Category Archives: Uncategorized

Separate Paths

March 8, 2013 James Pyles 16 Comments

However, after a few years these same mission organizations started putting other books at the top of the bags of Bibles. These were books about one particular denomination’s theology, or teaching that focused on certain aspects of God’s Word.

This, I believe, was the start of disunity among many of China’s house churches.

These booklets told us we must worship in a certain way, or that we must speak in tongues to be a true believer, or that only if we were baptized in Jesus’ name (instead of in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) could we be saved. Other teachings focused on extreme faith, still others argued for or against the role of women in the church.

We read all these booklets and soon we were confused! The churches started to split into groups that believed one thing against groups that believed another. Instead of only speaking for Jesus, we also started speaking against other believers who didn’t conform to our views.

-Brother Yun (with Paul Hattaway)
Chapter 20: “The Road to Unity” pg 233
The Heavenly Man: The Remarkable True Story of Chinese Christian Brother Yun

“Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.”

-Thomas Gray
“Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College” (1742)

Any of this sound familiar?

Brother Yun (Liu Zhenying) is describing a situation that occurred with the Christian communities of China in 1994. Various Christian missionary organizations from other nations wanted to help the isolated and often persecuted church in China. When China’s borders started to open up in the 1980s, these missionaries took the opportunity to engage representatives of the church in China, which was broken up in to thousands of house churches for the purposes of security and anonymity in relation to a hostile government, and try to provide for the Chinese Christians’ needs. They needed Bibles…lots and lots of Bibles.

After foreign Christian missionaries were expelled from China after the advent of the communist revolution in 1948-1950, the body of Chinese believers were pretty much on their own. Only a handful of Christians possessed Bibles, including Brother Yun, and almost nothing was known about “Christian theology” except what was revealed by the Bible itself and the Holy Spirit as it was manifested in the lives of the faithful, particularly Pastors and teachers like Brother Yun. Although there were very rare encounters with a few Chinese people who self-identified as Catholic, Christianity in China had no denominational identity of any sort. The focus of Christians in China was to covertly study the Bible, covertly meet in small house churches, covertly travel to preach the Gospel where it was unknown in China, and if captured, imprisoned, and tortured, covertly teach the Gospel to other prisoners and on occasion, even to sympathetic prison guards.

No one was thinking about denominationalism and anyone who was a Christian was a brother and sister to everyone else who was a Christian. They shared the same passion for Christ, the same fear of the government, the same pattern of concealing themselves to avoid detection and arrest, and the same risk of being tried, jailed, tortured, and executed by the anti-church state.

That changed in the early 1990s, and with the knowledge that there were different theologies, different doctrines, different denominations, and different identities, all calling themselves “Christian” but sometimes differing radically from one another, the once unified church of China became fragmented and fractured, just like Christianity in the rest of the world.

We arranged for Zhang Rongliang and the leaders of this Fangcheng Church to meet with us. This was a big step because of the tension that had existed between his group and Brother Xu’s group for many years. The day before Zhang arrived we had a time for prayer. Brother Fan said, “Brother Xu, I believe the Lord has given me a word for you, but I’m not sure you can accept it.”

He continued, “I feel that when Zhang Rongliang and his leaders arrive you shouldn’t sit down with them and talk straight away. You shouldn’t even pray with them at first. When they arrive you should immediately get on your knees and wash their feet one by one.”

Brother Xu, who leads millions of believers across China, immediately responded, “I accept this as a word from the Lord. I’ll certainly wash their feet.”

Yun/Hattaway, pp 236-7

I’ve spent this past week addressing the struggle between Messianic Judaism and Hebrew Roots Christianity in terms of community identity and whether or not we can consider our two groups (and the multiple sub-groups contained within) at all part of the same “body of Christ.”

There are days when I have my doubts.

