All posts by James Pyles

James Pyles is a published Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror author as well as the Technical Writer for a large, diversified business in the Northwest. He currently has over 30 short stories published in various anthologies and periodicals and has just sold his first novella. He won the 2021 Helicon Short Story Award for his science fiction tale "The Three Billion Year Love" which appears in the Tuscany Bay Press Planetary Anthology "Mars."
Uncategorized

Struggling to Touch the Essence

Leave a comment

Talmud StudyDuring the centuries following the completion of the Mishnah, the chain of transmission of the Oral law was further weakened by a number of factors: Economic hardship and increased persecution of the Jewish community in Israel caused many Jews, including many rabbis, to flee the country. Many of these rabbis emigrated to Babylon in the Persian Empire. The role of the rabbis of Israel as the sole central authority of the Jewish people was coming to an end.

This decentralization of Torah authority and lack of consensus among the rabbis led to further weakening of the transmission process. It became clear to the sages of this period that the Mishnah alone was no longer clear enough to fully explain the Oral Law. It was written in shorthand fashion and in places was cryptic. This is because it was very concise, written on the assumption that the person reading it was already well-acquainted with the subject matter.

So they began to have discussions about it and to write down the substance of these discussions…

…When you look at the page of the Babylonian Talmud today, you will find the Hebrew text of the Mishnah is featured in the middle of the page. Interspersed between the Hebrew of the Mishnah are explanations in both Hebrew and Aramaic which are called the Gemara.

The Aramaic word Gemara means “tradition.” In Hebrew, the word Gemara means “completion.” Indeed, the Gemara is a compilation of the various rabbinic discussions on the Mishnah, and as such completes the understanding of the Mishnah.

The texts of the Mishnah and Gemara are then surrounded by other layers of text and commentaries from a later period.

-Rabbi Ken Spiro
“History Crash Course #39: The Talmud”
Aish.com

My conversations with Pastor Randy are always very rewarding. We’ve taken to meeting somewhat regularly to discuss matters of mutual interest and specifically the world of believing Jews called “Messianic Judaism.” He lived in Israel for fifteen years and has many Israeli Jewish friends. He is well-versed in Biblical Hebrew and Greek, and his mind and heart are very open to Israel and the Jewish people.

But in our talks, it’s difficult to address how or if modern Messianic Jews are obligated to Torah, what exactly is meant by “Torah,” and the role of Talmud (Mishnah and Gemara) in the life of an observant Messianic Jew. For a Jew, including one in Messiah, is it even possible to comprehend a passage in Torah without Talmud?

I admit, I have few answers.

But since we both have questions, I thought this was the perfect topic to expose to the blogosphere and to present to my readership (and anyone else my readership wants to share a link to this blog post with minus a few “nudniks”). If the bottom line is the Word of God and the revealed Messiah, how can we say that the word of the Sages go beyond them? I disagree that history was frozen after the destruction of Herod’s Temple and I know that Judaism and Christianity continued to move forward and develop. If I may be allowed a conceit, I believe errors entered both Judaism and Christianity in the past 2,000 years that caused both (although Christianity began as a wholly Jewish sect known as “the Way”) religious traditions to “stray” from the intent of God and the footsteps of the Messiah to some degree (probably a really large degree).

And yet, we cannot recapture first century Christianity as Paul understood it and how it was expressed and lived within both Jewish and Gentile cultural contexts. We can only look at where we’re at now and attempt to return to the scriptures to “observe, interpret, and then apply” what we discover there (to quote Pastor Randy).

ruins
But if the Bible is the final word, what do we do with 2,000 years of Jewish history, law, discussion, and interpretation…just wad it up and toss it in the nearest (very large) trash can?  Do we have a right to take everything that it means to be a Jew and to lay it to waste, leaving behind only ruins?

Absolutely not! I don’t believe Messiah will do this upon his return (although, of course, this is just my opinion). Do we say that Jesus will wholeheartedly accept each and every judgement and ruling made by the sages without question? I don’t know if that’s true either, if for no other reason than because the discussion between the ancient sages that spans the centuries, does not come to a final agreement on many practical and legal matters.

And not all Jews and not all Jewish traditions follow the same interpretations. Which one do you choose, and having made a choice, do you realize that it is a human decision and not God’s decision? How can we reconcile this?

My wife told me something interesting just the other day. She told me that the local Chabad Rabbi and the local Reform Rabbi study Talmud together. That’s kind of surprising, and in a community with a large Jewish population, that wouldn’t happen. Chabad (Orthodox) and Reform Rabbis view the traditions and Talmud from very different perspectives. But in this little corner of Idaho, there just aren’t that many Jews and there are even fewer Jewish Rabbis. That fact acts as a bridge for these two gentlemen to meet and share what they have in common as well as their differences.

However, a much greater bridge is required to link a Messianic Jew to any other observant Jew, particularly an Orthodox scholar, although this too has recently occurred. But what is the relationship between a Messianic Jew “keeping Torah,” a state of righteousness before God, and faith in Yeshua (Jesus) as the Jewish Messiah King? Can a Messianic Jew choose how to keep Torah within a particular traditional framework of halachah? Upon making such a choice, whose choice is it, the person’s or God’s?

