BEMA Episode Link: 236: Jewish Roots — Paul, Jewish Law, and Atonement in Hebrews
Episode Length: 55:29
Published Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2021 01:00:00 -0700
Session 6
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings explore the fourth and fifth chapters of Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity, discussing Paul’s relationship to Jewish Law and the atonement process we see in Hebrews.

Discussion Video for BEMA 236

Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity by Gerald McDermott

David Rudolph at The King’s University

David M. Moffitt at the University of St. Andrews

BEMA 147: Galatians — Two Women, Two Covenants

BEMA 165: Hebrews — Running a Better Race

BEMA 166: Hebrews — Atonement 101

Transcript for BEMA 236

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA 236: Jewish Roots - Paul, Jewish Law, and Atonement in Hebrews - Study Notes

Title & Source Summary

Episode: 236 - Jewish Roots: Paul, Jewish Law, and Atonement in Hebrews Hosts: Marty Solomon and Brent Billings Focus: Chapters 4 and 5 of “Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity” - Paul’s relationship to Jewish law and the atonement process in Hebrews

This episode explores two crucial essays from “Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity”: David Rudolph’s examination of Paul’s relationship to Jewish law, and David M. Moffitt’s analysis of the sacrificial atonement process as understood in Hebrews. The discussion challenges common Christian assumptions about Paul abandoning Jewish practice and reframes how we understand Jesus’s sacrifice through the lens of the complete Levitical sacrificial process rather than reducing it merely to death.

Key Takeaways

• Not all biblical texts carry equal interpretive weight when addressing specific theological questions - some passages should be privileged based on their explicit purpose to clarify controversy
• Paul’s “rule in all the churches” was that Jews should remain Jewish and Gentiles should remain Gentiles when following Jesus - no one needs to change their cultural or ethnic identity
• The Jerusalem Council decision (Acts 15) exempted Gentiles from full Torah observance while simultaneously affirming that Jewish believers were to remain practicing Jews
• Acts 21 provides the most explicit New Testament statement that Paul himself lived as a Torah-observant Jew and taught fellow Jews to remain faithful to Jewish law and custom
• Levitical sacrifice was not merely the act of killing an animal but rather a complete process designed to draw people closer to God’s presence
• In the sacrificial system, animals were never killed on the altar itself - they were slaughtered separately, and then portions were brought to the altar
• Jesus’s death should be understood not as the entirety of his sacrifice but as one crucial component in a larger sacrificial process that includes his priestly role in the heavenly Holy of Holies
• The common Christian understanding that equates sacrifice solely with death fundamentally misunderstands both the Levitical system and the book of Hebrews

Main Concepts & Theories

The Principle of Weightier Texts

David Rudolph introduces a critical hermeneutical principle: when interpreting Paul’s view on Jewish law, certain texts should be privileged over others. This concept mirrors Jewish interpretive tradition where Torah held more weight than the Prophets, which held more weight than the Writings - all while recognizing that all Scripture is equally inspired.

The criterion for identifying a “weightier text” is that the text itself or its context explicitly indicates its purpose to set the record straight on a controversial matter. Rudolph identifies three such passages regarding Paul and Jewish law: 1 Corinthians 7:17-20, Acts 15, and Acts 21:17-26.

This approach challenges the common practice of pulling isolated “proof texts” from Paul’s letters without considering their specific contextual applications, particularly in addressing Gentile inclusion rather than Jewish practice.

Paul’s Rule in All the Churches (1 Corinthians 7:17-20)

In addressing the sexually chaotic context of Corinth, Paul articulates his universal principle: “This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised.”

Circumcision functions here as a metonymy (a part representing the whole) for complete Jewish identity and lifestyle. Paul’s instruction means that Jews should remain Jewish and Gentiles should remain Gentiles when coming to faith in Jesus. The call to follow Jesus does not require abandoning one’s ethnic, cultural, or covenant identity.

This principle extends beyond circumcision to various life situations - married/unmarried, slave/free - emphasizing contentment with one’s state while simultaneously affirming the pursuit of freedom when possible. The overarching message is that the Gospel meets people where they are without demanding they become something else first.

The Jerusalem Council and Its Implications (Acts 15)

The Jerusalem Council represents the first official church gathering to address controversy - specifically whether Gentile believers needed to be circumcised and keep the full Torah. The council’s decision explicitly exempted Gentiles from these requirements, giving them only four specific guidelines related to idol worship and sexual morality.

However, Rudolph and a growing number of New Testament scholars recognize an equally important implication: by exempting Gentiles from full Torah observance, the council simultaneously affirmed that Jewish believers were expected to maintain their Torah observance. The decision created two distinct but equally valid pathways to following Jesus.

Paul not only participated in this council’s deliberations but also personally delivered its ruling to the Gentile churches, demonstrating his full agreement with and commitment to this dual-path approach.

