This is a great discussion to be had- do we keep the Sabbath now that Christ has come? If so, do we keep it on Saturdays or Sundays, which the New Testament calls "the Lord’s day..." You will all have different answers and convictions. You need to be led by Christ. However, when it comes to Sabbath or feast days, do not judge a person who keeps them or doesn't, let each person be led by the Spirit.
The Meaning of Jewish Shabbat
The 4th Commandment- God Means Business
Exodus 20:8–The major institution of the Sabbath came in the 4th of the ten commandments which stated that the Sabbath (or the 7th day; i.e. our Saturday) was a holy day on which no work should be performed. It was to be a day of rest and worship. It was serious enough that a violator could be killed for performing work on that day (Num. 15:32-36). Israelites were not even to light a fire in their home on the Sabbath.
Exodus 16 Manna in the Wilderness
That evening quail came and covered the camp, and in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp. 14 When the dew was gone, thin flakes like frost on the ground appeared on the desert floor. 15 When the Israelites saw it, they said to each other, “What is it?” For they did not know what it was.
Moses said to them, “It is the bread the Lord has given you to eat. 16 This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Everyone is to gather as much as they need. Take an omer[a] for each person you have in your tent.’”
17 The Israelites did as they were told; some gathered much, some little. 18 And when they measured it by the omer, the one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little. Everyone had gathered just as much as they needed.
19 Then Moses said to them, “No one is to keep any of it until morning.”
20 However, some of them paid no attention to Moses; they kept part of it until morning, but it was full of maggots and began to smell. So Moses was angry with them.
21 Each morning everyone gathered as much as they needed, and when the sun grew hot, it melted away. 22 On the sixth day, they gathered twice as much—two omers[b] for each person—and the leaders of the community came and reported this to Moses. 23 He said to them, “This is what the Lord commanded: ‘Tomorrow is to be a day of sabbath rest, a holy sabbath to the Lord. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.’”
24 So they saved it until morning, as Moses commanded, and it did not stink or get maggots in it. 25 “Eat it today,” Moses said, “because today is a sabbath to the Lord. You will not find any of it on the ground today. 26 Six days you are to gather it, but on the seventh day, the Sabbath, there will not be any.”
27 Nevertheless, some of the people went out on the seventh day to gather it, but they found none. 28 Then the Lord said to Moses, “How long will you[c] refuse to keep my commands and my instructions? 29 Bear in mind that the Lord has given you the Sabbath; that is why on the sixth day he gives you bread for two days. Everyone is to stay where they are on the seventh day; no one is to go out.” 30 So the people rested on the seventh day.
Exodus 20- Moses Lays Down the Law
What did keeping the Sabbath look like? During the period between Ezra and the Christian era the scribes formulated innumerable legal restrictions for the conduct of life under the law.” Zondervan p. 736a. There were 39 sections of prohibition; they are as follows: sowing, plowing, reaping, gathering into sheaves, threshing, winnowing, cleansing, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking, shearing wood, washing it, beating it, dying it, spinning it, making a warp of it, making two cords, weaving two threads, two stitches, tearing to sew two stitches, catching a deer, killing, skinning, salting it, preparing its hide, scraping off its hair, cutting it up, writing two letters, building, blotting out for the purpose of writing two letters, pulling down, extinguishing, lighting a fire, beating with a hammer, and carrying from one property to another.
These 39 rules can be placed into 4 categories: (1-11) the preparation of bread; (12-24) manners of dress; (25-33) writing; and (34-39) work necessary for a private house.
There were 5 types of interdictions laid down by the Jews: 1) those specifically forbidden in the scriptures, 2) those supposedly forbidden in the scriptures, 3) things forbidden because they might lead to a transgression of the Biblical command, 4) actions that are similar to the kinds of labor supposed to be forbidden in the Bible, and 5) actions that are regarded as incompatible with the honor due to the Sabbath.
Over time Isreal and Judah strayed from God and were taken into captivity in Babylon. While there the time of their punishment came to an end and God moved on the heart of the king to send a group of settlers back to Jerusalem to build the wall. Nehemiah was in charge but found that many did not keep the old ways and had to be re-taught
Isaiah 56- God Makes Promises to Eunchs and foreigners Who Keep the Sabbath
To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
who choose what pleases me
and hold fast to my covenant—
5 to them I will give within my temple and its walls
a memorial and a name
better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name
that will endure forever.
