Random Update

It's been a busy few days, and lest I drop out of sight for another six weeks (Heaven forbid!), I thought I should post at least something briefly.

I'm currently in the process of getting ready to move, which means lots of planning and packing. The move is being driven by my financial situation not improving as I'd hoped, but it's also beneficial to the family as a whole; if all goes well, I'm taking over a house my parents haven't been able to sell and moving in with my brother. It also puts me closer to my SO.

While I've got more material on the SeekGod front, I'm holding off posting it for a bit, mostly so I can space posts out if things stay crazy for a while.

Be back soon!

Shalom!

Tisha B'Av

Tisha B'Av, the ninth day of the Hebrew month of Av, has just passed. It's a solemn occasion, a time to remember the destruction of the two Temples as well as numerous other calamities that have befallen the Jews on this day since. For example (with thanks in part to KHouse for the list):

• 135 CE - The Bar Koshba revolt is squelched with the fall of Bethar, the last Jewish stronghold
• 136 CE - Emperor Hadrian establishes a temple of Zeus and the pagan city of Aelia Capitolina on the ruins of Jerusalem
• 1095 AD - The declaration of the Crusades by Pope Urban II, which resulted in many Jews being attacked by Crusaders on their way to the Holy Land
  
• 1242 AD - The burning of the Talmud
  
• 1290 AD - The signing of the edict by King Edward I expelling the Jews from England
• 1492 AD - Ferdinand and Isabella issued a royal decree that all Jews must leave the Spanish territories by August 3rd (9th of Av on the Hebrew calendar)
  
• 1914 AD - The start of the First World War
  
• 1942 AD - The first killings at the Treblinka extermination camp in Poland
  
• 1994 AD - And the AMIA bombing by Arab terrorists in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which killed 86 and wounded more than 120

It is also tradition that it was on the 9th of Av that ten of the twelve spies that Israel sent into Canaan came back with a bad report, causing Israel to lose faith and wander the wilderness for 40 years (cf. Num. 13). I also think it likely that Moses removed the Tent of Meeting from the camp on Tisha b'Av, as we explain in our article, The Feasts and the Exodus.

We praise ADONAI that Tisha B'Av has passed this year without trouble, and pray His continued protection over Israel, both the land and in Diaspora, throughout the year.

Shalom!

A Response to Pyromaniacs

Per reader Bryan Z’s request, we’re taking a break from responding to SeekGod’s Vicki in order to respond to another article written on the Pyromaniacs blog. The article in question is written by Steven A. Kreloff rather than the blog’s owner, Phil Johnson. Pardon the length; I wanted to answer a whole post in a single post, and these are not simple issues to be addressed.

While the article is very well written, and is instructive for making a very (if I may say so) typically Christian argument against Messianic Judaism. Many of its arguments have been previously refuted on HebrewRoot, and in those cases, I will of course refer readers to the appropriate articles rather than re-invent the wheel. I also suggest that all readers refer to our general article Why the New Covenant Doesn’t Do Away With the Torah for a general overview of arguments in favor of a Torah-observant Body of Messiah.

Kreloff’s opening paragraphs explain exactly what he sees wrong in Messianic Judaism:

A number of years ago, when my son was young, we attended a baseball game. Not only was my son a baseball fan, but he was also an avid collector of baseball cards. When we arrived at the ballpark, though, I noticed that he seemed more interested in looking at the pictures of the players on his cards than in watching the ball players on the field. In my astonishment I asked him, "Why are you looking at the pictures, when the real living players are standing right in front of you?"

What my son did with baseball cards and players, many Jewish Christians today do with their faith. Embracing a concept known as Messianic Judaism, these Jewish believers emphasize Old Testament laws and practices (such as dietary laws, feasts, and Sabbath days) as the way to please God. Yet Paul referred to these kinds of observances as "shadows" pointing to the reality of Jesus Christ (Col. 2:16, 17).

Our fuller response to the argument from Colossians can be found here. To sum it up, I will make two illustrations here. The first is to ask whether Mr. Kreloff keeps a picture of his wife or significant other in his wallet? If so, why? Doesn’t he have the real wife to look upon? And yet he, and most other Americans, keeps pictures of his loved ones as reminders of them and a way of keeping them close as he goes through his day.

In the same way, the Feasts of ADONAI serve as reminders of the Messiah. Consider the first Feast commanded, Passover. It celebrated Israel’s redemption from Egypt. Would we ask why Israel continued to keep Passover after they had already been redeemed? Or do we understand that it served like a picture in the wallet, reminding Israel every year of her great Loved One and how He saved them from bondage? In the same way, Messianics keep Passover as a yearly reminder of our Beloved Lamb, who gave His life to redeem us from bondage to the world—and really, don’t most Christians keep Easter for the same reason?

The second illustration is derived from water immersion, or baptism. As Col. 2:11-12 explains, baptism is symbolic of our dying to our old lives with Yeshua and being raised with Him into a whole new life to be lived in the Spirit. Now, knowing the reason for this “shadow,” how many Christians think that we should cease to keep baptism simply because we have the Messiah, the reality to which the baptism points?

Kreloff continues by stating that Yeshua is superior to the types of the Tanakh that point to Him. We agree completely; that doesn’t in and of itself change whether we should continue to keep God’s commandments. The argument that he alludes to, but doesn’t yet make, from Hebrews is answered here and in my debate with Myles Davis: No part of the Torah was done away with, and only the High Priesthood and sacrifices were transferred to Yeshua.

Kreloff’s next argument is both very typical of mainline Christianity and utterly without Biblical support: “Instead of encouraging these Hebrews to remain within their comfortable religious practices, the inspired penman pleads with them to abandon these customs in favor of loyalty to Jesus Christ.”

Such a thought never entered into the Apostles’ minds, let alone their pens! In Acts 15, the subject of whether Jews should continue to keep the Torah is never even raised; it is considered a given that they would and the question is wholly on how to handle the Gentile converts flooding the synagogues every Sabbath to hear of Yeshua. In Acts 21:20ff, we are told that the tens of thousands of Messianic Jews “are all zealous for the Law,” and that Rabbi Sha’ul, aka the Apostle Paul, took a Nazrite vow with four others and went to the Temple to make sacrifices (v. 26) in order to refute the idea that he was telling Jewish believers “to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs” (v. 21)! We also refute the argument that the Apostles had ceased to live as Jews that is often made from Galatians here.

