The Enduring Word: A Theological Response Affirming the Perpetual Validity of the Torah for All Believers

I. Introduction: Re-establishing the Foundation of Divine Instruction

The landscape of modern Christianity is marked by a profound and unsettling fragmentation, a condition evidenced by the existence of over 33,000 distinct denominations worldwide.[1] This disunity is not merely organizational but deeply theological, stemming from a foundational departure from the unified, unchanging nature of divine revelation. At the heart of this theological crisis lies a series of apparent contradictions concerning the status and applicability of the Law of God, the Torah, as given through Moses. Mainstream theological traditions have, for centuries, promulgated the doctrine that these divine instructions were temporary, a preparatory stage that has been superseded or abrogated by the advent of Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ). This report will systematically challenge that premise. It will posit that these perceived contradictions are not inherent to the biblical text but are the result of errant hermeneutical frameworks and a failure to adhere to the first principles of scriptural authority.

The central thesis of this analysis is that salvation, which is unequivocally a gift of grace received through faith, does not nullify the Law of God. Rather, it is the very mechanism that empowers and motivates believers to live in joyful obedience to it. This obedience is not a means for salvation but is the irrefutable evidence of a genuinely transformed heart. The purpose of this report is to construct a logically coherent and biblically grounded defense of the perpetual validity of the Torah for all believers, Jew and Gentile, by re-establishing the foundational principle that the Word of God is an eternal and indivisible whole.

This investigation is predicated on the mandate to “test everything” (1 Thessalonians 5:21) against the singular authority of the Word of God, eschewing any reliance on denominational creeds, historical traditions, or the consensus of a majority.[1] History provides a stark warning against such misplaced faith; the Protestant Reformation itself was born from the realization that the majority of Christendom had been in grave doctrinal error for nearly 1,500 years. To assume that the Reformation completed the task of removing all error is to ignore the biblical pattern of God’s people repeatedly falling into doctrinal deviation despite correction.[1]

The relationship between faith and works must be correctly defined as correlational, not causal. Salvation is by faith alone, apart from works (Ephesians 2:8-9). However, the same faith that results in salvation also inevitably produces works. These works, which are acts of obedience to God’s commandments, never have a causal relationship with one’s salvation status, but they are inextricably correlated with it.[1, 2, 3] True faith, by its very nature, compels action. When the Bible declares a principle to be true—for example, that murder is wrong or that baptism is an ordinance—a believer who genuinely trusts the Bible will align their life with that truth. This principle does not apply selectively; it holds true for every commandment of God. The same reason a believer refrains from murder is the same reason they would observe any of God’s instructions: it is the outward evidence of an inward belief that God’s Word is true.[1]

This entire theological framework is constructed upon a “first principles” approach to biblical epistemology. This approach holds as non-negotiable axioms the unchanging character of God and the stated attributes of His Word. Any theological conclusion that violates these axioms must be considered a priori incorrect. The inquiry begins with fundamental logical tests: Can a “perfect” law be made “more perfect”? Can an “absolute truth” later become “untrue”?.[1] These are not merely rhetorical questions; they expose the logical fallacy at the heart of abrogationist theology. If God is perfect and unchanging, and His Law is a reflection of His perfect character, then His Law must also be perfect and unchanging. Therefore, any doctrine, such as dispensationalism, that posits a change, annulment, or replacement of the Torah implicitly suggests an imperfection or change in God Himself. This creates a severe logical and theological contradiction that this report seeks to resolve by rejecting the flawed premise of a mutable divine law. The analysis that follows will demonstrate that much of post-apostolic theology has been erected upon this logically untenable foundation, necessitating a return to the first principles of God’s enduring and unified Word.

II. The Unchanging Character of God’s Law: A Study in Perfection, Truth, and Liberty

To comprehend the perpetual place of the Torah in the life of a believer, one must first deconstruct the modern, pejorative view of “Law” and reconstruct a biblical understanding based on the attributes Scripture itself ascribes to it. The common theological error stems from a fundamental linguistic and conceptual misunderstanding. The English word “law” often carries connotations of a cold, rigid, and punitive legalism, which is then contrasted with concepts like “grace,” “love,” or “freedom.” This framework, however, is a product of a Greco-Roman philosophical lens being superimposed onto a Hebraic text. The biblical term for the Law of Moses is the Hebrew word Torah, which does not mean “law” in the modern legalistic sense, but rather “instruction,” “teaching,” or “direction”.[1] It is the guidance of a loving Father showing His children how to live a blessed life. When viewed through this correct Hebraic lens, the biblical descriptions of the Torah as perfect, true, and liberating are not paradoxical but perfectly coherent.