6 And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord
to minister to him,
to love the name of the Lord,
and to be his servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold fast to my covenant—
7 these I will bring to my holy mountain
and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
a house of prayer for all nations.”
8 The Sovereign Lord declares—
he who gathers the exiles of Israel:
“I will gather still others to them
besides those already gathered.”
God was pretty serious about the Sabbath in Jeremiah
At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!”
3 But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? 6 Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. 7 But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Healing on the Sabbath
9 Now when He had departed from there, He went into their synagogue. 10 And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand. And they asked Him, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”—that they might accuse Him.
11 Then He said to them, “What man is there among you who has one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and lift it out? 12 Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” 13 Then He said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And he stretched it out, and it was restored as whole as the other. 14 Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.
Behold, My Servant
15 But when Jesus knew it, He withdrew from there. And great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them all. 16 Yet He warned them not to make Him known, 17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying:
18 “Behold! My Servant whom I have chosen,
My Beloved in whom My soul is well pleased!
I will put My Spirit upon Him,
And He will declare justice to the Gentiles.
19 He will not quarrel nor cry out,
Nor will anyone hear His voice in the streets.
20 A bruised reed He will not break,
And smoking flax He will not quench,
Till He sends forth justice to victory;
21 And in His name Gentiles will trust.”
Why Was It a Big Deal to Heal on the Sabbath?
In regards to healing on the Sabbath, a person could be medically tended to if there were danger to that person’s life, otherwise it would have to wait. Now, certain external bodily ailments were not considered dangerous, however many internal ones were. Another interesting twist is that a person using such external remedies such as cotton in the ear, may place it there and leave it before the Sabbath begins, but once the Sabbath has started, one cannot put it in. And it if falls out on the Sabbath, it would not be allowable to put another in. Thus when Jesus healed on the Sabbath, their laws were not silent.
Unless it was a life threatening situation it should wait. Even in modern synagogue services one will hear the liturgical pronouncement after reading a list of those who died in that year and those who are presently ill: “Because this is the Sabbath we will make no supplication, but pray God’s speedy healing and comfort to return.” The modern Jew will not even ask God to heal on the Sabbath. In regards to the “sheep fallen in the pit,” which Jesus mentions, they had laws for that also. If an animal could be sustained in the present predicament, it should stay there until after the Sabbath was over. If sure death would occur, they could then profane the Sabbath by taking positive action. The canon was that on the Sabbath no healing was to be done except to prevent death. A person could also apply such medical attention so as to keep a wound from getting worse, but not so much as to help it get better. Thus a plaster might be worn, provided its object was to prevent the wound from getting worse, not to heal it, for that would have been work. Here is an extreme example. If a wall fell on a man on the Sabbath, and it was doubtful whether he was still alive. You could clear away the rubble in order to find the body. If the man was still alive he could be pulled out from the rubble. But if he were dead, they would have to leave him there until after the Sabbath. This principle of life superceding the Sabbath most probably came from Lev. 18:5. Rabbi Simeon ben Menasya (c. A.D. 180) said, “The Sabbath has been committed to you and not you to the Sabbath.” How strikingly similar this is to Jesus’ earlier pronouncement that the “Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
Sabbath Day Regulations
Meticulous Sabbath Regulations:
” . . . the prohibition about tying a knot was much too general and so it became necessary to state what kinds of knots were prohibited and what kind were not. It was accordingly laid down that allowable knots were those that could be untied with one hand. A woman could tie up her undergarment, and the strings of her cap, those of her girdle, the straps of her shoes and sandals, of skins of wine and oil of a pot with meat. She could tie a pail over the well with a girdle, but not with a rope” (Zondervan, 736).
A Sabbath’s journey could be no longer than 2,000 cubits (3,000 feet) from one’s house. However, if you were to set up a temporary dwelling (by pitching a tent, leaving a meal, etc.) you could travel another Sabbath’s journey from there.
A Sabbath’s “burden” was the weight of “a dried fig.” If a person were to twice lift the weight of half a dried fig so as to transport it from one place to another and thus combining the action into one, that would also constitute a sin and a Sabbath desecration.
If an article of clothing or apparel were intended to be worn in front, it could be slipped behind without constituting a breach of Sabbath law, but not the other way around; that would constitute a sin.