Note that without this foundational assumption that the Apostles saw themselves as the forerunners of a new religion rather than as Jews who saw their Judaism made complete (whole) in the Messiah, Kreloff’s entire article falls apart. Note also that Messianic Judaism has long had substantial rebuttal arguments to this assumption, arguments that Mr. Kreloff does not even mention, let alone address. With all respect to Mr. Kreloff, this speaks of a knee-jerk response, not of someone who has carefully studied Messianic Judaism so as to be able to write a viable argument against it—and reflexive opposition has never been an ally to the truth.

A Theological Danger?

Kreloff’s next section begins,

The greatest menace posed by Messianic Judaism is that, by encouraging its followers to diligently observe Old Testament laws, it obscures the foundational truth of Christianity, which is justification by faith in Christ. Though many within this movement are born again and would affirm that their salvation is based upon Christ's substitutionary atonement, yet their emphasis upon Old Testament ceremonial laws gives the distinct impression that the observing of these laws are necessary for salvation.

A distinct impression to whom? And on what basis? Does simply obeying a command of God automatically imply that one is doing so with the belief that one is working towards his/her salvation?

I assume that Mr. Kreloff opposes adultery and homosexuality, and his faithful to his own wife. Would he accept the argument that by doing so, he “gives the distinct impression that the observing of these laws are necessary for salvation”? He might, at that, but would such a stance in any way diminish Grace? What about the command to be baptized into the Name of the Lord Yeshua? Is doing it in just the right way—whatever way Mr. Kreloff thinks is correct—necessary for salvation?

Obviously, any command can become the basis for a legalistic attitude. Many Christians have killed each other in arguments over baptism in darker times, and even today many Christians condemn those who drink, smoke, listen to the wrong music, etc.—none of which are even part of the Biblical commands! Do these errors mean that mainline Christianity should be considered a “menace”?

Let’s be clear about this: Repentance (turning away from one’s sin) is necessary for salvation:

This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. (1Jn. 1:5-10)

Does this mean that someone who sins unintentionally and doesn’t realize it is condemned? Not at all—the sacrifice clearly covers sins of ignorance (Lev. 4:2ff, Heb. 9:7). This is one reason why the Apostles did not see keeping the Torah as a prerequisite for salvation, and instead only laid down four basic laws that would separate the Gentile converts from paganism (see again our article on Acts 15). However, it does mean that just as the Israelites who sinned out of ignorance and then came to realize it were responsible for repenting from that sin and making the appropriate sacrifice, those of us in Messiah who find out that we have not been keeping one of His commands because we didn’t know about it or didn’t know that it applied to us are likewise responsible for thereafter keeping the command and relying on Yeshua’s sacrifice to cover us.

So then, do I believe that we who are in Messiah should continue to keep His Feasts and other “Jewish” commandments? Absolutely. Do I see it as a matter of salvation? Absolutely not. Since we are indeed saved by faith, we can afford to honestly disagree about the interpretation of certain passages of Scripture.

I trust that clarifies the erroneous “impression” Mr. Kreloff has. On to his next objection:

Indeed, there are some within the messianic movement who teach that Jewish believers are obligated to observe all the Old Testament laws. They would in fact associate their salvation with keeping these laws.

For the former, yes, on the basis (Acts 21) already given. For the latter, who is Kreloff claiming takes this position?

Kreloff next argues from Galatians as a whole We’ve previously touched on this in part, but have not yet finished a full article on Galatians as a whole. While our previously cited articles address Kreloff’s specific points, let us take a moment to address the specific points he makes here:

He called their rejection of grace for law "a different gospel" (1:6) and a distortion of the gospel of Christ (1:7).

This is true. However, the issue was neither one of Jewish believers remaining Jewish nor even of Gentile believers keeping the commands of the Torah. Rather, the issue, per Acts 15:1 & 6, was that circumcision (being Jewish) and keeping the Torah were being distorted into prerequisites for salvation and fellowship. As I pointed out in my debate with Myles Davis,

In fact, it was to combat this then-prevailing rabbinic error that the Apostles forbade Gentile believers to circumcise, as explained before. The command to be made righteous by trusting in God alone (Gen. 15:6) preceded (both chronologically and in importance) the command to be circumcised (Gen. 17). So long as the misperception ruled that one had to be circumcised to be saved, and to be circumcised meant to become a Jew, the two were in conflict.

In order to preserve both the true way of salvation as commanded by the Torah—by faith—and to preserve God’s promise to call Gentiles—not just proselytized Jews—by His Name, the Apostles had to put the command of faith ahead of the command of circumcision. They did not annul the Torah by so doing: They actually preserved and upheld it according to its true meaning!

Note that the emphasis against circumcision was meant to be a general rule, not an absolute prohibition; otherwise, Paul damned both Timothy and himself by circumcising the young Greek (Acts 16:3; note that this was many centuries before the rabbis ceased to trace one’s ancestry through the father).

So long as justification by faith, just as our father Abraham was, is kept foremost in mind as the reason for doing good works (cf. Eph. 2:8-10), there is no contradiction between faith and works. Let me repeat again: I do not seek to keep the Torah in order to be saved; I seek to keep it because I am saved, and I want to be like my Savior in every way.

A Ecclesiological Danger?

Kreloff’s next objection is, to put it plainly, nonsensical:

One of the great truths of the New Testament is that the Body of Christ is made up of both Jews and Gentiles. It is an unbiblical concept to have a local church that is distinctively Jewish or Gentile (by necessity the early church in Jerusalem consisted of all Jews because the Gospel had not been presented to the Gentile world). Thus, the nature of messianic synagogues—with their unique Jewish distinctions—violates the very spirit of fellowship among believers of all backgrounds and cultures.

If it is unbiblical to have a local church that is distinctively Gentile, then by definition virtually every church in the world is unbiblical! Would Kreloff argue that having a church with a distinctly American culture—as his doubtless is, though he may be so immersed in our culture as to not notice it—is a violation of Scripture? What about a church with a distinctly Chinese flavor? Hispanic? African? What exactly is wrong with having a church with a particular cultural tradition?