The Perfection of the Torah

The Psalmist declares, “The law (Torah) of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul” (Psalm 19:7).[1] This statement of perfection is an absolute declaration of the divine origin and flawless nature of God’s instruction. It presents a significant logical challenge to any theology of abrogation. If the Torah is perfect, how can it be improved upon, amended, or rendered obsolete? The notion that the Law was a flawed or temporary system that needed to be replaced by something “better” implies that God’s initial work was imperfect. This contradicts the very nature of God. To suggest that a perfect instruction could be made “more perfect” is a logical absurdity.[1]

The perfection of the Torah lies in its comprehensive capacity to guide humanity in righteousness and revive the soul. It is not a flawed system that leads to death, but a perfect guide that leads to life when followed in faith. The problem has never been with the perfection of the Law, but with the imperfection of human hearts that are naturally hostile to it. The solution, as will be explored later, was not to discard the perfect instruction but to provide a divine means for humanity to align with it.

The Truth of the Torah

The Torah is not merely a collection of rules; it is the biblical definition of objective, eternal truth. This is stated unequivocally in Psalm 119: “Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, And Your law (Torah) is truth” (Psalm 119:142).[1, 4] If the Torah is truth, then it must be as unchanging as God Himself, for truth cannot become untruth. To argue that the commandments of the Torah are no longer applicable is to argue that what was once divine truth is now divine falsehood. This is a theological and philosophical impossibility.

This identification of Torah with truth is critical for understanding the ministry of Yeshua. When He declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), He was not introducing a new truth to replace an old one. He was embodying the living Torah, which itself is the way, the truth, and the light.[1] As the “Word made flesh” (John 1:14), His very being was a manifestation of the eternal truth of God’s instruction. Therefore, any teaching that sets the words of Yeshua in opposition to the written Torah creates a false dichotomy and misunderstands both the nature of the Messiah and the nature of truth itself. Any doctrine that contradicts the Torah is, by definition, not truth.

The Liberty of the Torah

Perhaps the most profound mischaracterization of the Torah in mainstream theology is its portrayal as a system of “bondage.” This stands in stark contradiction to the testimony of Scripture, which consistently describes the Torah as a source of freedom and liberty. The Psalmist proclaims, “So shall I keep Your law (Torah) continually, Forever and ever. And I will walk at liberty, For I seek Your precepts” (Psalm 119:44-45).[1] The Apostle James echoes this, referring to the Torah as “the perfect law of liberty” (James 1:25).[1]

The biblical equation is clear: obedience to God’s instruction is freedom, while transgression of that instruction (sin) is bondage. The Law provides freedom from sin. Therefore, the common theological assertion that Yeshua came to “free us from the Law” is a biblically incoherent concept. It is tantamount to saying He came to “free us from freedom”.[1] True bondage is the state of being enslaved to sin and its consequence, death. The Torah, as God’s divine instruction, is the pathway out of that bondage. It defines the boundaries of righteousness, and in walking within those boundaries, the believer finds true liberty. The error of viewing the Law as bondage arises from confusing the curse for disobedience with the instruction itself. The Torah contains both blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience; it is not, in itself, a curse. The true “yoke of slavery” that Paul warns against is not the liberating instruction of God, but the crushing weight of a works-based salvation system that perverts the Torah’s true purpose.[1]

III. The New Covenant: The Internalization, Not Abrogation, of the Torah

A central pillar of theologies that advocate for the annulment of the Mosaic Law is a fundamental misinterpretation of the New Covenant. It is commonly taught that the “newness” of this covenant lies in a replacement of the Law itself. However, a careful exegesis of the foundational prophetic texts reveals that the New Covenant does not abrogate the Torah; rather, it provides the divine solution to humanity’s inability to keep it. The promise is not a change in God’s perfect standard of righteousness, but a radical change in the human heart, enabling believers to live in accordance with that standard from a new, internal motivation. The New Covenant is the ultimate fulfillment and enablement of the Torah, not its abolition.

The primary prophetic announcement of the New Covenant is found in Jeremiah 31. The text is explicit about the content of this covenant:

“But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law (Torah) in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.” (Jeremiah 31:33) [1, 5]

The passage does not promise a new law but a new disposition toward the existing Law. The very same Torah that was written on tablets of stone is now to be written on tablets of the human heart. The contrast drawn with the Mosaic Covenant is not in the legal content but in the outcome: “not like the covenant that I made with their fathers… My covenant that they broke” (Jeremiah 31:32).[6, 7, 8] The fault lay not with the covenant’s laws but with the people’s inability to keep them. The author of Hebrews affirms this, stating that in establishing the New Covenant, God “found fault with them” (Hebrews 8:8), explicitly exonerating the legal code itself.[1]

The prophet Ezekiel provides further detail on the mechanism by which this internal transformation is accomplished:

“I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and cause you to walk in My statutes and be careful to obey My rules.” (Ezekiel 36:26-27) [1, 5]

Here, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is directly linked to empowerment for obedience. The Spirit’s primary function in the context of the New Covenant is to “cause” believers to walk in God’s statutes and keep His laws. This divine enablement is the solution to the “heart problem” that plagued Israel throughout its history. The narrative of the Old Testament is a repeating cycle: God provides His good Law, the people pledge obedience, their “heart of stone” leads them into rebellion, and they fall under the covenant curses. The prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel diagnose this condition as a terminal cardiac issue. The New Covenant, therefore, is the prophesied divine surgery—a “heart transplant” that enables the patient (believers) to finally live according to the life-giving instructions of the divine Physician (the Torah).

To argue that the New Covenant abolishes the Torah is to fundamentally misunderstand this entire diagnostic-prognostic arc of Scripture. It is akin to suggesting that a successful heart transplant is intended to make the patient’s circulatory system obsolete. The New Covenant does not do away with God’s standard of righteousness; it provides the supernatural means to meet it. It transforms obedience from an external, burdensome duty into an internal, joyful desire.

IV. Yeshua the Messiah: The Living Torah and Exemplar of Perfect Obedience

The person and ministry of Yeshua the Messiah represent the ultimate clarification, not cancellation, of the Torah. He is not an abolisher of the Law but its perfect embodiment, its most profound teacher, and its living exemplar. A prevalent theological error portrays Yeshua as a radical innovator who broke with the “Judaism” of His day to establish a new, law-free religion. This view is a historical and biblical distortion. Yeshua functioned as an intra-Jewish reformer, calling the people back to the purity of the written Word of God and away from the human traditions that had obscured its true intent. His life serves as the definitive pattern for how the Torah is to be lived in faith.

The foundational text for understanding Yeshua’s relationship to the Law is His own declaration in the Sermon on the Mount:

“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:17-18) [1]

This statement is an explicit and unambiguous affirmation of the Torah’s enduring authority. The word translated “fulfill” (Greek: $\pi\lambda\eta\rho\tilde{\omega}\sigma\alpha\iota$, plērōsai) does not mean “to terminate” or “bring to an end.” In this context, it means “to fill with meaning,” “to fully preach,” or “to demonstrate its true intent”.[1, 9, 10] Yeshua came to reveal the full depth and spiritual purpose of the Torah, which had been flattened into a system of external regulations by the religious establishment. Furthermore, He provides a non-negotiable timeline for the Law’s full authority: it will not pass away until “heaven and earth pass away,” an eschatological event that marks the end of the current age.[1, 9] To claim any part of the Law has been annulled prior to this event is to directly contradict the Messiah.

A cornerstone of this report’s Christology is the “Deuteronomy 13 Test.” In this passage, God provides His own unchangeable criterion for identifying a true prophet: a true prophet will never lead the people away from the commandments that God has already given, even if they perform signs and wonders.[1, 11] If Yeshua had taught the abrogation of the Torah, He would have failed this divine test and, according to God’s own definition, would have to be considered a false prophet. Therefore, as a matter of theological necessity, all of Yeshua’s teachings and actions must be interpreted in a way that is consistent with and upholds the Torah. This principle provides an infallible control for Christological interpretation; any reading of the Gospels that places Yeshua in opposition to the written Law of Moses is, by definition, an incorrect reading.

This framework clarifies Yeshua’s frequent conflicts with the Pharisees. His rebukes were not directed at the Torah, but at the “traditions of men” (often called the Oral Law, later codified in the Talmud) that the Pharisees had elevated to a status equal to or greater than the written Word. He accused them of “nullifying the word of God” with their traditions (Mark 7:13).[1] His instruction to the people was to “obey them and do everything they tell you” specifically when they “sit in Moses’ seat”—that is, when they are reading directly from the written Torah in the synagogue. However, He immediately warned, “But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach” (Matthew 23:2-3).[1, 12] This is a crucial distinction: Yeshua affirmed the authority of the written Torah while condemning the hypocrisy and man-made legalism of the religious leaders. He was not introducing a new religion but purifying the practice of the existing one. Any form of Christianity that sets its own traditions (such as the doctrine of abrogation) in opposition to the written Torah ironically repeats the very error of the Pharisees that Yeshua so forcefully condemned.

V. A Defense of the Apostle Paul: Reclaiming the Torah-Observant Pharisee

The Apostle Paul is often presented as the chief architect of the doctrine that the Law of God has been abolished for believers in Yeshua. This perception, however, creates what is termed the “Pauline Paradox”: a conflict between the theological construct of Paul derived from selective readings of his epistles and the historical Paul presented in the narrative of the Book of Acts. A rigorous examination of the historical record in Acts reveals a man who lived as a consistently Torah-observant Jew and repeatedly, publicly, and vehemently denied all accusations to the contrary. This historical record must serve as the controlling context and interpretive lens for understanding his more complex theological letters. Any interpretation of Paul’s epistles that contradicts the clear testimony of his life must be considered a misinterpretation.