This isn’t quite what Brother Yun is describing, but it is related. At one point, the Chinese Christians conceptualized their identities as Christians in fundamentally the same way. They just didn’t know any better. Then, with the awareness of denominationalism, split after split occurred, and the only way to even begin the healing was through an act of humility, much as what the Master performed upon his own disciples shortly before his crucifixion and death.

In the case of Brother Xu and Zhang Rongliang, it almost didn’t work. When the different groups of Chinese Christian leaders got together in the same room, discussions degraded and old arguments resurfaced. Zhang flew into a rage and almost stormed out before Brother Fan pushed Brother Xu into hurriedly getting some water and kneeling in front of Zhang to wash his feet. It took years to unify most of China’s churches again but the effort wasn’t totally successful, at least in the short run. However, by the beginning of the 21st century, most of China’s estimated 58 million Christians were unified as brothers and sisters, averting the disaster that came about with the knowledge of “differences.”

But the problem isn’t the same in the Messianic Jewish/Hebrew Roots Christianity space. Jews are different by design…God’s design. Finding a way to integrate Gentiles into a Jewish religious movement and yet have the Gentiles retain their identity, not requiring that they convert to Judaism, was and is something of a chore. I personally don’t believe it was ever completely accomplished in Paul’s lifetime, and not that soon afterward, the whole thing disintegrated (though it took a few centuries to finish it off) into a Jewish religion that did not believe the Messiah had yet come, and a Christian religion that believed the Jewish Messiah came, rejected the Jews for rejecting him, and took upon himself the Gentiles instead. When the Christ returns, it is generally believed he will reward his faithful Gentile Christians and judge the unbelieving Jews.

What a mess.

I still don’t have an answer but I have a vague sense of an ideal. The ideal is that somehow, in some way, the Jewish sheep and the Gentile sheep will be able to enter the same room and without too much discord, be able to have a conversation. In some way, we’ll be able to discuss what we have in common and not just what makes us different (and was drives us apart). In some way, we will all seek to encounter God and we will all seek joy in Him in a way that is universal.

Imagine what it would be like to speak to the wisest, most powerful being in the universe.

Realize that when you pray, you are doing just that. As you talk in prayer, nothing else in the world exists for you but Him and you. Talk to Him with the ease you talk with your father. At the same time, maintain complete awe and respect.

-Rabbi Zelig Pliskin
Proper Prayer

When you personally are happy, it doesn’t make any difference what others have. So the way to counteract envy is to increase your own level of joy.

By mastering joy, you will become free from envy.

-Rabbi Zelig Pliskin
Joy Removes Envy Of Others

I believe fear of assimilation and marginalization within the Messianic movement drives Messianic Judaism to strive with great effort to preserve their Jewish identity. The history of the church has certainly shown us that such Jewish fear is well founded and that supersessionism, otherwise known as replacement theology or completion theology, is something, in all its forms, to be resisted, battled, and defeated.

I believe that a lack of recognition of the Jewish source of Christian faith, and frankly, envy of Jewish “chosenness” has led some factions within Hebrew Roots to claim the full Torah mitzvot for themselves. Even if these factions deny attempting to usurp an actual Jewish identity, modeling your life on modern Jewish synagogue worship practices and recognizing zero differentiation between Gentile and Jewish believers within the body of Messiah amounts to taking away another kid’s toys just because that kid has them and you want them.

OK, both of those examples were of extremist positions but things can be pretty “extreme” in the world of religion. The Chinese Christians had nothing to fight about until the very concept of differences and distinctions within Christianity was introduced from outside of China. You might think that Hebrew Roots has the right idea from that example and say that the “cure” for the Messianic Judaism/Hebrew Roots conflict is also to eliminate distinctions, form a unity movement, and to start washing each other’s feet (washing away uniqueness and identity along with the dust of the road).

But as far as I can tell, there were no Jewish believers in China. Brother Yun’s book doesn’t address the issue. The problems and the practice of Christianity in China over the forty or so years his book covers had wholly different priorities.