And if one may have a Biblical church with a distinctive American, Chinese, Hispanic, or African cultural tradition, exactly on what basis can one object to an assembly with a distinct Jewish cultural tradition?

Of course, this "any culture but Jewish" attitude in the Ekklesia goes back a long way, with Jews who wanted to worship a Jewish Messiah being forced to take oaths to give up everything Jewish about their heritage, as Dan Juster documents in an article on our home site. Even today, Jews who come to the Messiah in a Sunday church are nearly always pressured to become “uncircumcised” in direct violation of 1Co. 7:18 and Acts 21. “You know Jesus now? Congratulations! Here, have a ham sandwich. What? Don’t you know that only the weak in faith keep kosher?” etc.

That being the case, it’s hardly surprising that Messianics would rather a new Jewish believer come to one of our synagogues. It’s not a matter of forcible separation on our part—it’s a matter of not wanting to help with the assimilation of the Jewish people into a Gentile culture. It may be objected that Christians aren’t assimilating Jews, but “completing” them. Not true. According to Paul in Romans 2:25, a Jew who ceases to keep the Torah becomes a Gentile for all practical purposes: “For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.”

Fortunately, we are seeing a shift in the above situation: Many evangelical churches today are discovering a new respect for the Jewish culture which gave them the Bible, and are encouraging the Jews in their midst to keep to that culture. However, that shift is coming about precisely because there is such a thing as Messianic Judaism and the Hebrew Roots movement.

Kreloff writes,

By encouraging messianic synagogues, Messianic Judaism promotes division in the Body of Christ that is contrary to the teachings of the New Testament.

Tell me, does having Baptists, Presbyterians, Evangelicals, etc. promote division in the Body of Messiah, or should we all go back to being Roman Catholic in the name of unity? If one supports the right of different denominations to develop with their own (Biblically-defined, one would hope) cultures, liturgy, songs, order of service, etc., on what basis can one object to Messianic Judaism as one among many?

Are we seeing the pattern here? Isn’t Mr. Kreloff saying again (however unintentionally, as I’m sure it is), “Different church cultures are fine—just as long as they aren’t Jewish!” How did we, who are the inheritors of a Jewish Messiah whose Name and teachings were passed on by wholly Jewish Apostles ever come to such a theological (as opposed to personal) anti-Semitism?

Simple: By a misuse of Galatians compounded by centuries of human tradition. Galatians does not override Acts 21, or the book of Romans, or 1Co. 7, or any of the other innumerable places where Paul affirmed that there was still value to being Jewish and keeping the Torah—let alone our true Master’s own command that even the least of the Torah should be kept (Mat. 5:17-19)!

Tell me, Mr. Kreloff, since you have cited Gal. 3:28 as stating that Jewish believers should not continue to live as Jews, does this passage also annul Paul’s own teaching on separate responsibilities for men and women, per 1Co. 11:3-10, for example? Does this passage mean that homosexuality is now permitted, since there is no difference between male and female? Of course not! The point of the passage is that all have equal access to the Messiah and God’s grace regardless of their birth, not that all distinctions have been completely destroyed!

Paul himself states, “Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Rom. 3:1-2). Is Paul schizophrenic on the issue? Or have we perhaps misunderstood his writings, as happened even in his own day (cf. 1Pt. 3:16)? Perhaps it is time to stop building our theology wholly upon Paul (and that out-of-context), and build it instead on the whole of Scripture.

If Mr. Kreloff is really concerned about Jews going to Messianic synagogues and “robbing” the Sunday churches of their richness, perhaps he should abandon an anti-Jewish, anti-Torah theology which drives them there. He should also recognize that just as he goes to an American church as opposed to a Korean church because of his cultural preference, the Messianic Jew has the same freedom in the Messiah.

An Evangelistic Danger?

Kreloff starts his next section,

Adherents to Messianic Judaism believe that those identified with messianic synagogues make better witnesses to Jewish people than Gentiles from a Bible believing local church. However, the Apostle Paul told the Romans that his goal in ministering to so many Gentiles (he was the Apostle to the Gentiles) was to provoke Jewish people to jealousy (Romans 11:14). In other words, he felt that the best way to arouse Jewish interest in the gospel was through Gentile Christians. When Jewish people observe Gentile believers having a relationship with the Jewish Messiah and loving their Jewish Bibles, they often are provoked to a jealousy that eventually leads them to Christ.

Likewise, when Jewish people observe Jew and Gentile worshipping together in a Messianic synagogue, following the Messiah by keeping the Torah, their jealousy is aroused that much more.

Let me share a true story: I know a family in which the mother’s mother is Jewish. For years, she has resented her son-in-law because she saw him as tearing her daughter away from her Jewish heritage. From a very young age, she had adopted the philosophy, “I was born a Jew, and I’ll die a Jew,” which made her completely resistant to Gentile Christianity.

Since her family started attending our synagogue and her daughter has returned to her Jewish roots, her attitude towards her son-in-law and Yeshua have softened considerably. Her jealousy for her heritage has indeed been provoked, but it wasn’t by Gentile Christianity—it was by her daughter and granddaughter’s Messianic Judaism.

What Kreloff fails to appreciate is that when Paul penned those words, he was living in a time when Gentile believers were coming into the Jewish synagogues (Acts 13-14) and learning the Torah (Acts 15:21) to hear of the Messiah. They were a sub-culture within Judaism, a sect (Acts 24:5 & 14, 28:22), not a separate religion. In such a position, they could indeed provoke the Jews to jealousy by showing an enormous love to each other, displaying their Spiritual gifts, and speaking of a Messiah who encapsulated the whole Torah—but as a separate religion which rejected even her own Jewish members (as long as they remained distinctively Jewish) and who rejected the Torah, we don’t provoke this jealousy—the vigilant guardianship of something we own or have a special relationship with. Does a man feel jealousy over his wife when he sees his friend with a different woman?

While it’s true that most Jews who have come to faith in Messiah have done so by my Sunday-brethren’s efforts. That’s hardly surprising just as a matter of numbers and time—Messianic Judaism has only really begun to spread in the last 20 years, and there are perhaps a million in us in the world as opposed to billions of professing Christians.