A person could not throw up an object and catch it for that would be work, involving that hand in such labor. But a big question arose as to whether a person could throw up the weight with one hand and catch it with the other. Similarly, a person could carry rain water caught from the sky, but not drained off the roof.
If a person were in one place, and his hand filled with fruit stretched into another, and the Sabbath overtook him in this attitude, he would have to drop the fruit, since if he withdrew his full hand from one locality into another, he would be carrying a burden on the Sabbath.
It was not lawful to sell anything to a heathen unless the object would reach its destination before the Sabbath, nor to give to a heathen workman anything to do which might involve him in the Sabbath work. Thus, Rabbi Gamaliel was careful to send his linen to be washed three days before the Sabbath.
You could not increase heat on the Sabbath, thus nothing could be cooked. An egg could not be boiled by putting it near a hot kettle, nor in a cloth, nor in sand heated by the sun. Cold water could be poured on warm, but not the reverse. One rabbi went so far as to forbid throwing warm water on your body lest you either spread a vapor or clean the floor thereby.
https://markmoore.org/sabbath-regulations/
Strictly speaking, the only commandments Jesus broke on the Sabbath belonged to Jewish tradition, not divine law. In their zeal to define exactly what a person could and could not do on the Sabbath, Jewish leaders laid on the people’s backs a spiritual burden heavier than any physical burden (Matthew 23:4). Jesus attacked such traditions with the vehemence of one who saw more clearly than any that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27).
If we could remove the chapter break between Matthew 11 and 12, we might notice, in the context immediately preceding the Sabbath controversies in Matthew 12:1–14, these arresting words: “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28). The rest offered on the Sabbath was now being offered in Christ.
You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. (Exodus 31:14)
One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. (Romans 14:5)
If an old-covenant Israelite esteemed “all days alike,” he might be stoned to death (Numbers 15:32–36). Yet Paul evidently felt no need to impose the Sabbath command on his Gentile converts. Some in Rome, it seems, wanted to keep the Sabbath (and so esteem “one day as better than another”) — perhaps Jewish Christians eager to maintain the traditions of their fathers. Paul had no issue with those Christians, so long as they refrained from pressuring others to imitate them or suggested that salvation hinged on obedience to the Sabbath (compare Galatians 4:8–11).
For the sake of Christian freedom and mutual love, Paul says simply and remarkably, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Romans 14:5).
John: ‘I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.’
Of course, when Christians today speak of the Sabbath, they almost never mean the seventh day, but the first day: not Saturday but Sunday. But surprisingly, no New Testament writer ever refers to Sunday as the Sabbath. When Jewish (and perhaps some Gentile) Christians observed the Sabbath, they would have done so on Saturday, as Israel had done for centuries. But that doesn’t mean Sunday held no special place in the early church. Scripture suggests that it did, only under a different name: the Lord’s Day.
The phrase “the Lord’s Day” appears only in Revelation, where the apostle John writes, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day” (Revelation 1:10). But other passages suggest that “Lord’s Day” simply put a name on the church’s common practice of gathering on Sunday. In Ephesus, Paul met with the church “on the first day of the week . . . to break bread” (Acts 20:7). Likewise, Paul instructed the Corinthians to set aside some money “on the first day of every week” (1 Corinthians 16:2).
None of these passages shows the early church resting, as if they considered Sunday their new Sabbath. Richard Bauckham goes so far as to write, “For the earliest Christians it was not a substitute for the Sabbath nor a day of rest nor related in any way to the fourth commandment” (From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, 240). The majority of these early Christians likely needed to work on the first day of the week. (Sunday was declared an official day of rest throughout the Roman Empire only under Constantine in AD 321.)