Torah is not to be regarded, however, as an academic field of study. It is meant to be applied to all aspects of our everyday life – speech, food, prayer, etc. Over the centuries great rabbis have compiled summaries of practical law from the Talmud. Landmark works include: “Mishneh Torah” by Maimonides (12th century Egypt); “Shulchan Aruch” by Rabbi Yosef Karo (16th century Israel); “Mishnah Berurah” by the Chafetz Chaim (20th century Poland).

“Torah versus Talmud?”
-from “Ask the Rabbi”
Aish.com

Torah is meant to be applied, but how it is applied in the life of an observant Jew is very much dependent on that person’s tradition and the branch of Judaism to which they are attached. I heard a story of a Reform Rabbi who made aliyah. According to the storyteller, when a religious Jew makes aliyah and enters the Land, they either become more religious or become secular. In this case, the Rabbi began studying to become an Orthodox Rabbi.

The differences in halachah between a Reform and Orthodox lifestyle must be enormous. I say this because the Rabbi once had a conversation with the storyteller expressing his frustration at attempting to live out the Torah according to Orthodox halachah. He cried out that he sometimes gets so confused that he doesn’t know which foot to step out of bed with in the morning as a proper way of getting up.

I don’t have a lived Jewish experience to which to compare that statement, especially within the Orthodox, so I don’t know how to respond. I don’t know how to respond when applying all that to the words of James, the brother of the Master:

For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.

–James 2:10 (ESV)

Granted, breaking one of the mitzvot does not invalidate the entire Torah nor does it make a Torah lifestyle futile and meaningless, but then what does it mean? A traditional Christian interpretation won’t be revealing here. Is the Jewish person guilty? If he or she is Messianic, what is the role of grace? For that matter, if he or she isn’t Messianic, what is the role of grace?

I know of no Messianic Jew who believes they are made righteous and “saved by the Law.” Messiah is the “way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). It isn’t enough for Messianic Jews to say “we have the Torah and the Gentile believers don’t” (and that is a gross oversimplification to be sure). Messiah is the bridge that not only links the Messianic Jew to his Jewish brothers and sisters but to the Gentile believers as well. As Boaz Michael once said, “Yeshua is the boss.” If Messiah isn’t the center of all things, the focal point, the goal of Torah and of the will of God for the redemption of the world, then what do we have?

These are the questions that my conversation with my Pastor brought into view last night. We spoke until there was no one left in the church but us. All the lights were out except for those in the Pastor’s office. All the doors were locked. If we had allowed it, our talk could easily have taken us into the middle of the night as we explored not only these questions, but everything else.

touch-the-essenceI don’t know what the answers are. I don’t know that there is any one answer. There really isn’t any one “Messianic Judaism” even as there isn’t any one “Christianity,” where a single set of interpretations and applications defines the entire group. But I believe the questions are important. I believe that discussion between all of the relevant parties is important, not because Christian Gentiles should have anything to do with defining Judaism, but for the sake of our mutual faith in Messiah.

Who is the Christian and the Messianic Jew when they each stand apart and who are we when we stand side-by-side? How are we to understand one another and in the light of scripture, how are we to understand ourselves?

The Master once said, “for where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.” (Matthew 18:20) Granted, his audience at that moment was a Jewish audience, but I don’t discount the possibility that he will also be among two or three Gentile Christians when we gather in our Bible studies and in prayer. I long for the day when two or three (or more…many more) Jewish and Gentile believers in Messiah gather together (Matthew 8:11) and we can talk about all these things. I long for the presence of Messiah among us, that he may teach wisdom and reveal understanding.

The angels are jealous of the one who struggles in darkness. They have light, but we touch the Essence.

-Rabbi Tzvi Freeman
“Jealous Angels”
Based on letters and talks of the Rebbe
Rabbi M. M. Schneerson
Chabad.org

I struggle in darkness to touch the Essence of Light.

Uncategorized

Doing Love

2 Comments

unworthyAaron was ashamed [and was reluctant to assume the position of High Priest] because of his role in the Golden Calf episode, and Moses said, “This is why you were selected.”

-Rashi, Leviticus 9:7

I was once asked to see a student nurse who was beside herself because she had made an error in medication. While this particular error was harmless, she felt that she lacked the competency to be a nurse, because she saw that she was capable of making even more serious errors.

I told the young woman that I did not know of anyone who can go through life without making any errors. Perfection belongs to God alone. If all nurses who became so upset because of a medication error would leave the field, the only ones who would remain would be those indifferent to making errors, and that would be the worst disservice to mankind.

We must try to do our very best at everything we do, particularly when it concerns others’ welfare. We must not be lax, negligent, nor reckless. We should of course be reasonably upset upon making a mistake and learn from such experiences how we might avoid repeating them. However, if in spite of our best efforts we commit errors as a result of our human fallibility, we should not give up. Allowing a mistake to totally shatter us would result in our not doing anything in order to avoid mistakes. This non-action would constitute the greatest mistake of all.

Today I shall…

…try to realize that the distress I feel upon making a mistake is a constructive feeling that can help me improve myself.