I don’t know many Messianics who would lose that advantage of numbers and time in reaching our Jewish brothers and sisters with the Gospel. Our concern is wholly with which way our Gentile brethren will influence new Jewish believers after they come to faith in a Jewish Messiah: Will they encourage them to maintain their Jewish culture, or tell them to stop keeping the Torah and become as Gentiles? If the latter, then they are in violation of Paul’s own writings as well as the Tanakh and Yeshua’s teachings.

Jewish believers do indeed offer so much to the Body of Messiah. Unfortunately, for most of the last 2000 years, we have rejected their gifts in the name of conformity and a terrible misreading of Paul’s writings. Messianic Judaism represents a reversal of this tragedy, a movement where Jews and Gentiles together can learn the full Jewishness of the Messiah and the Bible, and in turn use what we have learned by living to edify our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Shalom!

An Answer to SeekGod.ca, Part 5

The purpose of this article is to defend Messianic Judaism against what I believe to be an unfair and unscriptural attack. While this of necessity requires a certain amount of “counter-attack,” I will try to keep the focus on the arguments rather than the person, though some comments about Vicki’s general tendencies in her writings are necessary.

Answering Vicki’s Specific Objections

Having established that many of Vicki’s arguments are misdirected due to her failure to discern the fringe from the core, let us deal with some of her arguments that actually do touch on the core of the Hebrew Roots and Messianic movements:

She quotes Larry Rowland of Messengers of Truth as saying, “In order to correctly understand the Newer Testament, it is beneficial to have a working knowledge of the world from which it was birthed.” She responds,

We have always understood that the Bible was a revelation of God himself. It encompasses His unending love, mercy, justice, patience and most of all, His plan for humanity and our salvation through Jesus Christ.

That does nothing to answer or disprove Rowland’s statement. Yes, the Bible was written for all mankind, but it was written through the lens of a particular culture, and that culture is Jewish! All Christian scholars acknowledge that our culture today is nothing like that of the Biblical world—take for example apologist J.P. Holding’s comparison of Biblical culture to Japanese culture in its honor-shame paradigm. While the major truths of the Bible, such as salvation by faith, are apparent in any decent translation, there are many passages that can only be fully understood by learning about the original culture and situation of the authors. Indeed, the very fact that we have to translate the Bible from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English proves Rowland’s point!

Vicki asks,

Do we indeed have to become Jewish in thought and custom in order to fully understand the Word of God and be pleasing before Him?

Okay, without accepting the “prophecy” as such (I don’t know Cozzen well enough to judge his “credentials” as a prophet, nor do I consider the question important at the moment), Cozzen’s essential point that we have accepted the Bible in general and the NT in particular as filtered through Western, Hellenistic culture rather than through its original Hebrew culture is essentially correct. Just as a Japanese person must become somewhat American in thought in order to fully understand an American book, we too must become Jewish in thought in order to fully understand a book written by Jews, the Bible. Why should that seem strange to anyone? (We do not, however, have to become Jewish in custom in order to please God, per Acts 15 and Gal. 2.)

Are we to accept that we have been lacking and even deliberately misled as some will say, by the New Testament and many orthodox teachings?

Few Messianics claim that the New Testament has misled us! What we are saying, just as Martin Luther said to the Church of his day, is that the NT has been misunderstood and some of its teachings ignored or distorted by preconceptions of what constitutes “orthodox” teachings.

What of the needed reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles they say will take place if we embrace our Hebrew Roots?

What of it? I’m not seeing a contradiction here.

Is there any truth to the charges of anti-Semitism towards Jews on the part of Christians in general, and from the New Testament?

From the former, there is no doubt. From the latter, no—but our misreading of the NT has certainly been used to justify anti-Semitism both great (blood-libel, pogroms) and small (forcing Jewish converts to Christianity to stop keeping the Torah).

She next objects to this “teaching of Jew and Gentile reconciliation” on the basis of Gal. 3:26-29. How exactly this passage is supposed to counter the Messianic movement is not stated; she simply assumes as a given that “There is neither Jew nor Greek,” negates the Bible’s distinctly Jewish—rather than Greek—origins. One wonders if she also sees this passage, which goes on to say, “there is neither male nor female,” negates the Bible’s teachings on homosexuality, for example, or Paul’s own teaching about the distinctions between men and women (e.g., 1 Co. 11:4ff).

After a brief criticism of the Sacred Namers (which we would agree with in general, though Vicki simply doesn’t provide much in the way of an actual argument to be considered), she writes,

Besides removing or changing the Name of Jesus Christ, many would eliminate the term Christianity. Uri Marcus, of Nehemiah Trustees Covenant Fund, in an email regarding "A Vote For "Jesus"?, insists that converted Jews must retain their Jewish identity and refuse the Christian name so as not to offend their fellow Jews

Vicki fails to recognize that there is a good reason for this: For the better part of sixteen centuries, Christianity has been the persecutor of the Jewish people. Even today, every time a Jewish person comes to faith in the Jewish Messiah, we tell them to become like Gentiles rather than remaining in their own Jewish culture. Messianic Jews wish to be considered part of the larger Jewish community, just as the Apostles were, not part of a Gentile religion—and frankly, there’s nothing wrong with that.

Shalom!

An Answer to SeekGod.ca, Part 4

The purpose of this article is to defend Messianic Judaism against what I believe to be an unfair and unscriptural attack. While this of necessity requires a certain amount of “counter-attack,” I will try to keep the focus on the arguments rather than the person, though some comments about Vicki’s general tendencies in her writings are necessary.

Promoters of Hebrew Roots

It’s significant that in this section, Vicki has isolated a handful of individuals of, frankly, little contribution to the Messianic movement as a whole. She does not even bring up David H. Stern, whose Messianic Jewish Manifesto and Complete Jewish Bible and Commentary are standard reading in many or most Messianic congregations; in fact, while modern Messianic Judaism has no singular leader or founder (unlike, for example, the Lutherans, Presbyterians, or Methodists), David Stern would come closer to qualifying than almost anyone else.