The passages do suggest, however, that Christians worshiped on the Lord’s Day. Perhaps in the morning before work, perhaps in the evening afterward, the first believers gathered to praise the one who rose “very early on the first day of the week” (Mark 16:2; Matthew 28:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:19). When the stone rolled away from Jesus’s tomb on Easter morning, true Sabbath rest arrived, and a new day dawned.
https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/should-christians-keep-the-sabbath
Paul has no quarrel with those who desire to set aside the Sabbath as a special day, as long as they do not require it for salvation or insist that other believers agree with them. Those who esteem the Sabbath as a special day are to be honored for their point of view and should not be despised or ridiculed. Others, however, consider every day to be the same. They do not think that any day is more special than another. Those who think this way are not to be judged as unspiritual. Indeed, there is no doubt that Paul held this opinion, since he was strong in faith instead of being weak. It is crucial to notice what is being said here. If the notion that every day of the week is the same is acceptable, and if it is Paul’s opinion as well, then it follows that Sabbath regulations are no longer binding. The strong must not impose their convictions on the weak and should be charitable to those who hold a different opinion, but Paul clearly has undermined the authority of the Sabbath in principle, for he does not care whether someone observes one day as special. He leaves it entirely up to one’s personal opinion. But if the Sabbath of the Old Testament were still in force, Paul could never say this, for the Old Testament makes incredibly strong statements about those who violate the Sabbath, and the death penalty is even required in some instances. Paul is living under a different dispensation, that is, a different covenant, for now he says it does not matter whether one observes one day out of seven as a Sabbath.
Most of the early church fathers did not practice or defend literal Sabbath observance (cf. Diognetus 4:1) but interpreted the Sabbath eschatologically and spiritually. They did not see the Lord’s Day as a replacement of the Sabbath but as a unique day. For instance, in the Epistle of Barnabas, the Sabbaths of Israel are contrasted with “the eighth day” (15:8), and the latter is described as “a beginning of another world.” Barnabas says that “we keep the eighth day” (which is Sunday), for it is “the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead” (15:9). The Lord’s Day was not viewed as a day in which believers abstained from work, as was the case with the Sabbath. Instead, it was a day in which most believers were required to work, but they took time in the day to meet together in order to worship the Lord. The contrast between the Sabbath and the Lord’s Day is clear in Ignatius, when he says, “If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death” (To the Magnesians 9:1). Ignatius, writing about A.D. 110, specifically contrasts the Sabbath with the Lord’s Day, showing that he did not believe the latter replaced the former. Bauckham argues that the idea that the Lord’s day replaced the Sabbath is post-Constantinian. Luther saw rest as necessary but did not tie it to Sunday. A stricter interpretation of the Sabbath became more common with the Puritans, along with the Seventh-Day Baptists and later the Seventh-Day Adventists.
Acts 15: Christians and the Law of Moses
Paul Kroll, a journalist working for Grace Communion International
Acts 15 describes the most important meeting the early church had. The future of the church was at stake—was it to be a Jewish group, or would it allow Gentiles?
If Gentiles could enter the church without following Jewish laws, the church would attract more Gentiles, and eventually Gentiles would be the majority. The church would no longer be a sect of Judaism, but a distinct faith. Let’s see how the council of Jerusalem developed.
Literary context
The council comes in the center of Luke’s inspired history. His book begins with the Jewish church, dominated by Peter in chapters 1 to 5. The book ends with Paul’s mission to the Gentiles, in chapters 16 to 28. Chapters 6 to 15 form a transition, alternating between Jewish and Gentile growth.
Chapter 15, the council of Jerusalem, forms the climax of the transition between Jewish and Gentile evangelism. In the story flow, the council forms the decisive step that propels the Gentile mission into dominance.
Paul and Barnabas had returned from a successful missionary trip in Gentile areas. They told the church in Antioch how God had “opened a door of faith to the Gentiles” (14:27). Thus the stage is set for chapter 15.
Controversy arises
“Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: ‘Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved’” (15:1). They were saying that circumcision was required for salvation. They probably thought the question was simple: Christians should obey God, and God had commanded circumcision. If people want the blessings of Abraham, they should act like children of Abraham, and that meant circumcision for Gentiles as well as for Jews (Gen. 17:12).
Paul and Barnabas had a different opinion: “This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them” (Acts 15:2). How was the argument to be resolved? “Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question.” In this way the church could have unity.
So “the church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad” (v. 3). Luke is letting us know that most Christians supported the Gentile mission.
“When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them” (v. 4). What God had done was part of the evidence. The miracles and conversions supported what he was saying.
The formal debate
Then they debated the question: “Some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, `The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses’” (v. 5). We saw in verse 1 that they believed that circumcision was necessary for salvation. Here we see that they also believed the laws of Moses were required. Circumcision was the first step in the process—they believed that Christians must keep all the laws of Moses.