-Rabbi Abraham J Twerski
“Growing Each Day, Shevat 12”
Aish.com

No one wants to make a mistake. Certainly we all want to “get it right” the first time, whatever “it” happens to be. And when you are a person of faith, you particularly want to get moral and ethical stuff right all of the time.

It’s rather humbling when we do not. More than that, the rest of the world, both religious and non-religious people, seems to be just waiting for us to slip up so they can criticize us.

I suppose religious people are used to being put down by atheists because we’re “superstitious” or “irrational” or we’re “non-inclusive bigots” or something. However, some people of faith are no better, and tend to jump on other believers who have opinions and convictions that don’t line up with their own. You see this most often within Christianity from “Evangelical Fundamentalists” or whatever label is appropriate to use here…people who are uncompromising on matters of abortion or gay marriage (for example) and who only see the black-and-white of the issues and not the human beings involved. Christians say “love the sinner but hate the sin,” but truth be told, some Christian human beings often don’t know how to tell the difference so they hate them both.

If only we realized that we are just as capable of making mistakes as anyone else. It’s worse for us though, since we know that we are accountable to God for every word and deed we commit in our lives. One day, we’ll have to make an accounting. One day, we’ll have to face God! What the heck is wrong with us? Don’t we get it?

Rabbi Eliezer said: “Repent one day before your death.” His disciples asked him, “Does then one know on what day he will die?” “All the more reason he should repent today, lest he die tomorrow.”

-Shabbat 153a

But what is it to repent?

“It is told that once there was a wicked man who committed all kinds of sins. One day he asked a wise man to teach him an easy way to repent, and the latter said to him: ‘Refrain from telling lies.’ He went forth happily, thinking that he could follow the wise man’s advice, and still go on as before. When he decided to steal, as had been his custom, he reflected: ‘What will I do in case somebody asks me, “Where are you going?” If I tell the truth, “To steal,” I shall be arrested. If I tell a lie, I shall be violating the command of this wise man.’ In the same manner he reflected on all other sins, until he repented with a perfect repentance.”

-Rabbi Judah ben Asher, fourteenth century

love-in-lightsIs making a mistake the same as sinning? Sometimes I suppose, but as we saw in the example of the student nurse above, sometimes we just make mistakes. Even when someone gets hurt, it’s still a mistake and not a sin. But mistakes and sins have a few things in common. If we are morally adequate people, they both make us feel guilty and they both show us that we need to improve and change our ways.

Sin and repentance have been written about endlessly by people far wiser and more worthy than I, so what’s the point of me putting in my two cents? Nothing, I suppose, except for timing. There are times when we need to say such things and times when we need to hear them as well. We may not realize that it’s time and we may not seek out the information which would then inspire us to be convicted and (hopefully) to then transform. So I offer this to you just in case it’s your time. And if we are, as Rabbi Eliezer suggests, to repent today (lest we die tomorrow), then every day is our time.

There are parallel guidelines which are set to direct us in our life goals. On the one hand, we are encouraged and even obligated to state, “When will my actions be as those of our patriarchs?” In this regard we should feel that we can achieve the same levels as our ancestors. On the other hand, we must recognize that we are worlds apart from the lofty levels of our forefathers. In fact, it would be highly presumptuous to even think that we have the ability to match their accomplishments, as our Gemara reports. Even the greatest among us must acknowledge that compared to the personalities of the Torah, who were giants in character and sainted servants of Hashem, we are as mere humans as compared to angels. How are we to balance the approach we are to take in setting our goals and aspirations?

Daf Yomi Digest
Gemara Gem
“Great Asperations”
from the Commentary on Shabbos 112

We may never achieve a state of spirituality and holiness like those people we see in the Bible or those people of faith who we admire, but we can continue to seek God, and to seek His will, and to live the life he created us to live. At a very basic level, it’s really quite simple.

To love is to sigh at another’s sorrow, to rejoice at another’s good fortune. To love is the deepest of all pleasures.

-Rabbi Tzvi Freeman
“To Love”
Based on letters and talks of the Rebbe
Rabbi M. M. Schneerson
Chabad.org

Sometimes after a mistake or failure, the first person we need to learn to love is ourselves. That isn’t easy but we do have someone who can teach us. He’s the lover of our souls, and if anyone can see something inside of each of us that is worthy of love, it’s Him.

Go do like He does. Love who you are, then go love others for who they are.

Uncategorized

On the 40th Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade

11 Comments

unborn-babyI was still an atheist and a liberal when my wife became pregnant with our twin sons (now 26 years old). That’s when I started questioning my assumptions about abortion. From the start, my wife and I started relating emotionally to our child (we didn’t know she was having twins until about twenty weeks gestation) as a personality. I started bonding and loving long, long before they were born. I just couldn’t imagine in my wildest dreams ending their lives at any stage, including before birth. How could I do that?

I know that, in theory, the pro-abortion advocates are supporting “pro-choice.” That is, when a woman becomes pregnant, she can choose to go through being pregnant and give birth, or she can choose to have her unborn child medically “terminated.” But let’s look at this. My guess is that most people who are pro-choice are either parents or will be parents someday. They don’t hate children and they don’t hate people who love their own children. They see their position as one where they want to have control of when they become parents.

