|
The Torah of Moses (תורת משה) is filled with various imperatives of one kind or another. The term mitzvah (מִצְוָה) is a general term used to refer to any commandment given by God. Mitzvot can be further divided into the subcategories of chukkim u'mishpatim (Deut. 4:5). Chukkim (חֻקִּים) are statutes given without a reason (i.e., fiats or divine decrees), whereas mishpatim (מִשְׁפָּטִים) are laws given for a clearly specified reason (i.e., logical laws). In addition eidot (עֵדוֹת) are testimonials (from the root 'ed, "witness") that commemorate something that we are instructed to observe. Finally, the word "Torah" (תּוֹרָה) is a general concept that implies a wide range of related ideas and concepts that focus on discerning God's will. Note further that the word brit (בְּרִית) refers to a specific agreement or "covenant" made between the Sovereign LORD and his people. All the various commandments, statutes, decrees, and so on are contextualized in terms of the underlying covenant and are expressed as obligations of the covenant.
When the Lord said to Isaac, "I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and will give to your offspring all these lands. And in your offspring all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws" (Gen. 26:4-5), we note immediately that Abraham is described as being one who kept God's Torah even though he lived several centuries before the time of Moses and the revelation of the law code at Sinai, thus indicating that "Torah" is something more (and more foundational) than the idea of a set of various laws, commandments, ordinances, and rules embodied in the Sinai "covenant..." Indeed Paul's argument that the meaning of the new covenant is based on "Torah" is based on this very distinction, that is, between the faith of the patriarchs in God's promise (which is the ultimate meaning of Torah) and the later giving of the law at Mount Sinai... Now that said, it is unfortunate that the distinction between "Torah" and "covenant" is not strongly distinguished in the Greek New Testament, and therefore we must discern the proper meaning of these Greek words by context and by seeing how these words were used to translate the original Hebrew texts in the ancient Greek Torah (i.e., the Septuagint).
Now a source of potential confusion for translators of the Greek New Testament concerns how the Greek word "nomos" (νόμος), which is often simply translated as "law," is to be understood. Does "nomos" always refer to the law code of Moses or does it perhaps more generally refer to the "Old Testament"? Does it go beyond the idea of a commanded imperative to include general principles, such as the "law of sin and death"? Of particular importance is how are we to distinguish between the use of nomos as "law" as opposed to the word "Torah"? Put the other way, is it right to substitute the idea of "Torah" for the word "nomos" (and vice-versa) when we translate and read the New Testament?
The word nomos (νόμος, "law") has a range of semantic meanings in Koine Greek and therefore should not necessarily be regarded as an exact equivalent for the term Torah (תּוֹרָה). As explained elsewhere on this site, the word "Torah" is derived from the verb yarah (יָרָה) meaning to "shoot" (as an arrow), or to indicate direction. It is therefore a general term that refers to instruction or guidance, and should be carefully distinguished from other Hebrew words such as "commandment" (i.e., mitzvah: מִצְוָה), "statutes" (i.e., chukkim: חֻקִּים), "judgments" (i.e., mishpatim: מִשְׁפָּטִים), and so on. To traditional Jewish thinking, the legal aspect of Torah is generally called halakhah (from halakh: הָלַךְ, "to walk") and includes the ideas of case law (תַּקָּנָה), custom (מִנְהָג), and the use of tradition (מָסרֶת) as expressed within the Oral Law. The legal aspects of Torah have roots in the system of judges (שּׁפְטִים) that Moses commissioned (Exod. 18:13-24; Deut. 16:18, 19:17-18, etc.) and in the Bet Din (בֵּית דִן), or religious system of justice that culminated in the supreme court of Israel called the Sanhedrin (סַנְהֶדְרִין). These legal aspects of Torah are usually distinguished from the homiletic or exegetical understanding of the Scriptures (e.g., midrash), which is generally called aggadah (אֲגָּדָה).
In light of these distinctions, it is unfortunate that the ancient Jewish translators of the Scriptures (i.e., the Septuagint) chose to use the word "law" (i.e., nomos) for the word Torah, since this can lead to essential misunderstanding about the meaning of the Torah. For example, they chose to translate the Hebrew name of the last book of Moses (i.e., devarim: דְּבָרִים, "words") as "the Second Law" (i.e., Δευτερονόμιον, fr. deutero + nomos), since many Hellenistic Jews at that time regarded the book as a summary (or retelling) of the various laws of Moses. Indeed, in most cases the Septuagint translates the word "Torah" (תּוֹרָה) as "nomos" (νόμος). In Deuteronomy 4:8, for instance, the word nomos is used to denote to the collection of mishpatim, chukkim, and mitzvot representing all of Israel's covenantal obligations before the LORD. This idea that "Torah" meant "nomos" was carried over to New Testament usage, of course, and the distinction between the idea of "law" and "instruction" was thereby made unclear...