What were these laws? Were they biblical laws, or the unbiblical traditions of the elders? In every other New Testament mention of the “laws of Moses,” the biblical books of Moses are meant (Luke 2:22; 24:44; John 7:22-23; Acts 28:23; 1 Cor. 9:9; Heb. 10:28). Luke could have said “traditions,” but he did not. Anyone who knew the teachings of Jesus would already know that unbiblical traditions were not required of anyone. They did not need to debate about Jewish traditions.
Just as circumcision was biblical, so also were the laws of Moses. The claim was that Gentile believers should be circumcised, and then, as part of the covenant people of God, obey the laws of the covenant. One of the laws of Moses was that males were to be circumcised.
Today, we might explain that Jesus instituted a new covenant, and that the Jewish believers were God’s people not because they were Jewish, but because they were believers. Membership in the new covenant is by faith, not by ancestry. But the Jerusalem council did not approach the question from this perspective. Let’s see how they did it.
The apostles speak
“The apostles and elders met to consider this question” (v. 6). Perhaps dozens of elders were involved. “After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: `Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe’” (v. 7).
Peter reminded the people that God had used him to preach the gospel to Cornelius and his family (Acts 10). As far as we know, Cornelius was not circumcised, but Peter did not use that precedent as proof. Rather, he focused on the theological foundations of how a person is saved —by believing.
“God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith” (vs. 8-9). God gave the Holy Spirit to this uncircumcised family, purifying their hearts, pronouncing them holy, as acceptable to him, because of their faith.
Peter then began to scold the people who wanted the Gentiles to obey the laws of Moses: “Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are” (vs. 10-11).
Peter’s point is that the yoke of Moses was a burden that the Jewish people were not able to keep successfully. Those rituals showed that, no matter how hard people worked, they could never be perfect. They showed, for anyone who ever wondered, that works can never lead to salvation. Salvation is attained in a different way—by grace. We can’t earn it, so it has to be given to us.
Since the law of Moses cannot bring us salvation, there is no need to require the Gentiles to keep it. God gave them the Holy Spirit and showed that he accepts them without all those rituals. They are saved by grace, and the Jews are, too.
If we follow Peter’s logic, we will see that Jewish believers do not have to keep the laws of Moses, either. They are saved by grace through faith, just as the Gentiles are. The old covenant is obsolete, so its laws are no longer required for anyone, and that is why Peter could live like a Gentile (Gal. 2:14). But that is getting ahead of the story. In Acts 15, the question is only whether Gentiles have to keep the laws of Moses.
The judgment of James
After Barnabas and Paul told “about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles” (Acts 15:12), James spoke. As leader of the Jerusalem church, he had a lot of influence. Some of the Judaizers even claimed him as their authority (Gal. 2:12), but Luke tells us that James was in complete agreement with Peter and Paul.
“Listen to me. Simon [Peter] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles” (Acts 15:13-14). The fact that God has already acted was powerful evidence. James then quoted from the Greek translation of Amos to show that Scripture agreed with what was happening (vs. 15-18). He could have used other Old Testament prophecies, too, about Gentiles being included among God’s people.
Experience and Scripture pointed to the same conclusion. “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God” (v. 19). There is no need to require the yoke of Moses, for that would make things unnecessarily difficult for the Gentile believers.
James then suggested four rules: “Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood” (v. 20). Instead of making things difficult for the Gentiles, these four rules would be enough.
Obviously, Gentile believers should not lie, steal and murder. They already knew that, so they did not need a special reminder about it.
Why, then, these four rules? Some scholars say the Jews believed that these laws dated back to the time of Noah, and therefore applied to all nations. Others say that all four rules were associated with idolatry. Some say that these four rules were laws of Moses, and were given so Gentiles and Jews could eat together. None of these suggestions is fully convincing.
However, the decree makes it clear that Gentiles do not have to be circumcised, nor do they have to obey the laws of Moses. They are circumcised spiritually, not physically. God never gave those commands to the Gentiles.
Moses is preached
We should not make it difficult for the Gentiles, James said. Instead, it will be enough to give them four rules, which they will find easy to comply with. Why give them these rules? Notice the reason that James gives: “For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath” (v. 21).
James was not encouraging Gentile Christians to attend the synagogues. He was not saying they should listen to the laws of Moses. No, but because those laws were commonly preached, the apostles should tell the Gentiles four rules. Then they would not think that Christianity is more difficult than it is.