But let’s say that the first time a woman becomes pregnant, for whatever reason, she doesn’t want to have the child (financial difficulties, under-age, unmarried…) and has an abortion. In order to be able to successfully have an abortion, she cannot relate to her unborn child as a child. She has to relate to it as a “thing.” Otherwise, how could she go through with it?

So she has the abortion. A few years later, she purposefully becomes pregnant and begins bonding with her child from the first moment she discovers she’s pregnant, probably within just a few weeks of conception. How can she decide to love one child from the very beginning but totally emotionally and physically disregard the other child? The abortion industry has been very successful in selling this strange dichotomy and mindset, but to me, it is so completely alien.

What’s the difference between a precious unborn baby and a fetus (a term which is used as a synonym for “thing”)? The only difference is that the first is wanted and the second is not. No quality the unborn child possesses makes it more or less worthy of life in the mother’s eyes or in any pro-choice advocate’s eyes. More’s the pity.

I wrote the above commentary on Facebook after reading a New York Times blog post on the topic. In consulting the blog again, I ran across this comment:

We fought and (thought we had) won the war against compulsory childbearing decades ago, so that our daughters would have agency over their own bodies and the ability to make decisions about their health care without government interference. Just as we fought for our daughters’ right to apply to medical school, and law school, and to compete fairly for jobs in any number of professions. We fought for our own and our daughters’ right to own real estate, to buy and own stocks and have bank accounts and credit in their own name, to be free of groping and sexual demands on the job, or to keep a job.

These battles were won within my adult lifetime. And our daughters don’t know a time when they couldn’t not open a bank account, buy a home, attend the medical school of their choice, be a bartender or carpenter or police officer as well as a barmaid.

I think we who fought the battles got complacent, or just plain tired. Maybe the neanderthal right has done us a favor this past election season, reminding us and our daughters and granddaughters that freedom and liberty must be constantly nurtured and protected like a perfect rose.

The phrase “compulsory childbearing” in the above empassioned declaration caught my attention, as if people or organizations outside of the woman’s control were somehow forcing them to engage in sex, become pregnant, and have children against their will. I could go on and I know this is a complex subject, so I won’t say too much more. Some believers treat all this as black-and-white without seeing the anguish many women go through when facing the decision of whether or not to abort their children. A woman having an abortion isn’t a terrible or bad person, she’s someone facing a very difficult choice, and one that is not as simple and clear cut as either the pro-abortion or the pro-life movements make it out to be.

I used to work at a Suicide Prevention hotline in Berkeley in the late 1970s and early 1980s. I typically worked midnight until 8 a.m., so I spoke with many people who felt all alone in the night. Sometimes, I would end up talking to a woman who would be crying inconsolably (there were more than just a few of them) because she had just done the unthinkable sometime yesterday…killed her unborn child.

Nat'l Organization For Women Marks Roe V. Wade Anniversary At Supreme CourtThis is the side of Roe vs. Wade that the media, the abortion industry, and the “pro-choice” political advocates never talk about. What it does to a woman after the abortion is over. What is it like when you have exercised what you’ve been told are your “reproductive rights,” taken control of your own body and your own destiny, done what fifty plus years of modern feminism have told you that you must do when you are pregnant and you don’t want to be, and had an abortion? What is it like after it’s all over, the “medical procedure” was successfully performed, you’ve gone back to your home, and you have time to realize what just happened? You’re alone now. It’s the middle of the night, but you can’t sleep. You always imagined having children someday and you know someday you will. But there is one little cry in the night you’ll never hear, one voice you’ll never respond to, one baby you will never feed and comfort. There is one child you’ll never nurture, support, love, hug, kiss, cherish, and help grow and thrive.

What about him? What about her? Your baby wasn’t an “it.” Your baby was a little boy or a little girl. What would you have named him? What would you have called her?

“Happy Anniversary,” Roe vs. Wade. In forty years, how many mother’s hearts have you broken? How many babies never took their first breath because of you and because of the illusion that you’ve drawn over the eyes of all their mothers? How many? Why is this a good thing?

Why?

Addendum: The Woman Behind “Roe” and why she has dedicated her life to overturning Roe vs. Wade.

Uncategorized

Collision and Recoil, Part 1

3 Comments

ancient-torahFor some days he was with the disciples at Damascus. And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” And all who heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called upon this name? And has he not come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests?” But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

–Acts 9:19-25 (ESV)

And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. And the word of the Lord was spreading throughout the whole region. But the Jews incited the devout women of high standing and the leading men of the city, stirred up persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and drove them out of their district.

–Acts 13:48-50 (ESV)

This becomes a familiar refrain in Paul’s life. Always someone is condemning him for his message or what it implies in their lives. As you may recall from yesterday’s “morning meditation,” when, in Acts 9:23, it says that “the Jews plotted to kill him,” the word we read in English as “Jews” in Greek is “Ioudaioi,” which specifically refers to the Jewish religious leaders and those who support them, not the Jewish people in general (according to the commentary in my ESV Bible, anyway). We see the same word used in Acts 13:50 when it also says, “But the Jews incited the devout women of high standing and the leading men of the city, stirred up persecution against Paul and Barnabas…”

I’ve been reading D. Thomas Lancaster’s Torah Club 6: Chronicles of the Apostles, specifically his commentary on Acts 13 (pp 379-405) which is intended to be read during the week that Torah Portion Bo (“Come”) is studied. I really wish that all of you reading this blog (and everyone else) could read this particular lesson on chapter 13 of Acts, because it is illuminating in many ways, presenting the message of salvation to Jews, Jewish converts, and everyone else in such a clear manner. Space on this blog prevents me from replicating Lancaster’s arguments in full and besides, if I simply “copied and pasted” the lesson here, I would be depriving you of the pleasure of studying from the Torah Club.