But it also presents a kernel of truth. Distinctions being what they are, we all either need to find some common ground upon which to walk and talk with each other, or we might as well accept the denomination solution that has been alive and well within both Christianity and Judaism for many centuries and agree to disagree, form our own groups, and be happy inside of them.

Do Orthodox Jews complain about Reform Jews? Do Protestants complain about Catholics?

Probably.

Even if I went around washing everyone’s feet in the blogosphere, I doubt that it would result in the sort of healing that Brother Yun describes in his book. The only healing I know how to accomplish is my own, and even that is a monumental task. Rabbi Pliskin describes how prayer can connect each of us to God and dispel petty bickering, envy, and unhappiness, replacing them with awe, respect, and joy.

I can’t control anyone reading this blog. I can’t stop caring about you and what happens to you, but I can’t affect your lives in any way, shape, or form unless you allow it on some level. I probably shouldn’t even try because trying only contributes to my own lack of peace, blunting my joy in the realization of God.

Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand; do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.

–Philippians 4:4-9 (ESV)

“Hope never abandons you, you abandon it.”

-George Weinberg

Walk whichever path that you will. Peace.

Uncategorized

Vayakhel-Pekudei: Come Together

March 8, 2013 James Pyles 14 Comments

Moses then convoked the whole Israelite community and said to them: These are the things that the Lord has commanded you to do.

–Exodus 35:1 (JPS Tanakh)

The verb vayakhel – which gives the portion its name – is crucial to an understanding of the task in which Moses is engaged. At its simplest level it serves as a motiv-word, recalling a previous verse. In this case the verse is obvious:

When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they assembled around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods who will go before us.” (32:1)

Moses’ act is what the kabbalists called a tikkun: a restoration, a making-good-again, the redemption of a past misdemeanour. Just as the sin was committed by the people acting as a kahal or kehillah, so atonement was to be achieved by their again acting as a kehillah, this time by making a home for the Divine presence as they earlier sought to make a substitute for it. Moses orchestrates the people for good, as they had once been assembled for bad (The difference lies not only in the purpose but in the form of the verb, from passive in the case of the calf to active in the case of Moses. Passivity allows bad things to happen – “Wherever it says ‘and it came to pass’ it is a sign of impending tragedy”. (Megillah 10b) Proactivity is the defeat of tragedy: “Wherever is says, ‘And there will be’ is a sign of impending joy.” (Bemidbar Rabbah 13)

At a deeper level, though, the opening verse of the portion alerts us to the nature of community in Judaism.

In classical Hebrew there are three different words for community: edah, tsibbur and kehillah, and they signify different kinds of association.

-Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks
From the “Covenant and Conversation” series
“Three Types of Community”
Commentary on Vayakhel
Aish.com

There’s a tendency in certain corners of Christianity to struggle with the definition of words like “kahal” and “kehillah” vs. the word “ekklesia.” Does “ekklesia” mean “church” or is it associated with one of the words that has to do with “Jewish” gatherings? Certainly “ekklesia” and “synagogē” although related, tend to be split in our modern world to mean (Christian) church and (Jewish) synagogue. But digging just under the surface, here’s what we find.

At its most basic level, “ekklesia” means “a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly.” (see BibleStudyTools.com). This strips the word of all its religious connotation and gives us the “nuts and bolts” understanding. An ekklesia can be any gathering of citizens called out into a public place. They could be football fans or a lynch mob. They don’t have to be “the church.”

Interestingly enough, one definition provided by my source says, “the assembly of the Israelites,” but there’s no way to understand in that context if we are to take “Israelites” as strictly Jewish people or rather to overlay a Christian understanding and include Gentile believers as “Israelites.” Given that ekklesia tends to be considered a compound word made up of “ek” (out of, from, by) and “kaleo” (to call, to invite, to give a name to), it seems more likely that the application in this sense, is recognizing “Israelites” as those called by God in the original “called” or “chosen” manner at Sinai. I don’t see the idea of a “mixed” population of Jews and Gentiles being called collectively “Israelites” here.