To summarize: Some men said that Gentiles should be circumcised and obey the laws of Moses or else they could not be saved. Not so, said the apostles. Gentiles are saved by grace and faith. God is pleased to dwell in people who aren’t circumcised and who don’t keep the rituals. But since Moses is widely preached, we need to give a decree that clearly distinguishes the Christian faith from the Law of Moses. This pleased the entire church, so they wrote it in a letter and sent it to Antioch, where they “were glad for its encouraging message” (v. 31).
https://learn.gcs.edu/mod/book/view.php?id=4475&chapterid=99
he “Judaizers” vs. Paul: Galatia
Despite the decree of the apostles and elders of the church in Jerusalem, the “Judaizers” continued to preach the need of the Gentiles to conform to the Law of Moses. Within a few years of the conference in Jerusalem, the “Judaizers” are seen actively in the areas of Asia Minor and Greece. We see this concern manifest in Paul’s letter to the Galatians, written to churches in south central Asia Minor around 55-57. In this letter, Paul first defends his apostleship and declares his authority (Galatians 1:11-2:10), demonstrating that the message he preaches comes from God. He then speaks of the hypocrisy of Peter in Antioch, who first associated with the Gentile Christians but then became aloof when some Jewish Christians from Jerusalem came (Galatians 2:11-21).
11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
15 “We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in[d] Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.
17 “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.
19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”[e]
Paul then chides the Galatians, calling them “foolish” (Galatians 3:1), demonstrating very clearly that the original covenant made was made with Abraham looking toward Christ (Galatians 3:2-14). The Law of Moses was therefore designed to be a tutor, leading men to the knowledge of sin and death to be ready for the coming of the faith through Christ, in whom all men are now equal (Galatians 3:15-29). Finally, Paul makes a plain declaration to the Gentile Christians in Galatians 5:1-6:
For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye are severed from Christ, ye would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away from grace. For we through the Spirit by faith wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through love.
It is abundantly clear: salvation comes through Christ and Christ alone. The Law of Moses can do nothing for the Christians in Galatia.
The “Judaizers” vs. Paul: Corinth
The “Judaizers” seem to enter Corinth in around 57, between the writing of the first and second Corinthian letters. They seem to have been accepted rather quickly, leveling charges against Paul: that he was not a true apostle, having no commendation from Jerusalem, as they did (2 Corinthians 3:1-2); that he was not a qualified speaker (2 Corinthians 10:10); and that since he did not take assistance from the Corinthian brethren, this was somehow a detriment to his validity as an Apostle (2 Corinthians 12:13).
Paul writes a very strong rebuttal to these charges. He establishes that his letters of commendation are the members of the church in Corinth, for whom Paul worked diligently (2 Corinthians 3:1-3). He then demonstrates how the Spirit is much more powerful than the Law written on tablets is (2 Corinthians 3:4-18). Later, he describes himself as meek when present, but bold through his letters (2 Corinthians 10:1-3), that he is the same person in present as in his letters (2 Corinthians 10:11-12), and is equal to many of the most eminent apostles in knowledge (2 Corinthians 11:5-6). He then says that he robbed from other churches to work with the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 11:7-9), and says the following concerning a comparison of himself and these “Judaizers,” in 2 Corinthians 11:22-28:
Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as one beside himself) I more; in labors more abundantly, in prisons more abundantly, in stripes above measure, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day have I been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in perils from my countrymen, in perils from the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in labor and travail, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Besides those things that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily, anxiety for all the churches.
Paul speaks about the reaction of the Corinthians regarding his lack of receiving any assistance from the Corinthians in 2 Corinthians 12:11-13:
I am become foolish: ye compelled me; for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing was I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I am nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty works. For what is there wherein ye were made inferior to the rest of the churches, except it be that I myself was not a burden to you? Forgive me this wrong.
Finally, Paul asks the Corinthians if he or Titus had taken advantage of the Corinthians in any way or if their conduct was anything but befitting a servant of Christ (2 Corinthians 12:14-18). We have no information about any changes made in the church at Corinth because of Paul’s exhortation, but we do see that no more rebuke or defense was necessary from him.
https://www.astudyofdenominations.com/history/judaizers/