Nevertheless, there is some important territory to cover. For instance, why does Chapter 13 end with the Jewish religious leaders of Antioch (and according to Lancaster,“thanks to the Seleucid dynasty, more than fifteen cities in the Roman world bore the name Antioch”), conspiring with “a few prominent, God-fearing, Gentile women who were friendly with the Jewish community” to drive Paul and Barnabas out of their area? I mean, the whole thing started out so well. After Paul’s brilliant teaching as we read in Acts 13:16-41.

When they went out [from the synagogue] they requested of them to speak these things to them the following Shabbat. When the assembly was dismissed, many individuals from the Yehudim and righteous converts followed Polos and Bar Nabba, who spoke to their heartfelt need and warned them to stand in the kindness of God

–Ma’asei HaShlichim 13:42-43 (As quoted from Torah Club, vol 6, pg 393)

The above version of Acts 13:42-43 is taken from an unpublished translation based upon the work of the nineteenth-century Christian scholar Franz Delitzsch (a translation of the Gospels based on Delitzsch’s work is currently available). Let me present the same verses in a form that might be more familiar to you.

As they went out, the people begged that these things might be told them the next Sabbath. And after the meeting of the synagogue broke up, many Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who, as they spoke with them, urged them to continue in the grace of God.

–Acts 13:42-43 (ESV)

Now, according to Lancaster, here’s the Jewish reaction to what Paul had taught the Jews, converts, and Gentile God-fearers about the risen Messiah:

The synagogue of Pisidian Antioch received Paul’s message enthusiastically. The synagogue heads asked Paul and Barnabas to return the following Sabbath and present more teaching about the man from Nazareth, His messianic claims, His resurrection from the dead, and the evidence from the prophets. After the Sabbath services concluded, an excited group of Jewish people (both Jews and proselytes) gathered around Paul and Barnabas. They followed them back to where they were staying and asked for more teaching and stories about the Master. The apostles spent the remainder of the Sabbath instructing them further in the message of the gospel and the teaching of Yeshua. They “were urging them to continue the grace of God.”

-Lancaster, pp 393-4

I’m not sure where Lancaster found that level of detail about what happened between the Jewish and proselytes from the synagogue and Paul for the rest of the Shabbat, but I can see how it could be true. Certainly it is evident that Paul’s message sparked a tremendous amount of excitement from his audience, it was received enthusiastically, and they couldn’t wait to hear more. This hardly seems like the sort of atmosphere that would abruptly turn to the local Jews experiencing “the offense of the cross” as some modern Christians might put it.

What happened?

Well, let’s back up a little bit.

Brothers, sons of the family of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to us has been sent the message of this salvation.

–Acts 13:26 (ESV)

Before proceeding, let me present the same verse from the Delitzsch translation to give it a more Judaic context:

Men, brothers, sons of Avraham’s family and God-fearers who are among you: to [us] this word of salvation was sent.

–Ma’asei HaShlichim 13:26

synagogueAnd now Lancaster’s explanation:

Paul finished his historical review with the prophecies of John the Immerser. Before going on to present the story of Yeshua, his suffering, and resurrection, he stopped to appeal directly to the people present in the synagogue. He declared, “To us the message of this salvation has been sent.”

Paul’s first person, plural pronoun “us” included all three types of people he addressed that day in the synagogue: “Brethren, sons of Abraham’s family, and those among you who fear God” (Acts 13:26). “Brethren” referred to his fellow Jews. “Sons of Abraham” referred to proselytes. (Proselytes take the patronymic “son of Abraham” at the time of their conversion.) “You who fear God” referred to the God-fearing Gentiles present that day in the synagogue. The God-fearing Gentiles were not accustomed to being acknowledged in such addresses, and they had never been included in the promises of Messianic redemption or covenant privilege.

-Lancaster, pg 390

That’s absolutely true. God-fearers, such as the Roman Centurion Cornelius and his household who we met in Acts 10, acknowledged the sole sovereignty of the God of Israel and denied all other Gods, but they had no covenant status to connect them to God as did the Jews. There was only the covenant God made with Abraham, but it was unrealized as far as the Jews and God-fearers who were listening to Paul knew.

I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.” So Abram went, as the Lord had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan. When they came to the land of Canaan, Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. Then the Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring I will give this land.” So he built there an altar to the Lord, who had appeared to him.

–Genesis 12:3-7 (ESV)

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ.