By contrast:

A synagogue (from Koine Greek: συναγωγή transliterated synagogē, meaning “assembly”), sometimes spelt synagog, is a Jewish or Samaritan house of prayer (When broken down, the word could also mean “learning together” – from the Greek συν syn, together, and αγωγή agogé, learning or training) that emerged at first essentially within the context of Hellenistic Judaism in the diasporas of Greece and the Hellenized regions of the MENA area (Cilicia, Syria and Alexandria) in the second half of the Second Temple period, then progressively became the typical place of Jewish worship and education after 70 CE, when Roman persecutions accelerated the geographic dispersion process that accompanied the abrupt ending of Temple worship and priestly rituals and traditions.

–Wikipedia

So synagogue seems to be more related to “house of assembly,” “house of prayer,” or “house of study,” but within a specifically Jewish context (we do see God-fearing Gentiles periodically attending synagogues in the late Second Temple period, but they were clearly non-Jewish guests within a Jewish venue). People don’t typically ever say something like “Christian synagogue” or “Jewish church.”

But why am I delving into all of this and why should you care?

This week, I’ve been discussing (complaining) about the interactions and friction that seem to occur between certain groups of believing Jews and certain groups of believing non-Jews (i.e. Christians). One of the questions that comes up in such transactions is how closely those groups are related. Are they a single group with a single identity, differentiated only by a bit of DNA and a slice of culture, or are they defined as more distinct and separate on the level of community and covenant?

Let’s take a look at what we know about “ekklesia,” which is how we commonly think of the community of disciples of Jesus Christ, and compare it to Rabbi Sacks’ definitions for different communities of Jews (and I’m setting “synagogue” aside for the sake of this conversation). First, Rabbi Sacks’ discussion:

Edah comes from the word eid, meaning “witness.” The verb ya’ad carries the meaning of “to appoint, fix, assign, destine, set apart, designate or determine.” An edah can be a gathering for bad as well as good. The Israelites, on hearing the report of the spies, lose heart and say they want to return to Egypt. Throughout, they are referred to as the edah (as in “How long will this wicked community grumble against Me?” Bemidbar 14: 27). The people agitated by Korach in his rebellion against Moses and Aaron’s authority is likewise called an edah (“If one man sins, will You be angry with the whole community?” Bemidbar 16: 22). Nowadays the word is generally used for an ethnic or religious subgroup. An edah is a community of the like-minded. The word emphasises strong identity. It is a group whose members have much in common.

By contrast the word tsibbur – it belongs to Mishnaic rather than biblical Hebrew – comes from the root tz-b-r meaning “to heap” or “pile up”. (Bereishith 41:49) To understand the concept of tsibbur, think of a group of people praying at the Kotel. They may not know each other. They may never meet again. But for the moment, they happen to be ten people in the same place at the same time, and thus constitute a quorum for prayer. A tsibbur is a community in the minimalist sense, a mere aggregate, formed by numbers rather than any sense of identity. A tsibbur is a group whose members may have nothing in common except that, at a certain point, they find themselves together and thus constitute a “public” for prayer or any other command which requires a minyan.

A kehillah is different from the other two kinds of community. Its members are different from one another. In that sense it is like a tsibbur. But they are orchestrated together for a collective undertaking – one that involves in making a distinctive contribution. The danger of a kehillah is that it can become a mass, a rabble, a crowd.

The beauty of a kehillah, however, is that when it is driven by constructive purpose, it gathers together the distinct and separate contributions of many individuals, so that each can say, “I helped to make this.” That is why, assembling the people on this occasion, Moses emphasises that each has something different to give: Take from what you have, an offering to God. Everyone who is willing to bring to God an offering of gold, silver and bronze … All you who are skilled among you are to come and make everything the Lord has commanded …

Moses was able to turn the kehillah with its diversity into an edah with its singleness of purpose, while preserving the diversity of the gifts they brought to God…

And to sum up his definitions, Rabbi Sacks states:

To preserve the diversity of a tsibbur with the unity of purpose of an edah – that is the challenge of kehillah-formation, community-building, itself the greatest task of a great leader.