The foundation for understanding the accusations against the early believers is laid at the very beginning of the Church’s persecution. In Acts chapters 6 and 7, Stephen is brought before the Sanhedrin on the charge that he “never stops speaking against this holy place and against the law,” and specifically that Yeshua would “change the customs Moses handed down to us” (Acts 6:13-14). The text critically identifies the originators of this charge as “false witnesses”.[1] This narrative detail is of paramount theological importance, as it establishes from the outset of the apostolic era that the accusation of teaching against the Torah is a calumny, a false charge leveled against the faithful.

The life of Paul, as documented by Luke in the Book of Acts, is a continuous refutation of this same false charge. A dossier of his actions and courtroom defenses provides overwhelming evidence of his personal Torah observance and his public affirmation of its authority:

• His Own Testimony: When formally accused before Roman governors, Paul is unequivocal in his defense. He declares, “Nor can they prove the things of which they now accuse me” (Acts 24:13) and “I have committed no offense either against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar” (Acts 25:8).[1, 13] Far from admitting to teaching a new, law-free religion, he insists on his innocence under the existing Law.
• His Affirmation of Scripture: Paul’s core belief system remained rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. He confesses before Felix, “I worship the God of our fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets” (Acts 24:14).[1] This is not the statement of a man who believes the Law has been rendered obsolete.
• His Public Actions: Paul’s actions speak as loudly as his words. Upon arriving in Jerusalem in Acts 21, he is confronted by James and the elders about rumors that he teaches Jews among the Gentiles to “forsake Moses.” To publicly disprove these rumors, Paul agrees to undergo a purification ritual at the Temple, taking a Nazarite vow and paying for the sacrificial expenses of four other men. The stated purpose of this act was so that “all may know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law” (Acts 21:20-24, ESV).[1, 11] This act, involving Temple rituals and sacrifices after the death and resurrection of Yeshua, is inexplicable if Paul believed the ceremonial aspects of the Torah were abolished.
• His Customary Practices: The narrative consistently portrays Paul’s life as one integrated with Jewish religious practice. It was his “custom” to attend the synagogue on the Sabbath (Acts 17:2), and he made haste to be in Jerusalem to observe the biblical feasts (Acts 18:21).[1]

This creates a clear hermeneutical principle: the biographical data from Acts must govern the exegesis of the epistles. Later theological traditions, particularly those stemming from Marcion in the second century and solidified during the Reformation, inverted this process. They prioritized a particular reading of the complex, situational letters to create a “theological Paul” who taught against the Law, forcing the historical record of Acts to be ignored or explained away. The Pauline Paradox is thus resolved by restoring the proper interpretive priority. If the historical Paul consistently lived as a Torah-observant believer and publicly denied teaching against it, then he cannot have secretly taught against it in his letters. The paradox is not within Paul; it is in the traditions that have misread him.

VI. Deconstructing the Pauline Paradox I: A Hermeneutical Key to the “Laws” of Paul

The primary source of confusion in interpreting the Pauline epistles, and the root of the so-called “Pauline Paradox,” is the failure to recognize the Apostle’s nuanced and multifaceted use of the Greek word for “law” ($\nu\acute{o}\mu o\varsigma$, nomos). The assumption that every instance of nomos refers to the Torah, or the Law of God given through Moses, leads to inescapable contradictions and supports the very “error of lawless people” about which the Apostle Peter issued a stern warning (2 Peter 3:15-17).[1] To correctly understand Paul, one must first understand that he employs the term “law” to refer to several distinct principles or systems of operation. By carefully discerning from the context which “law” is under discussion, the apparent contradictions dissolve, revealing a consistent and unified theology that upholds the Law of God.

Paul’s writings identify at least seven different applications of the term “law,” each with a specific meaning and function within his theological framework.[1] These can be systematically defined and serve as an indispensable hermeneutical key for the exegesis of his letters.

The Seven “Laws” in the Pauline Epistles

Law/Principle

1. The Law of God

2. The Law of Sin

3. The Law of Sin and Death

4. The Law of the Spirit of Life

5. The Law of Faith

6. The Law of Righteousness

7. The Law of Christ

This framework reveals a sophisticated theological system. The Law of God is the unchanging, objective standard. Humanity, in its fallen state, operates under the Law of Sin, an internal principle of rebellion that leads to transgression of God’s Law. This transgression automatically places the individual under the Law of Sin and Death, the just penalty for rebellion.