–Galatians 3:16 (ESV)

For the first time, as Paul addressed all those present at that synagogue in Antioch, he “hot wired” the connection between the Abrahamic covenant and the Jewish Messiah who he revealed was Yeshua of Nazareth, Son of David, who was born, died, and resurrected, and who carried the promise of salvation to the Jew, the Jewish convert, and yes, even to the Gentiles of the nations who feared God.

We’ve already seen how the Jews and proselytes reacted with great joy, but what was the response of the Gentiles who heard this message?

We’ll pick up with the answer to that question and more in Part 2 presented in tomorrow’s “morning meditation.”

Uncategorized

Sunday School Homework: Acts 9:1-31

14 Comments

paul-on-the-road-to-damascusBut Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

–Acts 9:1-9 (ESV)

This is part of the book of Acts generally referred to as “the Conversion of Saul,” and from a traditional Christian point of view, records the event of the Jewish Pharisee Saul, hater of all Christians and followers of Jesus, converting and becoming Paul the Christian, and Apostle to the Gentiles in the diaspora.

If you’ve been reading my blog for very long, you know that I’m not likely to accept the exact understanding most Christians have of this event, but I must say things have been illuminating. A new teacher is taking over the Sunday school class I’m attending and he’s coming in with a different style. It’s not particularly unusual, though. He assigns “homework” for the upcoming Sunday school class, in this case on the aforementioned Acts 9, and presents a series of questions that we students are supposed to research (he provides the relevant scriptures) and answer, and then bring our answers to the next class, which for me, is later today.

I debated within myself (and with God) whether or not I should even write about my Sunday school assignment. After all, my first impression upon receiving my assignment by mail several days ago and taking a look at it, was that it’s rather traditional Christian fare in terms of its content and perspective. I was wondering if there was anything I could learn from it (I know that sounds arrogant on my part, but I’m pretty familiar with how Christian tradition views Saul/Paul). I was also wondering what the rest of the class could learn, since the lesson seems relatively elementary, and I recently discovered that several members of the class are on the church’s board of elders, and thus are likely long-term Christians, well established in their faith and knowledge of the Bible.

I can’t speak for them of course, but I learned a few things.

I tend to think and write thematically, and while I am detail oriented, some of the finer points of scripture escape me at times, or at least don’t make it from short-term to long-term memory. According to Galatians 1:16-19, after Paul’s “conversion,” having his sight restored, and his escape from Damascus (Acts 9:23-25), Paul spent three years in Arabia (presumably it was Arabia) before going to Jerusalem. According to Galatians 1:18-19, once Paul returned from Arabia and journeyed to Jerusalem, he spent fifteen days in the Holy City (Acts 9:26-30) before leaving again (apparently in haste to escape the “Greek-speaking Jews” who were trying to kill him).

paul-damascus-basketI’m not sure those details are important, but they were recorded by Luke and Paul so I suppose I should acknowledge them.

I did find it ironic that Paul most likely discovered that the shoe was on the other foot as he found himself being lowered in a basket, through an opening in the exterior wall of Damascus to escape those trying to kill him.

For some days he was with the disciples at Damascus. And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” And all who heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called upon this name? And has he not come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests?” But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

–Acts 9:19-25 (ESV)

Compare that to what we read here:

But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.

–Acts 1:1-2 (ESV)

In Acts 9:23, when it says the Jews plotted to kill him, the word translated into English as “Jews” is the Greek word “Ioudaioi,” which specifically refers to the Jewish religious leaders and their supporters, not all Jewish people in general. Paul was a representative of the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem, and only a short time before, he was the one who was seeking to imprison and kill the Jewish believers belonging to “the Way.” Now, he was in the exact position of those he formerly sought to harm, and his opponents were the ones who only a tiny march of days before, would have been his allies. It must have been like facing a reflection of his former self as he was before encountering the Master on the road to Damascus. His “Damascus experience” had changed and completely reversed itself from what he thought it was to be when he originally left Jerusalem.

Jesus, it seems, is not without a sense of irony.

And when he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples. And they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles and declared to them how on the road he had seen the Lord, who spoke to him, and how at Damascus he had preached boldly in the name of Jesus. So he went in and out among them at Jerusalem, preaching boldly in the name of the Lord. And he spoke and disputed against the Hellenists. But they were seeking to kill him. And when the brothers learned this, they brought him down to Caesarea and sent him off to Tarsus.

–Acts 9:26-30

OK, let me get this straight. After an absence “off the grid” of three years, Paul returns to Jerusalem and attempts to make contact with the Apostles. They are naturally dubious, since the last time they heard about Paul, he was an enemy of the Way and had made it his “mission” to persecute the movement and eradicate its followers. Now he’s claiming to be one of them, to have had a vision of the Master himself, and that Jesus had given Paul a completely different mission, one of announcing the good news of Messiah to the Gentiles of the nations. It sounds like a bad joke.

PaulFortunately, Barnabas was there to back Paul up and to verify everything Paul was saying. Scripture doesn’t record how the Apostles reacted, but I guess it was favorably enough to allow Paul to go “in and out among them at Jerusalem” and to preach “boldly in the name of the Lord.” However, for whatever reason, Paul found it necessary to speak and dispute against the Hellenists (Greek-speaking Jews) in Jerusalem, which resulted in said-Hellenists wanting to kill him. Again, we don’t have the details, but commentary suggests that these Hellenistic Jews were not believers (as were the “Hellenists” we find in Acts 6:1), however, they may have been some of these guys.