To the classical Greek mind, nomos referred to an idealized standard, often linked with the ontology of Plato's forms (ιδέες) or the laws of nature, though in other senses it referred to social standards and norms of the community (i.e., the legal definition). The Jewish Hellenistic theologian Philo of Alexandria (20 BC - 50 AD), for example, attempted to harmonize Platonic philosophy with the Torah, and therefore combined the idea of moral law with cosmic law and the order of nature (i.e., λόγος). For Philo, the idea of "Torah," then became reduced to the concept of natural law (i.e., nomos as expressed as logos in Greek speculations).
In the New Testament, nomos is used in varied ways. James used it to refer to the moral will of God (James 2:9-11, 4:11). The Apostle John quotes Yeshua using it to refer to the Tanakh in general (John 10:34; 15:25), though it is most often used to refer to the writings of Moses in the Gospels (Matt. 11:13, Luke 16:16; 24:44; John 12:34; Acts 13:15; 28:23). Certainly the moral and ritual aspects of the writings of Moses are represented using the word (Matt. 7:12; 22:40; Luke 2:22,39;8:5; John 1:17; 7:19,23, etc.).
In Paul's letters, the use of the word nomos is likewise varied. In most cases it follows the Septuagint's usage by regarding it as the collective set of commandments given by Moses (Rom. 2:12-29; 3:19; 5:20; 7:7; Gal. 3:21; 1 Cor. 9:8; 14:34), whereas in other places it refers to the Tanakh in general (Rom. 3:19, 1 Cor. 14:21). Still in other cases, nomos appears to be used by Paul to refer to "principles," such as his description of the "law of sin and death" as opposed to the "law of the Spirit of life" (Rom. 7:23, 8:2). For Paul, the overarching principle of the law is the ethic of love (Gal 5:14; Rom. 13:8-10). In each case of Paul's use of the word nomos, however, we must carefully examine the flow of Paul's reasoning as well as the historical context of a given letter.
Some have claimed that Paul sometimes used "nomos" to refer to a legalistic perversion of the law imposed by the oral tradition of the sages, and therefore the statement that "no one is justified by the law" (ἐν νόμῳ οὐδεὶς δικαιοῦται) should be understood in this light (Gal. 3:11). However, in Galatians 3:21, Paul clearly used nomos (νόμος) to refer to the Law of Moses (תּוֹרַת משֶׁה) since he referred to the law that "had been given" (i.e., mattan Torah) 430 years after the time of Abraham (Gal. 3:17). When Paul rhetorically asked if this law ("which had been given but was not able to impart life") was contrary to the original promise given to Abraham, it is again clear he is again referred to the Sinai revelation. "Legalism" wasn't given at Sinai, but the direct revelation of the will of God was. The Messiah came to redeem us from the curses contained in the Book of the Law (i.e., the sefer ha-brit of Moses detailing the various commandments), and this line of argument only makes sense if we understand nomos here to refer to the written law code of Moses.
Often it is helpful to study how a Hebrew word was translated into ancient Greek (i.e., the Septuagint, or LXX) to get some idea of how the New Testament writers might have used the word. In the case of the word "Torah," however, this methodology breaks down, since the ancient Greek translators used a general word that was not an adequate equivalent, and this lack of precision makes it difficult to determine the precise sense of the word as it is used in the New Testament. For example, when Paul writes that "we do not nullify the law (nomos), but rather affirm it" (Rom. 3:31), and later writes that we are "dead to the law (nomos) by our faith in Yeshua" (Gal. 2:19; Rom. 7:4), and furthermore identifies a "law (nomos) of sin that works in our bodies" (Rom. 7:23; 8:2), then it's clear that we need to make some distinctions in our understanding of his use of the word "law" lest we become hopelessly befuddled. The only viable method here is to carefully consider the overall context of the passage for additional clues as to the author's meaning, and then compare Scripture to Scripture to attempt to discover the usage for the word in this particular case. It is admittedly a bit tedious sorting this all out, but God will help us understand if we sincerely ask Him...
Related Topics:
|