The gospel provides the divine intervention. The Law of the Spirit of Life, accessed through the Law of Faith in Yeshua, liberates the believer from the penalty and power of the Law of Sin and Death. This liberation does not lead to lawlessness but to a new ability to fulfill the Law of Righteousness, which is to live in accordance with the Law of God. The perfect pattern for this new life of obedience is the Law of Christ, who is the living embodiment of the Torah.

Failure to make these distinctions is the primary cause of misinterpreting Paul. When he writes that believers are “not under the law” (Romans 6:14), he is referring to the Law of Sin and Death (the penalty), not the Law of God (the instruction). When he speaks of being “dead to the law” (Romans 7:4), he means dead to its power to condemn, which frees the believer to be “married” to Christ and bear fruit for God through obedience. This multi-layered understanding of “law” is the key that unlocks Paul’s writings and demonstrates his profound consistency with the teachings of Yeshua and the entirety of Scripture.

VII. Deconstructing the Pauline Paradox II: Reconciling the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians

Armed with the hermeneutical key of Paul’s multiple “laws,” it is now possible to approach the most challenging passages in his epistles to the Romans and the Galatians. These letters, often cited as the primary evidence for the abrogation of the Torah, are in fact sophisticated theological arguments against a specific soteriological error: legalism, or the attempt to earn justification through works. Paul is not attacking the Law of God; he is systematically dismantling a false gospel and clarifying the proper relationship between law, sin, faith, and grace. His arguments are not about whether to obey God’s Law, but why and how a believer, justified by grace, is to live.

The Epistle to the Romans: Establishing the Law Through Faith

The letter to the Romans contains Paul’s most systematic theological presentation. Far from being an argument against the Torah, it is a defense of its proper place in God’s plan of salvation. Paul’s own thesis statement for this section of his argument is found in Romans 3:31: “Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.”.[1] Any interpretation of Romans that results in the overthrow of the law is, by Paul’s own declaration, incorrect.

One of the most frequently misinterpreted verses is Romans 6:14: “For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.”.[1] The common interpretation reads “under law” as “obligated to obey the Torah.” However, the context and Paul’s systematic use of terms reveal a different meaning. The verse begins by speaking of freedom from the “dominion of sin.” As established by the “Seven Laws” framework, the principle that sin’s transgression leads to the penalty of death is the “Law of Sin and Death.” Therefore, to be “under law” in this context means to be under the condemnation and penalty of that law. To be “under grace” means to have that penalty removed through the atoning work of Yeshua. The verse is not contrasting obedience with grace, but condemnation with grace. Paul is teaching that because believers are freed from the penalty of the Law, they are now empowered to overcome the dominion of sin in their lives, not given a license to disregard God’s instruction.[1]

Similarly, in Romans 7:4-6, Paul states that believers “have died to the law” and are “released from the law”.[1] Again, this is not a death to the Torah as a standard for living. It is a death to the law’s power to condemn the sinner. Paul uses the analogy of a marriage: a woman is bound by the law of marriage to her husband only as long as he lives. If he dies, she is free to marry another. In this allegory, the “first husband” is the “old self” enslaved to the Law of Sin, which holds the believer captive under the condemnation of the Law of God (its “ministry of death”). Through baptism into Yeshua’s death, that “old self” dies. Having “died to that which held us captive,” the believer is now released from that state of condemnation and is free to be “married” to the resurrected Christ. The purpose of this new union is “in order that we may bear fruit for God” (Romans 7:4) by serving “in the new way of the Spirit” (Romans 7:6), which, as Ezekiel prophesied, empowers obedience to the Torah.[1]

The Epistle to the Galatians: A Polemic Against a False Gospel

The letter to the Galatians is not a general treatise on the Law but an urgent, passionate polemic against a specific heresy that had infiltrated the Galatian churches. This heresy, promoted by a group known as the “Circumcision Party” or “Judaizers,” was a “different gospel” (Galatians 1:6) which taught that Gentile believers must be circumcised and observe the Law of Moses in order to be saved and accepted into the covenant community (Acts 15:1).[1] Paul’s vehement arguments in Galatians are directed squarely against this works-based soteriology, not against the Torah itself when lived out in faith.

In Galatians 3:10-13, Paul speaks of the “curse of the law.” This is not to say the Law itself is a curse. The Torah itself contains both blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience (Deuteronomy 27-28).[1, 14] Because “all have sinned,” all humanity stands under the curse pronounced by the Law for transgression. Paul’s point is that “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13). He redeemed believers from the penalty for their disobedience, not from the standard of obedience itself.