Nor does she mention D. Thomas Lancaster or Tim Hegg of First Fruits of Zion, Michael L. Brown (Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus), Kevin Howard and Marvin Rosenthal (The Feasts of the Lord), Mark Kinzer (Post-Missionary Messianic Judaism), or any other well-known, published authors in the Messianic movement. Admittedly, some of these (like FFOZ) may have come to the forefront after she wrote her initial article, but Stern, for example preceded her website by fifteen and seven years, respectively.

(A correction: I originally referred to Mark Nanos here as being Messianic; he is not, but rather is a Reform Jew who believes that the misrepresentation of Paul's view has been extremely harmful to the Jewish people--and he's right. My apologies to him for the accidental misrepresentation on my part.)

Vicki shows little understanding of the diversity within the Messianic and Hebrew Roots movement—to start, she continually groups them together when they should be regarded as interrelated, but separate groups. For another, she takes several distinct congregations, takes diverse statements from their leaders, and jumbles them together into a caricature of what “mainline” Messianic Judaism (if there is such a thing) truly believes.

For example, she has no cognizance of the fact that the role that the Talmud, if any, should play in Messianic Judaism is an ongoing and healthy debate. Avi ben Mordecai, as a Jew of Orthodox background living in Israel, believes that the Talmud should be kept. There is a whole community of Messianic Jews living in Israel (warning: YouTube link) who disagree with him—and far more living outside of the Land. In fact, he himself says at the beginning of the quote she has selected, “I am not a proponent of the ‘Jewish Roots’ or ‘Hebraic Roots’ movement as you or they define the terms”! How then are his opinions on the matter of halakhah relevant to a discussion of a group that he himself admits not belonging to? That’d be like me quoting a Catholic about Mary to discredit an Evangelical denomination!

Vicki quotes several sources as “leaders” of the Messianic movement; where she got the idea that these were leaders accepted by the movement as a whole is not stated. She has failed to notice that each of these three has distinct points-of-view which are at least partially incompatible with the others: Avi ben Mordecai would be unlikely to accept Dean Cozzens as a prophet, for example. Nor would Cozzens or Rowland accept ben Mordecai’s belief that we should keep the whole Oral Torah—not to mention ben Mordecai’s denial of being a part of the Hebrew Roots or Messianic movements at all!

What we are seeing here is that Vicki does not know how to properly discern between differing sub-groups of a movement. By differing between such groups and then discerning the common denominators between them, one can develop a core set of beliefs that characterize a movement as a whole, and then present a criticism of those. In the case of the Messianic/Hebrew Roots movement, one could legitimately criticize the following beliefs, which I defend on HebrewRoot:

• A need to understand the Jewish origins of the Scriptures and to read them in that light rather than in a Greek/Western light
• The validity in keeping the Torah for the believer in Messiah today
• Keeping the Feasts of the Lord
• A belief that we are grafted into Israel’s branch without replacing the natural branches
• A predominantly premillennial eschatology

If one were doing a critique of the Messianic portion of the movement, one could add the following:

• Keeping of much (not all) Jewish tradition as a legitimate expression of our faith in Messiah
• Referencing the Talmud and other Judaica for history and commentary (though in fact many Christian commentators do this, such as Edersheim, Keil & Delitzsch, and Lightfoot)

However, the following beliefs are held only by some groups within the Hebrew Roots/Messianic movement (many would say the fringe elements):

• A Pentecostal belief in the Spiritual gifts – in this case, my own congregation does believe in the Spiritual gifts as continuing today, but we do not derive any theology from extra-Biblical prophecies, nor do we claim to speak for all Messianics in this matter
• A belief in the divine origin of the Oral Torah
• Kabbalistic teaching – I don’t actually know any Messianic congregation which promotes studying Kabbalah, though I suppose there are probably a few somewhere
• The Sacred Name belief – on why “Jehovah” is not the correct transliteration, see here and here.

By failing to understand the different “flavors” of Messianism, or to acknowledge that the movement as a whole does not have a single leader or group of leaders, Vicki has mischaracterized mainline Messianic belief. By suggesting that we dispute the inspiration of the NT, she has again mischaracterized mainline Messianic belief. While she does raise some valid questions (though not questions without answers, as my own page and this blog demonstrate), she has not done enough research to know what the Messianic response to her arguments are in order to counter them.

In short, Vicki has either not done her homework or has not done so with a researcher’s discernment, and in the process has (inadvertently, we hope) slandered a large (over a million and counting) group of people.

Shalom!

HebrewRoot Update

I've just posted a new article on HebrewRoot called The Way of Paradise: Rabbinic Hermeneutics. It's a look at the four levels of interpretation that one can find in virtually any passage of Scripture, including examples of those levels being used by the Apostles in the Renewed Covenant Scriptures. I actually wrote it in response to some of the stuff I've been responding to on SeekGod, but it incorporates some thoughts that I've had and arguments I've made on FR as early as two years ago. Hopefully, it stands as a worthy contribution to an area where many others have written in more (and probably better) detail.

Shalom!

An Answer to SeekGod.ca, Part 3

The purpose of this article is to defend Messianic Judaism against what I believe to be an unfair and unscriptural attack. While this of necessity requires a certain amount of “counter-attack,” I will try to keep the focus on the arguments rather than the person, though some comments about Vicki’s general tendencies in her writings are necessary.

Anti-Semitism?

“Those who have challenged the Hebrew Roots teachings in the past have been dealt with swiftly and with the utmost hostility,” Vicki writes. “Dealt with?” With what? Hit-squads? No, as it turns out, by angry emails which use strong language. While I don’t condone the email presented, I’m not sure how this constitutes being “dealt with swiftly” or “with the utmost hostility”—is Vicki likewise dealing with Messianics “swiftly and with the utmost hostility” by publishing her website?

It’s interesting that the email she has chosen to use as an example of this hostility is obviously a knee-jerk reaction, rather than one written by a calmer, more eloquent author. She claims it to be from a “well-known leader,” but doesn’t tell us who. Frankly, anyone who is in ministry gets the occasional kook email or letter; our synagogue gets them all the time, many from “leaders” in the Christian world. Should I use those emails to show just how the Christian world is out to get us, and hint at a conspiracy to silence our point of view? Neither should Vicki use her kook mail to attack Messianism.

She continues,

Those who question this movement have often been accused of anti-semitism. Does the presentation of various Jewish doctrines obtained from Jewish sources constitute anti-Semitism? It seems unreasonable to conclude that the facts, presented objectively, are inherently anti-Semitic.