Acts 21 and Paul’s Torah Observance

Acts 21:17-26 provides the most explicit biblical statement about Paul’s own practice. Upon arriving in Jerusalem, Paul is informed of a rumor that he teaches diaspora Jews to abandon Moses, stop circumcising their children, and forsake Jewish customs.

James and the Jerusalem elders categorically reject this rumor as false. To publicly demonstrate the truth, they ask Paul to purify himself in the temple with four Nazarites and pay for their sacrifices - actions that would only make sense for someone committed to Torah observance.

The text explicitly states two key facts: (1) the rumor about Paul teaching Jews to abandon Torah is false, and (2) Paul himself lives in observance of the law. Luke includes this narrative specifically to resolve controversy about Paul’s actual practice and provide a crucial framework for interpreting his letters.

Rudolph identifies seven instances in Acts where Paul defends himself against accusations of apostasy (Acts 16:3, 18:18, 21:17-26, 23:6, 24:14-16, 25:8, 28:17), suggesting this was a major theme Luke wanted to address. Paul’s repeated self-identification as a Pharisee (present tense) and his insistence that he has “done nothing against our people or the customs of our ancestors” support this interpretation.

Sacrifice as Process, Not Just Death

David M. Moffitt presents three foundational assumptions that revolutionize how we understand both Levitical sacrifice and Jesus’s work:

First Assumption - Sacrifice as Process: Levitical sacrifice consisted of multiple elements working together, not merely the act of killing an animal. The complete process included: slaughter (away from the altar), collection of blood in a bowl, butchering, transferring portions to the altar, burning the body parts, and applying blood to the altar. Each step was essential, and altars were places of offering, not slaughter.

Second Assumption - Relational Context: Sacrifice functioned within a relationship, not as a mere transaction. The goal was drawing near to God’s presence, not simply paying a debt or providing a substitute. The entire process facilitated intimacy with the divine rather than creating distance.

Third Assumption - Covenantal Framework: Levitical sacrifice only made sense within the Levitical covenant context. Removing sacrificial practices from their covenantal framework renders them meaningless - you cannot understand sin offerings in Jacob’s day because the established order didn’t exist yet.

Jesus’s Sacrifice in Hebrews

Building on his understanding of Levitical sacrifice as process, Moffitt argues that Hebrews portrays Jesus as fulfilling every aspect of that process, not just dying. Just as the high priest had to take blood into the Holy of Holies to complete atonement, Jesus must take the elements of his sacrifice (his own blood and flesh) into God’s presence in the heavenly Holy of Holies.

Jesus’s work is not reducible only to his death - Hebrews carefully thinks through Jesus’s sacrifice in terms of the whole process. Jesus serves as both the sacrifice and the priest who offers it, and he does so in the true heavenly temple rather than an earthly copy.

This means Jesus’s death, while absolutely necessary and significant, is one component of a larger sacrificial process. The death inaugurated a new covenant era (similar to how Passover and covenant inauguration functioned), but the complete work includes Jesus’s ongoing priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.

Rethinking “New Covenant”

The hosts wrestle with the term “new covenant,” preferring to understand it as “renewed covenant” or an updated mechanic within the same overarching story. Rather than God starting something completely different, the new covenant represents the same God working with the same people in the same story, but with an improved system.

The Abrahamic covenant of promise remains foundational. What changes is the mechanism - instead of requiring the ongoing temple system, Levitical priesthood, and repeated sacrifices, Jesus’s once-for-all perfect sacrifice provides a better way. He simultaneously functions as sacrifice, priest, and temple, making the old system obsolete while fulfilling its deepest purposes.

Examples & Applications

Corinth’s Sexual Culture

Paul’s instruction to the Corinthian church must be understood against the backdrop of Corinth as a port city with rampant sexual immorality and prostitution on every corner. The culture resembled modern Las Vegas or Mardi Gras - sexuality was divorced from covenant relationship and treated as recreational.

In this context, Paul’s teachings about marriage, singleness, and proper sexual expression weren’t abstract theological principles but practical guidance for maintaining holiness in an extremely challenging environment. His affirmation of both marriage and singleness as valid options challenged a culture that reduced sexuality to physical gratification while elevating it to its proper covenantal context.

The Maccabean Period Parallel

When Paul uses the phrase “let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision” (1 Corinthians 7:18), he employs a Jewish idiom referencing the Maccabean period. During Hellenistic pressure, some Jews actually underwent surgery to appear uncircumcised, effectively abandoning their covenant identity.

1 Maccabees 1:11-15 describes such individuals as those who “abandoned the holy covenant.” Paul’s instruction that circumcised believers should not become uncircumcised directly addresses the temptation to assimilate and lose one’s Jewish identity - a temptation apparently present even in early messianic communities.

Reading Jesus Through Paul vs. Paul Through Jesus

The hosts emphasize the importance of interpretive hierarchy: they read Paul through Jesus rather than Jesus through Paul. While all Scripture is equally inspired, Jesus’s teachings carry more interpretive weight when conflicts arise.