Kehillah seems to be what God, through Moses, was trying to forge from the Children of Israel. Each type of group had something valuable to offer but those elements needed to be brought together and combined within a single container to result in both diversity and unity being focused on constructive purpose.

How does that compare to our understanding of ekklesia?

In a Christian sense:

an assembly of Christians gathered for worship in a religious meeting

a company of Christians, or of those who, hoping for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ, observe their own religious rites, hold their own religious meetings, and manage their own affairs, according to regulations prescribed for the body for order’s sake, those who anywhere, in a city, village, constitute such a company and are united into one body

the whole body of Christians scattered throughout the earth

the assembly of faithful Christians already dead and received into heaven

But ekklesia can also mean “any gathering or throng of men assembled by chance, tumultuously.”

It’s as if ekklesia is trying to mirror the Jewish (or at least Rabbi Sacks’) understanding of kehillah. Ekklesia is taking the general understanding of a group of people who are called out, in some sense, who are dissimilar, who can also be assembled by random chance, but who also, when given a purpose by God, gather together from widely diverse backgrounds to be united into one body of believers for the sake of Jesus Christ.

I know that some people don’t think being gathered together for the sake of Christ is a “constructive purpose.” Certainly the vast majority of Christian history has shown us we haven’t been very “constructive” in relation to the Jewish “kehillah.” Many atheists would also agree that, based on their perception of “Christian bias,” the body of believers is hardly constructive and especially not “progressive.”

But for those of us who authentically and honestly seek out God through being disciples of the Master, being gathered together in the ekklesia of Messiah very much is a constructive purpose. Feeding the hungry, comforting the grieving, visiting the sick and imprisoned is all “constructive purpose” as far as I’m concerned and as far as the teachings of Jesus and the Torah are concerned.

Pulling all this together within the widest possible sense of the body of believers, just how close a comparison can we make between the Messianic Jewish kehillah and the Christian (including Hebrew Roots) ekklesia? I’m unwilling to say that the only difference between Jewish and Gentile believers is a string of DNA or a bit of cultural context and rather, believe that the manner in which God distinguished the Children of Israel at Sinai continues to distinguish their descendants, the Jewish people, even within the community of Messiah. I also believe, going back to Rabbi Sacks and his commentary, that community must be active and not passive, we must live holy lives, not just talk about holiness.

In other words believing Jews and Gentiles are and aren’t different at the same time. We are different in that Sinai is the defining moment for the Children of Israel and always will be relative to their special “called out-ness” from the nations. All Jews are born into this covenant relationship whether they want to be or not. But what believing Jews and Gentiles have in common is that we all had to consciously and willingly hear the voice of Messiah and respond to him, and to accept the good news of salvation from sin and the promise of the restoration of national Israel under her King.

There are groups who want to separate the believing Jews and believing Gentiles completely and have us live in two parallel but isolated silos. There are other groups who want to pour us all into a single silo like so many millions and millions of grains of wheat, completely indistinguishable form one another.

I believe we are more like two sheep pens united in a single flock with a single shepherd. Not all sheep look the same. Not all sheep act the same. Some of the sheep, a relatively small number, have a more specified purpose within the flock than the vast majority of other sheep in the flock. In spite of that, we have one shepherd whose voice we all listen to and who we all respond to in faith and trust. Since we’ve originally come from two separate pens, we have two separate histories and we different sheep have a lot to learn about one another. Sometimes, that means we “butt heads,” so to speak. The shepherd, seeing this, encourages us to live at peace with one another, not as identical drones or dough stamped out from the same cookie cutter, but as sheep from the Jewish pen and sheep from the Gentile pen in the flock of Messiah.