That depends: Are these Jewish doctrines presented in their full historical and linguistic context? Has Vicki studied the Judaica enough to know how to evaluate whether a source is considered “authoritative” or whether it is simply the recorded position of a single rabbi? Frankly, I could go through the writings of such well-respected fathers of Christianity as John Chrysostom and Martin Luther and pull quotes a-plenty to demonstrate that Christianity is a Jew-hating religion—but Vicki would be quick to leap on me for my selective quotation, and rightfully so.

Let me be the first to point out that there are passages in the Talmud and other traditional sources that are very blasphemous to our Lord Yeshua. However, I would also point out that a) just because something is in the Talmud does not make it authoritative for Judaism as a whole (just as not all things said by the early Church fathers are authoritative for Christianity as a whole), and b) that those statements were given and recorded at a time when the Church had joined with the State of Rome in persecuting the Jewish people.

Which is more blasphemous: To speak slander of an anti-Torah, anti-Jew “Jesus” that the Christians have presented you, or persecuting a person in Jesus’ name so as to provoke them to speak slander of Him? I’d say the latter.

Vicki writes, “Moreover, this writer has no bias against the Jews, but looks forward to the salvation of any through Jesus Christ.” The question is, once they are saved, would she encourage them to remain circumcised, Jewish, per Acts 21:20ff and 1 Co. 7:19, or would she expect them to assimilate into Gentile Christian culture? If she objects to the Messianic movement as a whole, the answer is necessarily the latter; and if the latter, Vicki is either saying that she wants there to be no more Jews, only Gentilized Christians, or that she wants some or most Jews to never accept their Messiah.

I’m sure Vicki would be appalled at those two conclusions, but they are the only ones which logically follow from her arguments.

Shalom!

An Answer to SeekGod.ca, Part 2

The purpose of this article is to defend Messianic Judaism against what I believe to be an unfair and unscriptural attack. While this of necessity requires a certain amount of “counter-attack,” I will try to keep the focus on the arguments rather than the person, though some comments about Vicki’s general tendencies in her writings are necessary.

To Embrace Hebrew Roots: Part I

Introduction

I have to give Vicki credit for both hitting the ground running and not pulling her punches even in her opening. She begins:

Research into the Hebrew Roots & Messianic movements constitutes research into Judaism as well as the occult. . . . We do not wish to edit or criticize Judaism, but recognize it as distinct from our Christian beliefs, just as many in Judaism also see a distinction and separateness from our beliefs, and we jointly have mutual respect for our differences and each other.

As we will see, by her tacit accusation of “occultism” in Messianic Judaism, she means our general utilization of the Talmud as a source of history and commentary. To say this on the one hand, but to claim respect for Judaism on the other, lacks consistency to say the least.

She begins with a fairly common format of asking the questions she intends to answer and expressing her concern that the Hebrew Roots movement is not all that it claims. So far, so good, and no real surprises. I would argue with her assertion that Christians “already study [the Old Testament] in light of the New Testament”—while this may be true in theory, in practice 90% percent of all sermons concentrate on the writings of Paul, and rarely touch on any of the Tanakh. The fact is that the Hebrew Roots movement wouldn’t even exist as a noticeable entity within the Body of Messiah if there weren’t so many believers hungry to better know how the Tanakh and New Covenant fit together.

Her introduction concludes:

We know that many of the Hebrew Roots ministries are connected with each other and with various other types of ministries. This obligates us to investigate them even more thoroughly. By examining the HR teachings, those of the Jewish faith and it's [sic] mystical exponent, Kabbalism--which is indeed the concerning root of the Hebrew Roots movement--we will then see if what is taught upholds the Word of God.

The first sentence is so obvious as to be meaningless: Of course many Hebrew Roots and Messianic ministries are connected with each other! We keep in contact the same way and for the same reasons that the various Evangelical churches and denominations do. I fail to see why this merits special investigation, unless Vicki’s intent is to suggest some sort of sinister cabal underlying the whole thing.

However, it’s the charge of Kabbalism against the movement as a whole which is particularly interesting and telling. The fact is that most Messianics—including those who have been in the movement for many years—have little more idea of what Kabbalism is than a dictionary definition. I’ve done somewhat more research into what Kabbalism teaches, and I can say that there is very little if any Kabbalistic influence in the Messianic movement. We’ll address her specific arguments for this influence as we continue.

Anti-Semitism?

“Those who have challenged the Hebrew Roots teachings in the past have been dealt with swiftly and with the utmost hostility,” Vicki writes. “Dealt with?” With what? Hit-squads? No, as it turns out, by angry emails that use strong language. I’m not sure how this constitutes being “dealt with swiftly” or “with the utmost hostility”—is Vicki likewise dealing with Messianics “swiftly and with the utmost hostility” by publishing her website?

It’s interesting that the email she has chosen to use as an example of this hostility is obviously a knee-jerk reaction, rather than one written by a calmer, more eloquent author. She claims it to be from a “well-known leader,” but doesn’t tell us who. Frankly, anyone who is in ministry gets the occasional kook email or letter; our synagogue gets them all the time, many from “leaders” in the Christian world. Should I use those emails to show just how the Christian world is out to get us, and hint at a conspiracy to silence our point of view? Neither should Vicki use her kook mail to attack Messianism.

She continues,

Those who question this movement have often been accused of anti-semitism. Does the presentation of various Jewish doctrines obtained from Jewish sources constitute anti-Semitism? It seems unreasonable to conclude that the facts, presented objectively, are inherently anti-Semitic.

That depends: Are these Jewish doctrines presented in their full historical and linguistic context? Has Vicki studied the Judaica enough to know how to evaluate whether a source is considered “authoritative” or whether it is simply the recorded position of a single rabbi? Frankly, I could go through the writings of such well-respected fathers of Christianity as John Chrysostom and Martin Luther and pull quotes a-plenty to demonstrate that Christianity is a Jew-hating religion—but Vicki would be quick to leap on me for my selective quotation, and rightfully so.