And Stephen, full of grace and power, was doing great wonders and signs among the people. Then some of those who belonged to the synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called), and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of those from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and disputed with Stephen. But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking. Then they secretly instigated men who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.” And they stirred up the people and the elders and the scribes, and they came upon him and seized him and brought him before the council, and they set up false witnesses who said, “This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law, for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.”

–Acts 6:8-14 (ESV)

That’s just speculation and the interpretation I found in my ESV Bible, but it’s as good as anything, lacking further information. All this does suggest something though.

The main understanding I’ve gained here is that not all Jews were against Paul, against following Jesus as the Messiah, or against the Way. There were obviously believers in Damascus, and Ananias, who was directed by Jesus to restore Paul’s sight (Acts 9:10-16) is thought by Christian tradition to have been the leader of the Jewish believers in that city. It is in the same city after his sight was restored, that Paul (amazingly, given who he was just a few days before) began to proclaim the Master in the local synagogues (Acts 9:19-22) and he did so for “many days” (v 23), and only when the non-believing Jewish religious leaders (as opposed to the Damascus Jews in general) tried to kill Paul (presumably for reasons similar to why Stephen was stoned in Acts 6), that he had to leave in secret.

Similarly, after his three-year absence, Paul returned to Jerusalem to find Jews who were Apostles and followers of Jesus and Jews who were not. The believing Jewish Apostles cautiously supported him (small wonder, given his former reputation) while other Jews, because he spoke against them (the reasons aren’t clear), opposed him and wanted to kill him (a recurring theme in Paul’s life).

prince-of-peaceThe upshot is that “the Jews” as a people and a nation, did not “reject Jesus.” Opinions between Jewish sects varied widely on theological grounds, but the most likely reason why the “official” (that is, established and supported by Rome) Jewish religious leaders wanted to kill Paul (and other members of the Way) was because they were rocking the political boat and upsetting the status quo of a corrupt and invalid leadership that was firmly in Rome’s back pocket.

Even studying for Sunday school, using a traditional Christian Bible and only consulting accepted Christian commentary, I still find that many, many Jews, including one of the (former) chief opponents of the Way, firmly accepted the Gospel message and were loyal and devoted disciples and Apostles of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Yes, other Jewish sects had reasons not only to disbelieve Jesus was Messiah but to passionately oppose the Jewish sect of the Way, but they didn’t represent all Jews everywhere. Paul spent “many days” in Damascus preaching the message of Messiah among all of the local synagogues (not just those belonging to Christ’s Jewish followers), so obviously he had a Jewish audience who wanted to repeatedly hear what he had to say (we see this again in the latter part of Acts 13 which I’ll introduce tomorrow).

Paul only spent fifteen days in Jerusalem before some of the Jewish believers heard of the plot to kill Paul and helped him escape (Acts 9:30), but he continued to speak boldly in the Master’s name. And even after leaving Jerusalem, we can see the effect of his subsequent journey.

So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it multiplied.

–Acts 9:31 (ESV)

While this translation of the Bible speaks of “the church” throughout all Judea and the Galilee and Samaria, who were the believers living in those regions? Jews and Samaritans. Probably lots of Jews and Samaritans. The first Gentile we know who became a disciple of Jesus was Cornelius, and Peter had yet to encounter him (see Acts 10). The Jews and Samaritans were not Christ’s enemies, at least not all of them. Many desired to hear the message of hope and they believed. Luke’s chronicle in the early chapters of Acts records this clearly. Those Christians who doubt this because of our own traditions may want to re-examine the scriptures with open eyes and see what is actually there.

christian-coffee-cultureJesus said, “salvation is from the Jews.” (John 4:22 ESV). Paul said, “first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.” (Romans 1:16, 2:10 ESV). If we in the church ignore or worse, cut off our root, we separate ourselves from the only source of our faith, our hope, and our salvation.

Oh, one more thing.

And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

–Acts 9:4-5 (ESV)

I knew of the extremely close association between Jesus and his people Israel and particularly his Jewish disciples, but I didn’t know it was also revealed here. Jesus didn’t ask, “Why are you persecuting my people” or “my disciples” but “Why are you persecuting me.” The better part of a year ago, I painted similar portraits of the Master as the Son of Israel in Minister of Peace and Gift of the Firstborn of Israel. Jesus revealed this part of his nature to Paul as well, and I hadn’t even realized it.

Now I wonder how much of this I should share in Sunday school?

Uncategorized

The Rabbi and The Taxi Driver

Leave a comment

HumbleThe position which baalei teshuvah [penitents] occupy cannot be occupied even by tzaddikim [completely righteous].

-Berachos 34b

A surgeon once encountered difficult complications during an operation and asked his assistant to see if there was anyone in the surgical suite who could help. The assistant replied that the only one who was there was the chief of the surgical staff. “There is no point in calling him,” the operating surgeon said. “He would not know what to do. He never got himself into a predicament like this.”

As far as people’s own functioning is concerned, it might be better not to have made mistakes. Still, such perfection makes them relatively useless as sources of help to others who have made mistakes, because they have no experience on which to draw to know how to best help them correct their mistakes.