The analogy of the “schoolmaster” or “guardian” (paidagōgos) in Galatians 3:24-25 is likewise widely misunderstood. Paul writes, “So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.”.[1, 14] In the Greco-Roman world, a paidagōgos was not the teacher but a trusted servant responsible for the care of a child and for escorting him to the teacher’s house. The Law, in its function as a guardian, reveals our sin and leads us to the Messiah for justification. Once we have arrived at the teacher (Christ), the guardian’s specific task of escorting us is complete. However, this does not render the guardian’s instruction book—the Torah—obsolete. On the contrary, the Teacher (Christ) then proceeds to instruct us from that very same book, revealing its full meaning and empowering us to live by it.[1, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25]

Finally, Paul’s reference to a “yoke of slavery” in Galatians 5:1 is not directed at the Law of God, which Scripture calls “liberty.” It is a direct reference to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. To seek justification through works of the law is to place oneself under a yoke of slavery, because it is an impossible task that ultimately “severs you from Christ” and causes you to “fall away from grace” (Galatians 5:4).[1, 14]

In both Romans and Galatians, Paul’s argument follows a consistent logic. He is not debating whether believers should obey the Law, but why and how. He is fighting a soteriological error that places works before justification, not promoting an ethical rebellion against God’s commands. The Judaizers’ sequence was → [Justification]. Paul corrects this to the true gospel sequence: [Faith in Christ] → [Justification by Grace] → →. Mainstream theology has made a categorical error by misinterpreting Paul’s rejection of the Judaizers’ false sequence as a rejection of the final, crucial step in the true gospel sequence. Paul is not rejecting the Law; he is placing it in its proper theological position as the blueprint for sanctification, not the basis for justification.

VIII. Deconstructing the Pauline Paradox III: Addressing Misconceptions in Other Epistles

The hermeneutical framework established through the analysis of Acts, Romans, and Galatians—namely, that Paul was a Torah-observant Apostle whose writings combat legalism rather than the Law itself—provides the necessary lens to clarify other key passages in his epistles that are often misinterpreted. By consistently applying the understanding of Paul’s multiple “laws” and the historical context of his ministry, these seemingly “anti-law” statements are revealed to be fully consistent with a Torah-affirming theology.

1 Corinthians: The Law of Christ and the Authority of Moses

In 1 Corinthians 9:21, Paul makes a statement that is crucial for defining his terms: “To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law.”.[1] This parenthetical clarification is of immense importance. Paul explicitly states that while adapting his evangelistic approach to Gentiles, he is not “outside the law of God.” Instead, he defines his position as being “under the law of Christ.” This demonstrates that, in Paul’s mind, the “law of Christ” and the “law of God” are not mutually exclusive; in fact, to be under one is to be in harmony with the other. The “Law of Christ” is not a new or different set of rules that replaces the Torah. It is the Torah as it was perfectly taught, interpreted, and lived out by the Messiah, Yeshua. Yeshua’s life is the ultimate exegesis of the Law, and to be under His law is to follow His example of perfect Torah observance.[1]

Ephesians: Abolishing the Wall of Hostility, Not the Law

Ephesians 2:14-15 is frequently cited to support the idea that Christ abolished the Law of Moses. Paul writes that Christ “has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances.”.[1] Interpreting this “law of commandments” as the Torah creates an immediate contradiction with Yeshua’s own words in Matthew 5:17 and with Paul’s consistent affirmation of the Law elsewhere. The context reveals that Paul is speaking not of God’s divine Law, but of the man-made “fence laws” and traditions of the Pharisees that had created a “dividing wall of hostility” between Jews and Gentiles.[1]

These human ordinances, such as the prohibition of table fellowship with Gentiles or the requirement of ritual conversion for salvation, were not part of the Torah. In fact, they contradicted the Torah’s inclusive spirit, which provides for the stranger and sojourner. It was this human-made barrier, this “enmity,” that Yeshua abolished in His flesh. By doing so, He did not destroy the Law of God but rather nullified the human traditions that were preventing the fulfillment of the Law’s ultimate purpose: to create “one new man” from both Jew and Gentile, granting both equal access to the Father through one Spirit.[1]

Colossians: A Defense of Biblical Observance

Colossians 2:16-17 is perhaps one of the most inverted passages in all of Pauline literature. It reads, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” This is commonly interpreted as Paul telling believers that they should not judge each other because these Old Testament practices are no longer binding.

However, the historical context of the Colossian heresy—likely an early form of Gnosticism that involved asceticism and the worship of angels—suggests the opposite meaning. Paul is instructing the Colossian believers, who are observing the biblical dietary laws, feasts, and Sabbaths, not to allow outsiders (Gnostic or pagan critics) to pass a negative judgment upon them for their observance. The “therefore” connects this instruction to the preceding verses, where Paul warns against being taken captive by “philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition” (Colossians 2:8). Paul is defending the believers’ right to observe these God-given appointments. He affirms their value by calling them a “shadow of the things to come,” with the substance being Christ. A shadow is not an illusion; it is a real outline cast by a real substance. These practices are not abolished but are affirmed as legitimate, Christ-centered expressions of faith that point to the reality of the Messiah. Paul is commanding the Colossians to resist judgment from those who would condemn their Torah observance, not to abandon it.

