Messianic Response to Paul & the Letter of Hebrews

The obviously most troubling obstacles to Messianism’s view of Yeshua and of Israel’s reconstructive restoration are 1) the teachings of Paul (whose ministry the Spirit accorded the spotlight in Acts and the lion’s share of the New Testament Bible) and 2) the anonymous letter to the Hebrews (whose witness the Spirit used to close the doctrinal New Testament canon).

As was clear to the Jerusalem Church, the Lord’s hand was most definitely on Paul as an apostle. And today’s Messianics accept this also. Messianics theoretically accept Paul’s writings and Hebrews as the inspired word of God. They have no alternative but to do so, or they cannot consider themselves true New Covenant believers. (One cannot claim to be a New Covenant believer and reject the apostles God appointed to articulate it.)

And yet, Paul and Hebrews confront Messianism on its own home territory—namely, the believer’s relationship to the Law—specifically, the Jewish believer. Messianics feel utterly compelled to define and defend their faith by some level of ongoing relationship to the Mosaic Law, including its sacrificial system. This defense occurs at several different points.

- Misinterpreting Paul’s Actions

As previously observed, Acts notes several times where Paul participates or acts in reference to Jewish legal observances from which he has otherwise declared his own freedom and that of all believers. His most stunning act in this regard occurred early in his second trip, right after the Council and his letter to the Galatians. It was to have Timothy circumcised (Ac. 16:3), whom he was tapping as a co-laborer.

Toward the end of his second trip, en route to Jerusalem from Corinth, Paul completed a vow he had made to the Lord (18:18). Ac. 20:6 notes Paul waited until “after the days of unleavened bread” to sail to Ephesus (though it’s not clear whether this was just a calendar reference or he actually participated in the feast). Paul’s last trip to Jerusalem was geared toward the date of Pentecost (20:16); and in course of that visit, he ended up participating in a Nazarite vow (21:23-27.)

Messianics create their own context around these isolated incidents to prove Paul still observed the Mosaic Law out of obligation to his heritage. But no one has a right to interpret a man’s actions contrary to his clear teaching, especially where the Spirit offers no commentary on his motives. In light of the Galatian letter, written about the same time as Timothy’s circumcision, it is ludicrous to believe Paul had Timothy circumcised for any reason other than for the sake of long term mission and witness to the Jews.

- Misinterpreting Isolated Texts: The Romans 11 Problem

The other alternative Messianism has for finding support in Paul’s writings is to isolate exceptional comments he makes on Jewish heritage to contradict his otherwise clear dominant train of thought and intent. The most notable passage so misconstrued is Romans 11, in which Paul warns Gentiles not to “boast against the branches” (ie, natural Israel) because they are grafted into the “rich root of the olive tree,”

11:16—If the root is holy, the branches are too. 17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?

Messianics interpret the root and the tree in this picture to be natural Israel, to thus assert Paul is teaching the grafting of the Gentiles into the natural body of Israel under the Mosaic covenant. The Messianic position on this text however totally violates Paul’s meaning in context.

First, Paul identifies separately the root, the branches and the wild branches. The wild branches are clearly the Gentiles. The branches are clearly the fleshly Jews. But the root is neither, but has its own identity. The Messianics mistakenly identify the root and the natural branches as the same entity—Israel and its natural heritage. They are not.

·        The Wider Contexts

In spiritual biblical context, the root into which the Gentiles have been grafted is not Israel, but Christ, the “root of Jesse” and “root of David” (Rom. 15:12 > Isa. 11:10; Rev. 5:5). As Christ says of Himself, “I am the vine, you are the branches.” He could as easily have said, “I am the tree, you are the branches” and “I am the root, you are the branches.”

The people of natural Israel then are neither the root nor the tree, but are the branches, as are the Gentile people. This agrees with Paul’s numerous other teachings that Gentiles have been placed “in Christ.” Elsewhere, Paul tells Gentiles they are “rooted and grounded in Christ,” never into fleshly Israel.

Back to Romans, when Paul speaks of “some” of the branches being “broken off” as Israel, he is speaking in context of virtually an entire nation (Rom. 9:27-29). Only an elect remnant remains. It cannot therefore be into the “vast nation of Israel” that the Gentiles are grafted. Nor is it into the remaining remnant, who themselves are also but branches.

In the more immediate context of Romans, the root not only refers to Christ (15:12), but can legitimately refer to Abraham based in his discussion in chapter. 4. But this must be seen in light of Paul’s identification of Abraham’s true children in 9:8. In other words, to be grafted into “Abraham” is to be grafted into the tree of Promise, not into the tree of Abraham’s human lineage with its Mosaic covenant, something Paul specifically disavows in Galatians 3-4.

·        Gentile Engrafting: Restoration Awaiting or Accomplished Fact?

The further problem with the Messianic interpretation of Romans 11 is that it tries to apply “restorationally” what Paul declares to be an already accomplished fact. This fact is that the Gentiles are already grafted into this tree and its root. Paul teaches nothing about Gentiles “becoming restored” into the ways of Jewish heritage by this. No. They are already “in” with no further to go. And so they have been for nearly 2000 years and counting.

This same applies to Ephesians 2 where Paul says the Gentiles have been brought (accomplished fact) into the “Commonwealth of Israel.” That Paul says this, yet spends his life disavowing all connection between Gentiles and Jewish heritage “according to the flesh” again confirms he has no intention of saying Gentiles are grafted into natural Israel (as did occur in Old Covenant proselyte ceremonies.) He can only be speaking of Eternal Israel.

But the Messianic position twists Romans 11 to say that God is 1) now grafting restoratively Gentiles into this tree (as if they have not already been grafted into it), and 2) that the tree is that of natural Jewish heritage including the Mosaic Covenant (contrary to Paul’s context and to all else Paul he Gentiles relative to their relationship to Jewish lineage.)

·        “Jerry-rigging” the Book of Hebrews

To handle the forthright assertions of the Book of Hebrews, the only recourse for Messianics is to create ad hoc gymnastic explanations out of the text in direct contradiction to what the text plainly says and means. One writer for instance teaches that the New Covenant has not come into force yet because it has not been made directly with “the houses of Israel and Judah,” and so Christ’s “mediation” of the New Covenant as taught by Hebrews does not mean He has “actually implemented” the Covenant!

Another Messianic teaches that there are two levels of atonement for sin (i.e., a “split atonement”)—a general once-for-all atonement for salvation by Yeshua (covered by Hebrews), with daily reconciliation still atonable by animal sacrifices (not covered by Hebrews)! Still others insist Hebrews didn’t mean to rule out animal sacrifices because faith was never put in the sacrifices for forgiveness of sin anyway!

The major factor behind all these tortured explanations is the witness of the restoration prophecies which appear to predict a Restoration Age return to the Mosaic sacrificial system. Applying reconstructive interpretation to the prophecies, Messianics grope to explain a return to the law and the Levitical sacrificial system in terms of “New Covenant faith,” even though both Paul and Hebrews make no allowance for this. (I will speak to the crux of these arguments in more detail later.)