A perfect tzaddik may indeed be most virtuous, but may not be able to identify and empathize with average people who need help in correcting their errors. The “position” to which the Talmud is referring may be the position of a helper, and in this respect the baal teshuvah may indeed be superior to a tzaddik.

Today I shall…

…reflect on how I dealt with the mistakes I have made, and share my experience with others who may benefit from them.

-Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski
“Growing Each Day, Shevat 8”
Aish.com

I love stories. I suppose you know that if you’ve been following these “meditations” for very long. I like the stories the Rabbis tell. Many of them are very inspiring without being particularly schmaltzy.

I like stories that tell a lesson or impart a moral, and one of my favorite movie lines about this comes from an unlikely source:

But there’s a bright side to this, and a moral. I think morals are good for you, I love morals, and the moral of this story is: If you’re walkin’ on eggs, don’t hop.

-Jack Braddock (played by Warren Oates)

I didn’t include that quote randomly. Mr Oates, who sadly passed away in 1982 at the age of 53, often played tough guys and other character roles rather than the “leading man.” In that way, he could be much more relatable to the audience than the handsome and always capable hero-type. The above-quoted line was delivered with his usual Kentucky drawl that, in spite of him playing a rather intimidating character, was like the advice you might get from your father or favorite uncle.

I think that’s what a life of holiness is supposed to be like.

Now I suppose that last statement requires an explanation. After all, how can a tough guy character actor delivering a line in a 1983 action film remind me of a life of holiness?

Time for another story.

I once had this exact conversation with a taxi driver. He was Catholic, and asked me if rabbis marry. I told him that not only are rabbis allowed to marry, they are obligated to marry. “Be fruitful and multiply” is a command to all, regardless of career or position in the community.

The taxi driver shook his head and said, “You Jews have got it good. In my community, when someone is dating and confused, or is going through a rough patch in his marriage, or needs guidance on how to discipline their kids, who should we turn to? Our celibate priest? He wouldn’t have a clue what it means to argue with your wife, he’s never been dumped, and certainly doesn’t have a kid that pokes other kids’ eyes out. If I have a question in theology, or need to know which prayers to say, then sure, I’ll go to him. But real-life issues—he can’t help me!”

This taxi driver’s comments brought home for me an important truth. Judaism does not differentiate between “clergy” and “laymen.” Whether you are a rabbi or a taxi driver, you are expected to live a “normal” life, to be involved with the struggles and pleasures of the mundane world.

But it works the other way as well. Whether you are a taxi driver or a rabbi, you are expected to make your everyday mundane world a home for G‑d. The Torah’s ideal is to create a society of holy people. Sanctity and morality are not the domain of rabbis alone: every individual must live to the same standard, and each one of us can engage in direct dialogue with G‑d and Torah.

The rabbi is there just to help others bridge the needs of the spirit with the realities of life. But he has to do the same in his own life.

Perhaps that cab was a microcosm of an ideal world. What could be more beautiful than a society in which taxi drivers share spiritual wisdom, and rabbis change diapers?

-Rabbi Aron Moss
“Can a Rabbi Get Married?”
Chabad.org

taxiRabbi Twerski and Rabbi Moss are almost telling the same tale. In the first story, we have a picture of two “experts,” two surgeons, one who is “ordinary,” and one who is “chief of the surgical staff.” In this instance, although the first surgeon has encountered a problem and needs help, no one believes the “chief,” or in the case of a moral dilemma, the “perfect tzaddik,” will be much help, because they’ve never encountered the problems of an ordinary person.

Rabbi Moss adapts that to the relationship between a married Catholic who has children and a Priest. How could the celibate Priest possibly understand the problems of a husband and a father, at least by direct experience?

But the Rabbi can. Further, not only can the Rabbi relate because he is not only allowed but commanded to marry and have children, but he is, in many ways, no greater keeper of holiness or wisdom than the taxi driver.

What could be more beautiful than a society in which taxi drivers share spiritual wisdom, and rabbis change diapers?

That’s a life of holiness we can all live and pursue. In some ways, maybe that’s the only way we can understand God and other human beings, by being immersed both in a world of spirituality, and in a world of going to work every day, taking out the garbage, and changing diapers. Life has many troubles, but a journey of faith does not serve God if it is undertaken in some ivory tower or study hall where you never encounter pain, frustration, or tears.

In these days especially, when by G-d’s kindness we stand at the threshold of redemption, we must make every conceivable effort to strengthen every facet of our religion. Mitzvot must be observed b’hidur, with “beauty,” beyond minimal requirements. Customs must be kept scrupulously, nothing compromised. It is a Mitzva and duty of every Rabbi in Israel to inform his congregation that the current tribulations and agonies are the “birth-pangs of Mashiach.” G-d is demanding that we return to Torah and mitzvot, that we not hinder the imminent coming of our righteous Mashiach.

“Today’s Day”
Thursday, Sh’vat 8, 5703
Compiled by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Translated by Yitschak Meir Kagan
Chabad.org

The baal teshuvah and the tzaddik both live inside of you, and you will see the return of Mashiach, may he come soon and in our day.