Let me be the first to point out that there are passages in the Talmud and other traditional sources that are very blasphemous to our Lord Yeshua. However, I would also point out that a) just because something is in the Talmud does not make it authoritative for Judaism as a whole (just as not all things said by the early Church fathers are authoritative for Christianity as a whole), and b) that those statements were given and recorded at a time when the Church had joined with the State of Rome in persecuting the Jewish people.

Which is more blasphemous: To speak slander of an anti-Torah, anti-Jew “Jesus” that the Christians have presented you, or persecuting a person in Jesus’ name so as to provoke them to speak slander of Him? I’d say the latter.

Vicki writes, “Moreover, this writer has no bias against the Jews, but looks forward to the salvation of any through Jesus Christ.” The question is, once they are saved, would she encourage them to remain circumcised, Jewish, per Acts 21:20ff and 1 Co. 7:19, or would she expect them to assimilate into Gentile Christian culture? If she objects to the Messianic movement as a whole, the answer is necessarily the latter; and if the latter, Vicki is either saying that she wants there to be no more Jews, only Gentilized Christians, or that she wants some or most Jews to never accept their Messiah.

I’m sure Vicki would be appalled at those two conclusions, but they are the only ones which logically follow from her arguments.

Shalom!

An Answer to SeekGod.ca

Let’s face it: We in the Messianic and Hebrew Roots movement have a lot of adversaries. More than any other reason, I think this is because of an old and misplaced fear in the Church of “Judaizing.” Now just what is Judaizing? Per Acts 15:1 and Gal. 3:3, it is believing that being circumcised—which is to say, becoming fully Jewish by the rabbinic ceremony of circumcision—is a requirement for salvation or for “perfecting” one’s walk. It is not Judaizing for a Jewish believer in the Messiah to continue to be Jewish and keep Torah, or else none of the Apostles were saved (Acts 21:20ff); nor for a Gentile to learn Torah in the synagogues, for then Jacob (James) was in error in Acts 15:21; nor even for a Gentile to become circumcised for the right motives after understanding his salvation by faith, or else Paul damned both Timothy and himself (Acts 16:3).

Now, under that definition, are some Messianic synagogues Judaizing? Possibly, but it seems to be the exception rather than the rule. We do encourage our Sunday brethren to rediscover the joys of keeping the Torah—particularly the Feasts, which all point to Messiah—but this is simply a matter of disagreeing that only the New Testament should be followed. The vast majority of us out here recognize that we are all saved by faith, so we can afford to honestly agree to disagree and all of us who have put our faith in the Messiah, whether we worship on Shabbat or Sunday, are brothers and sisters together and will be together in the World to Come.
Nevertheless, the accusation refuses to die. So it is with Vicki of SeekGod.ca, who has written quite an extensive series of articles attacking Messianism. Such challenges both deserve and require a response.

Vicki has wisely decided to maintain a certain degree of anonymity on the internet by withholding her last name and other personal information. We do not begrudge her her privacy one bit; however, she does not even disclose a denomination, and in fact claims in her introduction page, “This website is not supported by or aligned with any denomination. This is our family ministry.” She speaks of going to an evangelical church, but does not disclose which branch of evangelicalism. Her statements of belief are extremely general, not allowing for any practical cross-examination. For example, she says, “That the Bible is clear in saying that if we love our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, we will obey all His commandments, not just some of them and that our lives will show a change, as ‘all things become new.’” I would agree (though pointing out that Yeshua told us to keep the whole Torah in Mat. 5:17-19); the problem is that she does not disclose the practical applications of what that means to her. In the interest of fairness, shouldn’t one who subjects the beliefs and practices to others to a microscope be willing to allow them to do the same of hers?

In fact, her whole page seems to be nothing but a series of attacks on other Christian groups, offering very little in the way of positive contributions to the faith. While I am all for challenging and testing beliefs that one does not hold to, it seems a bit unbalanced to spend 99% of one’s time attacking others for their “wrong” beliefs without also writing many positive arguments for one’s own. This is why, for example, HebrewRoot has focused on providing positive arguments for Messianic Judaism and Torah-observance and rebuttal arguments against the more common Scriptures cited against us, but does not attack our Sunday brethren directly or question their integrity or salvation for believing differently on certain relatively minor matters. Nor do we here attack Vicki’s integrity or salvation, though I do question the wisdom and humility of attacking a man who has done far more to spread Christianity than almost anyone else this century for alleged “occultism” in his fictional works.

The purpose of this post and those to follow is to defend Messianic Judaism against what I believe to be an unfair and unscriptural attack. While this of necessity requires a certain amount of “counter-attack,” I will try to keep the focus on the arguments rather than the person, though some comments about Vicki’s general tendencies in her writings are necessary. I do not intend to counter her attacks against specific individuals; those who have been the targets of her darts are the ones best equipped to answer her or to choose to ignore her, whichever seems best to them.

Shalom!

Recent Articles

You know, with all the neglecting of this blog, I haven't even made a point of posting links to the articles I've written over at HebrewRoot, so here's some recent material:

• The Feasts and the Exodus, and overview of the Appointed Times of the Lord, how they related to the Exodus, and how they in turn relate to the two Comings of the Messiah.
  
  
• Yeshua: The Living Torah, in which I look at the true significance of John 1:1 and demonstrate that not only is Yeshua not opposed to the Torah, but that He is the Torah--that is, the substance of which the written Torah is the shadow--drawing on both rabbinic and Christian thought. This one is probably foundational to understanding Messianic Judaism.


• Mark 7:19 and Acts 10:10-16: Jesus Ended the Kosher Laws, in which I address the long-held misconception about these two passages and their true significance. I also address why a Gentile believer does not even have to appeal to the B'rit Chadasha for proof that keeping kosher is not mandatory for them, as well as why some of us choose to keep it anyway.

I also have a major piece coming up, called "Who Has the Authority?" In it, I look at the question of how authority devolves in Scripture, and why, even if Sha'ul (Paul) or another Apostle did claim that we should no longer keep Torah (and I've been doing a pretty good job of demonstrating that they didn't, but just for the sake of argument), they would not have the authority to do so, and would have to be rejected as apostles. It can be summed up in one sentence--"If Jesus and Paul ever did disagree on something, who would you follow?"--but goes into far more detail, including details on how we should understand the authority of non-canonical sources like the rabbis or the early Church fathers.