Kehillah/Ekklesia: different and distinct but brought together for a common and constructive purpose, offering our distinctive talents and identities in a unified container all for the sake of Messiah and by the plan of God.

Come together, right now
Over me

-John Lennon (credited to Lennon-McCartney)
Come Together (1969)
from the Beatles album Abbey Road

Good Shabbos.

Uncategorized

Debate or Beer?

March 7, 2013 James Pyles 4 Comments

One of the glories of life in the Messianic Jewish community is the unity of worship and service between its Jewish and Gentile members within a specifically Jewish context. In recent years, however, a trend has developed that challenges the Messianic Jewish community on this very issue. This trend involves various groups and movements that teach that all Jews and Gentiles under the new covenant are called to keep the same Torah in all regards.

In so doing, these One Law movements not only misinterpret a great body of Scripture, but they also miss the unique calling of Jews and Gentiles within the Body of Messiah, robbing both groups of the biblical richness of their identity. They lose the new covenant vision of unity in Messiah between Jews and Gentiles and replace it with a man-made rallying cry, which One Law advocate Tim Hegg has expressed as “One people, One Messiah, One Torah.”

-Daniel Juster and Russ Resnik
“One Law Movements: A Challenge to the Messianic Jewish Community” (January 2005)
As downloaded from Messianic Jewish Musings
Original Source: MJ Studies

This has already started something of a minor “buzz” in the Messianic Jewish and Hebrew Roots blogospheres. I wasn’t going to write about it, but since a certain amount if misinformation (or disinformation) is already becoming promoted (no, not at Derek’s blog) on the web, I felt it necessary to present a more balanced perspective. Also, since the Juster and Resnik paper significantly mentions Acts 15 and since I’ve already spent a lot of time and effort addressing Acts 15 from the current perspective of First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ) as published in D. Thomas Lancaster’s commentary in Torah Club Volume 6, I thought my perspective might provide just a little illumination.

I also want to say that FFOZ is mentioned in the Juster and Resnik paper and not in a complementary fashion. The paper was published in 2005 and references material produced by FFOZ from 2003 which was written by then-contributor Tim Hegg, a well-known Hebrew Roots scholar and proponent of “One Torah.” Since that time, FFOZ has shifted its theological and doctrinal perspective to be quite a bit more like that of Juster and Resnik as documented in their paper. It’s not identical but it’s pretty close. Unfortunately, this dates the Juster/Resnik paper somewhat, but the other content they present is fairly well “spot on.”

A few things.

By the time of Yeshua, an interpretative tradition was developing concerning the requirements for Gentiles. These later became formulated as the Noahide laws, binding on all people and rooted in the covenant with Noah. Already in the first century, Judaism made a distinction between universal requirements and requirements that were the particular responsibility of Jews.

Juster/Resnik, pg 4

This statement could be misconstrued to suggest that Juster and Resnik believe the Acts 15 letter is a reworking of the Noahide Laws and that such laws were the only restrictions incumbent upon the Gentile believers in Christ from the perspective of James and the Jerusalem Council. However, a further reading of the paper reveals this is not entirely true.

As has been noted, these are very similar to the Noahide laws. This does not mean that Gentiles are free to murder, steal, and dishonor their parents. The passage assumes a universal morality, as do Paul, Peter, and James (who were present that day), and John in their writings. As Romans 2 notes, Gentiles can perceive the law of God, even without the revelation of Moses, and are responsible for many standards that are also expressed in the Bible. For example, classic Roman moral law taught the ideals of monogamous marriage, honoring parents, honesty and much more. The essential and unique addition of New Covenant ethics is the sacrificial example of Yeshua.