IX. One Body, One Law: The Grafted-In Believer and the Commonwealth of Israel

A foundational error undergirding much of modern theology is the unbiblical division of God’s people into two distinct entities: “Israel” and “the Church.” This dichotomy, which is the cornerstone of both Replacement Theology and Dispensationalism, has no basis in Scripture. The Bible consistently presents one people of God, one body of believers, and one standard of instruction. The theological construct of “the Church” as a separate entity from “Israel” is a post-apostolic invention, likely born from the historical realities of a growing Gentile majority and the rise of anti-Jewish sentiment within early Christianity.[26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33] A correct biblical theology recognizes that Gentiles who come to faith in Israel’s Messiah are not forming a new entity but are being incorporated into the existing “commonwealth of Israel.” As citizens of this commonwealth, they are expected to live according to its constitution: the Torah.

The principle of a single legal standard for all of God’s people is established within the Torah itself. It was never intended to be an exclusive code for one ethnicity. The Law repeatedly and explicitly states that the same rules apply to the native-born Israelite and the foreigner (ger) who chooses to sojourn with them.

• Numbers 15:15-16: “As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. As you are, so shall the sojourner be before the LORD. One law and one rule shall be for you and for the stranger who sojourns with you.” [1]
• Leviticus 24:22: “You shall have the same law for the sojourner and for the native, for I am the LORD your God.” [1]
• Exodus 12:49: “There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.” [1]

This principle of “one law for all” is not abrogated in the New Testament; it is affirmed and explained through the teachings of Paul. In his famous olive tree analogy in Romans 11, Paul describes Israel as a “cultivated olive tree.” Unbelieving natural branches (Jews) are broken off, and believing Gentiles, who are “wild olive shoots,” are “grafted in among the others” to “share in the nourishing root of the olive tree” (Romans 11:17).[1] Critically, the Gentiles do not become a new or separate tree. They are incorporated into the existing tree of Israel and draw their spiritual life and sustenance from its “rich root”—the covenants, promises, and instructions given to the patriarchs and to Israel at Sinai.[1]

Paul further develops this concept in Ephesians 2. He reminds the Gentile believers that before coming to faith, they were “separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise” (Ephesians 2:12). But now, through the work of the Messiah, they are “no longer strangers and aliens, but… fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God” (Ephesians 2:19).[1] The language is explicit: Gentiles become citizens of the “commonwealth of Israel.” Citizenship in any commonwealth implies an adherence to its laws and constitution. To claim citizenship in Israel while simultaneously rejecting its foundational law, the Torah, is a logical contradiction.

The very term “church” (Greek: $\epsilon\kappa\kappa\lambda\eta\sigma\acute{\iota}\alpha$, ekklesia) is the word used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) to refer to the “assembly” or “congregation” (qahal) of Israel in the wilderness (Acts 7:38).[1] The New Testament “church” is not a new invention but a continuation and restoration of the original assembly of Israel, now expanded to include Gentiles grafted in by faith. Therefore, to be biblically consistent, one must see all believers in Yeshua as part of the one people of God, spiritual Israel, who are called to live by the one Law of God.

X. A Critique of Contradictory Theological Systems

The doctrine that God’s Law has been abolished is not derived from a plain reading of Scripture but is the product of extra-biblical theological systems designed to resolve perceived tensions between the Old and New Testaments. These systems, however well-intentioned, ultimately create more contradictions than they solve, undermining the unity of Scripture and promoting a departure from the “faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). A comprehensive theological response requires a direct critique of these foundational errors.

Dispensationalism

Dispensationalism is a theological system that organizes biblical history into successive “dispensations” or administrations. Its core tenet is a fundamental and permanent distinction between God’s plan for national Israel and His plan for the Church.[1] This system posits that the Church is a “parenthesis” in God’s timeline, a separate body with a separate destiny from Israel. This foundational premise directly contradicts the Pauline teachings of the “one new man” (Ephesians 2) and the “grafted-in” olive tree (Romans 11), which emphasize unity and incorporation, not separation.[1] By creating two distinct peoples of God, dispensationalism necessitates two different sets of rules, thereby providing a framework for setting aside the Torah for “the Church.” This artificial division fractures the unity of God’s people and His redemptive plan, standing in opposition to the scriptural witness of one body, one Spirit, and one Law.[1]

The Tripartite Division of the Law

A common method used to justify partial obedience to the Torah is the theological division of its commandments into three categories: moral, civil, and ceremonial.[34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41] In this framework, it is argued that while the “moral law” (often reduced to the Ten Commandments, or a subset thereof) is eternally binding, the “civil” and “ceremonial” laws were specific to the theocracy of ancient Israel and have been fulfilled or rendered obsolete by Christ.