This principle prevents the common error of using Paul’s letters (often written to address specific Gentile inclusion issues) to override Jesus’s clear affirmations of Torah in the Gospels. It recognizes that while all Scripture is God-breathed, not all Scripture addresses every issue with equal directness or authority.

Modern Misunderstanding of Altar Sacrifice

The revelation that animals were never killed on the altar challenges deeply embedded Christian imagery. Many believers picture Jesus on the cross as being “on the altar,” but this doesn’t align with the actual Levitical process.

Animals were slaughtered away from the altar, then portions were brought to it. The altar was where the sacrifice was transferred into God’s presence, where application occurred, where atonement was achieved - but not where death happened. This reframes how we should visualize Jesus’s work: the cross is one component, but his ongoing priestly ministry “in the heavenly Holy of Holies” completes the sacrificial process.

Moshe’s Perspective

The hosts reference their friend Moshe in Jerusalem who emphasizes that Jewish sacrifice is fundamentally about drawing near to God, not about substitution or transaction. The process allows you to approach God’s presence, to cleave to the divine.

This relational understanding transforms sacrifice from a legal transaction (paying a debt, satisfying justice) to an intimacy practice (removing barriers, facilitating closeness). The goal is communion with God, not merely avoiding punishment.

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

1. How does the principle of weightier texts apply to other controversial theological topics beyond Paul and the law?

2. What are the practical implications for modern believers - both Jewish and Gentile - of Paul’s “rule in all the churches” about maintaining one’s cultural and ethnic identity?

3. How does understanding Jesus’s ongoing priestly ministry in the heavenly Holy of Holies affect our understanding of prayer, intercession, and ongoing sanctification?

4. What is the relationship between the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) liturgy and the book of Hebrews’ description of Jesus’s work?

5. How do we reconcile passages that seem to suggest Paul’s gospel was different or created controversy with passages that show his full Torah observance?

6. What is the significance of the four requirements given to Gentile believers at the Jerusalem Council, and do they still apply today?

7. How does Philo of Alexandria’s thought influence the book of Hebrews, particularly regarding the heavenly vs. earthly sanctuary?

8. What does it mean practically that sacrifice is about drawing near to God rather than appeasing divine wrath?

9. How should understanding sacrifice as process rather than just death affect Christian worship, communion practices, and atonement theology?

10. What are the implications of Jesus serving simultaneously as sacrifice, priest, and temple for our understanding of his nature and work?

11. How do we distinguish between cultural practices that should be maintained (circumcision for Jews) and those that are no longer required in the new covenant era (temple sacrifices)?

12. What does Paul’s statement “I, not the Lord” vs. “not I, but the Lord” in 1 Corinthians 7 tell us about the nature of biblical inspiration and contextual application?

Comprehension Questions

1. According to David Rudolph, what criterion should be used to identify which biblical texts deserve “privileged status” when interpreting Paul’s view of Jewish law? Provide an example of such a text from the episode.

2. Explain what it means that circumcision functions as a “metonymy” for Jewish identity in 1 Corinthians 7. Why is this distinction important for understanding Paul’s instruction?

3. What are the two key implications of the Jerusalem Council decision in Acts 15 - one explicit and one implicit according to recent scholarship?

4. Describe the complete Levitical sacrificial process as outlined by David M. Moffitt. Why is it significant that animals were not killed on the altar itself?

5. How does understanding sacrifice as a process rather than merely an act of killing change our interpretation of Jesus’s work as described in Hebrews? What components beyond his death are essential to his sacrifice?

Summary

This episode challenges two fundamental assumptions in Christian theology. First, it demonstrates through careful biblical examination that Paul remained Torah-observant throughout his life and taught Jewish believers to do likewise, while simultaneously championing freedom for Gentiles from these same requirements. The Jerusalem Council and Acts 21 provide explicit evidence that the early church operated with two distinct but equally valid pathways to following Jesus - one for Jews within their covenant framework and one for Gentiles grafted into God’s people.

Second, the episode revolutionizes how we understand sacrifice by revealing that Levitical offerings were never merely about death or substitution but rather a complete process designed to facilitate drawing near to God’s presence. This reframing transforms our understanding of Hebrews and Jesus’s work - his death, while absolutely necessary and significant, is one essential component of a larger sacrificial process that includes his ongoing priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. Rather than reducing atonement to a legal transaction, we see it as a relational process that removes barriers and creates intimacy between humanity and God.

Both essays affirm that reading Scripture through its original Jewish context fundamentally changes - and enriches - our theology. We discover that Paul’s letters, properly understood, don’t advocate for Jewish assimilation or abandonment of Torah but rather celebrate the radical inclusion of Gentiles without requiring them to become Jewish. We find that the book of Hebrews, far from dismissing the Levitical system as inferior, actually depends on deep understanding of its processes to articulate how Jesus fulfills and perfects what it foreshadowed. The result is a more coherent, historically grounded, and theologically robust understanding of both testaments and their unified testimony to God’s redemptive work.

Edit | Previous | Next