-ibid

I disagree that the halachah developed by James for the Gentile believers was a reworking of the Noahide Laws although this is a commonly held belief by many scholars and laypeople. But according to Lancaster, it would make little sense to require the Gentile believers to comply only to the Noahide Laws when in fact all of humanity is accountable to God by those standards. In fact, as I’ve mentioned on one of my blog posts, Lancaster states that James only uses the Noahide Laws as a starter and seems to leverage Leviticus 17 and 18 to forge a distinct Gentile identity in Messiah based, to some degree, on the stranger or “ger” in Israel.

In those chapters, the Torah describes the sins of the Canaanites, warns the people of Israel against imitating their ways, and prescribes four prohibitions which both the Israelite and the stranger who dwells among the nation much keep. “These correspond to the four prohibitions of the apostolic decree, in the order in which they occur in the apostolic letter.” [Richard Bauckham, “James and the Jerusalem Church,” in “The Book of Acts In Its Palestinian Setting, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), 459]

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Mishpatim (“Judgments”) (pg 461)
Commentary on Acts 15:20-31

I would also direct the reader to Toby Janicki’s article The Gentile Believer’s Obligation to the Torah of Moses, found in issue 109 of Messiah Journal (Winter 2012), pp 45-62 to understand how the deceptively brief “four prohibitions” are extended to provide a rich and robust Torah observance for the non-Jewish believers that does not intrude on Jewish identity or unique covenant obligation to God.

Having read one staunch critic of the paper as well as Leman this morning, I agree that the Noahide Laws cannot be applied to the “fourfold decree” of the apostles, but that doesn’t shoot down the foundation of Juster’s and Resnik’s argument opposing the position of “grafted in” Gentile believers and Jewish believers forming a fused and completely uniform corporate identity. The so-called “One Law/One Torah” position by necessity, essentially eliminates the Jewish people in Messiah and replaces them with “One Torah” cookie cutter produced humanity. This may be inadvertent replacement theology on the part of One Law/One Torah advocates, but it is replacement theology nonetheless.

As far as I can tell, the criticism of the Juster/Resnik paper I read this morning is based on only a single element and since the Juster/Resnik position, as we see in Lancaster, is otherwise well supported, then the basic assumption of the paper remains valid.

Acts 15 specifically declares that nothing should be required of the Gentiles but four laws, three of them related to blood. Galatians 5 warns Gentiles not to receive circumcision or they will be required to keep the whole Torah. The clear implication here is that without circumcision, Gentiles are not required to keep the whole Torah. Colossians 2 warns that no one is to judge the Colossians with regard to Sabbath, New Moons or festivals. These are a shadow; the substance is Messiah. In Galatians 4:10 Paul writes that he fears that he labored over the Galatian Gentile congregations in vain because they were now observing “special days, months, seasons and years.”

Juster/Resnik, pg 2

This is probably one of the more devastating portions of their argument since the statement emphasized in the quote above plainly illustrates that the non-Jewish believers could not be obligated to keep the Torah mitzvot in the manner of the Jews unless they were circumcised (i.e. converted to Judaism).

One of the comments I made on Leman’s blog was that Juster and Resnik seem to draw a hard and clear line in the sand between Jewish and Gentile Torah observance, especially in their belief of how Paul saw the matter, while the Lancaster commentary appears to allow for more leeway, providing a sort of “permission” for Gentiles to extend themselves into more of the mitzvot without an implicit or explicit command to be obligated to full Torah observance over some undefined period of time.

One of the things I liked about the Juster/Resnik paper is that it was very clear in showing what Paul, or James for that matter, didn’t say (I apologize in advance for the length of this quote):

One Law teachers make a big point of James’s statement that “Moses has been read every week in the Synagogue” (Acts 15:21). This is taken to imply that Gentile believers will, in the normal course of their new life, attend synagogue and adopt more and more of the whole Torah. Since Torah life is good and beautiful, why wouldn’t he? On this basis, the verse is taken as an exhortation to further learning and the adoption of the whole Torah. Thus, One Law teachers transform an ambiguous statement into a strong and unambiguous exhortation.