Before that's finished, I plan to have an answer to the argument from Galatians that keeping Torah makes Messiah of no avail to us. I've actually answered this in my debate with Myles Davis, but I look forward to giving more detail than the format of the debate allows. Speaking of whom, Myles has been held up by a firework injury (third-degree burn) to his leg; he and I speak on the phone regularly and he's doing well, though a bit in pain. He'll have his next response up soon; this will be our last argument round, after which we'll make our closing arguments.

I think that's all for now.

Shalom!

Is Oral Torah Necessary to Keep the Written?

It's a question that is often answered in knee-jerk fashion. For many observant Jews, the answer is so obviously yes that it seems stupid to even ask it. On the other hand, Christians and many Messianics are just as quick to say "no." (Interestingly, the answer for many Catholics is "yes," though they would not term their traditions as "Oral Torah.") Both sides have their proof-texts, and a brief blog entry cannot hope to address all of them, but I will nevertheless risk throwing my two cents into the mix.

In Dr. Kinzer's paper (p. 3), he writes:

The Torah requires a living tradition of interpretation and application if it is to be practiced in daily life. This is due in part to the lack of detail in its legislation. As Michael Fishbane notes, “frequent lacunae or ambiguities in their legal formulation tend to render [biblical]…laws exceedingly problematic – if not functionally inoperative – without interpretation.” Thus, the Torah forbids all work (melachah) on Shabbat, but it nowhere defines the meaning of melachah. Similarly, it commands that we “afflict ourselves” on Yom Kippur, but it does not tell us what this means in practice.

On the surface, the idea of an oral tradition to supplement the Torah does make a certain amount of sense. After all, the culture in Biblical times was primarily oral, the written word being both difficult and very expensive to distribute. It also makes sense that there were certain details of the ritual commands that were not recorded in the Torah, details that were best passed on by demonstration (i.e., orally) rather than in a written form. Explaining in text and without diagrams (which would be more prone to error in re-copying) the correct way to cut an animal’s throat so that it suffered as little as possible and to remove the most blood would take a page or more of text or a large number of technical terms whose meanings could be lost in later centuries due to lack of common use, whereas teaching one’s children the correct way would take but a few demonstrations and a few more times letting them do it under supervision. (See here for a longer discussion.)

However, having said that, Scripture requires that such "supplementary instruction" be the exception rather than the rule. Joshua 8:35 sates, "There was not a word of all that Moses had commanded which Joshua did not read before all the assembly of Israel with the women and the little ones and the strangers who were living among them." If we take this with rabbinic literalness, this leaves the way open for additional demonstrations that Moses made that were not read, but it does not leave open the way for additional words comprising an Oral Torah.

Kinzer points out, as many do, that the Oral Torah does not require direct transmission from Moses, but only the authority that the L-RD, through Moses, gave to Israel's judges to make binding rulings (Deu. 17:8-13). This is very true; however, this command only provides that there would develop an oral torah, not the existence of the Oral Torah.

What do I mean by this? Simply put, Torah provides a framework, but as Kinzer points out, it leaves numerous "gaps." Kinzer assumes that these gaps must be filled in a particular way in order for Torah to be carried out. Let me suggest to the contrary that G-d left these gaps open so that they could be filled in different ways, reflecting different cultural traditions.

Let us take the example of Yom Kippur which Kinzer raised: What does it mean to "afflict" ourselves in obedience to Lev. 16:31? The Hebrew word, anah עחה, can mean "afflict" (as in Gen. 31:50), but can also mean to "humble" or "submit" (Gen. 16:9). The traditional Jewish understanding is that this means to fast, as well as forgo all pleasures (such as bathing, leather footwear, etc.). However, is this the Biblically required practice? Consider Isa. 58:5-7:

Is it a fast like this which I choose, a day for a man to humble himself? Is it for bowing one's head like a reed And for spreading out sackcloth and ashes as a bed? Will you call this a fast, even an acceptable day to the L-RD? Is this not the fast which I choose, To loosen the bonds of wickedness, To undo the bands of the yoke, And to let the oppressed go free And break every yoke? Is it not to divide your bread with the hungry And bring the homeless poor into the house; When you see the naked, to cover him; And not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

So then, we see that even the prophets understood that fasting, while not a wrong way to submit one's self to G-d (cf. Mat. 6:16f), is not the primary interpretation of anah. Do we really require the Oral Torah to tell us how to properly afflict/humble ourselves on Yom Kippur?

Kinzer is correct that the Torah requires "a living tradition of interpretation and application if it is to be practiced in daily life" (ibid.). However, where I believe we differ is that I do not see it as requiring just a single "living tradition," but rather as the framework for many living traditions--the traditions of every people, tribe, tongue, and nation. (As indeed there are actually many "living traditions" within the various sects of Judaism, and always have been.) If we try to claim that there can be only one correct "living tradition," then we fall into the error of the P'rushim (Pharisees) who criticized Yeshua's disciples for not following their tradition (Mat. 15:1-20).

I'm not writing as someone who wishes to divorce himself from Jewish tradition and halakha. On the contrary, I have dedicated myself to learning it and living it out. I believe that there is great value in adopting into our Messiah's culture. However, neither do I want to see the full richness of the Torah to continue to be lost: When all the nations live out the Torah, each adapting their cultural traditions to it and vice-versa, then we will truly see the Kingdom of Heaven, as well as the grand variety that the Eternal One loves (cf. Rev. 7:7ff).

Shalom!

Once again, we see that I'm a slacker

It's pretty scary when you look at your blog and realize that it's been six weeks since you updated it. That's not to say that I've been totally slacking; I've written some good articles (at least I think they're good) for HebrewRoot. But in so doing, I've been neglecting the blog, which is just wrong. I don't have a huge readership (pretty small, so far), but I should treat it a lot better than I do.

One of the things that I'm planning to write for this blog soon is my thoughts on a paper written by Mark Kinzer that was brought to my attention by the Messianic Jewish Musings blog called "A Biblical Defense of 'Oral Torah'" (which can be found here for those who are interested). It's an interesting article, and not one which falls under the Hebrew Root site's mandate, so it's perfect for discussion here.

Again, sorry for the delay. Focusing on one site should not cause neglect to the other.

Shalom!