This tripartite division is a human invention; it is a classification system that has no basis in Scripture itself. Nowhere in the Bible does God, Yeshua, or any of the apostles categorize the Law in this manner or authorize believers to parse God’s instructions, discarding some while retaining others. The Torah presents itself as a unified whole. James warns that “whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it” (James 2:10), indicating the Law’s indivisible nature. Yeshua’s declaration that “not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished” (Matthew 5:18) leaves no room for such selective abrogation.[1] The division of the Law into moral, civil, and ceremonial is an arbitrary hermeneutical device created to justify a pre-existing theological commitment to non-observance of commandments such as the Sabbath, the biblical feasts, and the dietary laws. It is a tradition of men that makes void the Word of God.

Antinomianism and Marcionism

Antinomianism (literally, “anti-law-ism”) is the belief that Christians are freed from any obligation to observe the moral law. While few theologians would openly embrace this label, any system that teaches the Torah is no longer applicable to believers is functionally antinomian. This position is the logical, albeit extreme, conclusion of misunderstanding Paul. The historical precedent for this error is Marcionism, a second-century heresy.[26] Marcion taught that the God of the Old Testament was a lesser, wrathful demiurge, distinct from the loving Father of Jesus. Consequently, he rejected the entire Old Testament and created a canon consisting only of a redacted Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul’s epistles.[26]

The early church rightly condemned Marcionism as a profound heresy. However, any theology that sets the “God of the Old Testament” against the “God of the New Testament,” or the “Law” against “Grace,” is a “soft” or functional version of the same Marcionite error.[1] It creates a dichotomy within the nature of God and the unity of His revelation. Peter’s warning that the ignorant and unstable twist Paul’s words to their own destruction, leading to “lawlessness” (2 Peter 3:16-17), is a direct prophetic critique of the antinomian trajectory.[1] Rejecting the Torah is not a sign of spiritual maturity but a departure from the foundational truths of Scripture, echoing a heresy that the church has rightly condemned since its earliest days.

XI. Conclusion: Contending for the Faith Once Delivered

This report has systematically dismantled the theological frameworks that argue for the abrogation of the Torah and has constructed a comprehensive, biblically-grounded defense for its perpetual validity for all believers in Yeshua the Messiah. The analysis has demonstrated that the perceived contradictions within Scripture, particularly in the writings of the Apostle Paul, are not inherent to the text but are the product of flawed hermeneutics, a departure from the Hebraic context of the Bible, and the imposition of extra-biblical theological systems.

The core findings of this report can be synthesized as follows:

1. God’s Word is Unchanging: The Torah, as a reflection of God’s perfect and unchanging character, is itself described as perfect, true, and eternal. The notion that it could be improved upon or become untrue is a logical and theological impossibility.
2. The New Covenant Empowers Obedience: The promise of the New Covenant is not the replacement of the Law, but its internalization. Through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, God provides believers with a new heart and the divine power to live in joyful obedience to His instructions.
3. Yeshua is the Living Torah: The Messiah did not come to abolish the Law but to demonstrate its true meaning and serve as the perfect example of a Torah-observant life. To follow Him is to walk as He walked, in obedience to the Father’s commandments.
4. Paul was a Torah-Observant Apostle: The historical record of the Book of Acts provides the authoritative context for interpreting Paul’s letters. It portrays a man who consistently lived by the Torah and defended himself against the false accusation that he taught against it. His complex theological arguments are not a polemic against the Law of God, but against the legalistic error of seeking justification through works.
5. There is One Law for One People: Scripture testifies to one people of God—the commonwealth of Israel—into which Gentile believers are grafted by faith. As citizens of this one body, all believers are called to live by its one constitution, the Torah.

Therefore, a Torah-observant life is not legalism. Legalism is the attempt to earn salvation through the merit of one’s works. The life of faith, as presented in this report, is the reverse: salvation is received as a free gift of grace, which then produces a transformed heart that desires to express its love and gratitude to God through obedience. This is the very definition of love articulated by the Apostle John: “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3).[1]

The conclusions presented herein are not an innovation but a restoration. It is a call to return to the foundational principles of the faith and to embrace the entire, unified, and unchanging Word of God—from Genesis to Revelation—as the sole authority for the life of every believer. It is a call to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3)—a faith that finds its roots, its structure, and its joyful expression in the life-giving Torah of God.[1]