They apparently overlook, however, the fact that these words spoken in the council were not included in the apostolic letter that was circulated among the congregations. If this were such a crucial exhortation to Gentiles, it is amazing indeed that the apostles, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, did not think it important enough to put in their letter!

It is most telling that in all the epistles to congregations there is not a single word commanding Gentiles to adopt the whole Torah, and no direct statement of hope that they will eventually adopt a fully Torah- keeping life in the same way as the Jews. There is no word of such an exhortation or even mild encouragement throughout the whole book of Acts, which is written in part to show the relationship of Jewish-Gentile fellowship!

Even were we to say that Gentiles are free to embrace Torah, the calendar of Israel, and more, there is no word that there is any covenant responsibility for Gentiles to do so. Acts 21 reinforces this impression. Here James tells Paul of the rumor that he teaches Jews who embrace Yeshua to forsake Torah. This of course is not true. So, Paul demonstrates this to be a false rumor by his Temple involvement. James reminds Paul that Gentiles were freed from responsibility for the full weight of Torah. Neither Paul nor James gives the slightest hint that they were encouraging full Torah observance among Gentiles. Paul could have said, “Not only do I not teach Jews to forsake Moses, but I even encourage Gentiles to embrace more and more of the Torah as they come to understand and appreciate it.” This is the emphasis of the One Law teachers, but there is not one word in the New Testament that explicitly encourages Gentiles to grow in keeping the whole Torah.

Galatians 5 is a watershed passage. Here Paul in the strongest terms exhorts Gentiles not to receive circumcision. Some One Law teachers want to allow a legitimate option of circumcision, so they add the proviso that it should not be done for the wrong reasons. Yet, this is not in the text. The New Covenant offers the fullness of God’s blessing upon Gentiles without the necessity of circumcision. This was not the case in the Mosaic order.

ibid, pg 5

I think when added to the body of work produced by Lancaster, we find ample support for the Juster/Resnik position. I mentioned on Leman’s blog that I hope, given the age of the paper, the authors would be willing at some point to update and expand the document to reflect changes that have occurred in the movement and in research over the past eight years.

But given my numerous blog posts of this week, lest you think I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth, I also said this on Leman’s blog:

My blog post tomorrow is my tying up all the loose ends of my “rant” for this week regarding these sorts of debates. One of the problems I have with some of our discussions is they tend to overlook the fact that, even though we disagree, we *all* still are part of the body of Messiah. I believe it is important to point out error and to support a more correct interpretation of the Bible, but how do we balance that against the need to bring organization and some manner of unity to *all* of the members of the body of Yeshua, Jewish and Gentile alike?

Rob Roy, a One Law supporter, said on the same blog post:

Probably a sign that folks are growing tired of this debate.

I’m getting tired of it, too. But my question to Derek stands. In spite of the radical differences in perspective, theology, and theory between Messianic Judaism and certain expressions of Hebrew Roots, we are all disciples of the same Master and members of the body of Messiah. If the internal organs of a person’s body fought each other as much as we do, the person would die. What’s going to happen to the body of Messiah because of us and because of the much wider “battle” of body parts we find in the various Christianites of the modern era?

My appeal to “come together” will be published in tomorrow’s morning meditation. In the meantime, we still have to talk and we’ll still disagree. May God have mercy on our limitations and particularly on our foolishness in presuming we know more than our Master.

Now can we all go out for a beer or two and loosen up or are we going to just fragment the body some more?

Uncategorized

Looking for Good

March 7, 2013 James Pyles 2 Comments

Everything that occurs comes from Him, and He is only good.

But if you and your world are not prepared to receive such good, it may manifest itself as apparent bad.

Struggle hard to see the good, think positively—and then the good will become revealed.

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

My father once said to a Rav, who labored in avoda and was an especially diligent scholar: A Rav must remember at all times and at every moment that he always stands on the threshold between being one of those who bring merit to the public and, G-d forbid, one of those who cause the public to sin – the threshold between the loftiest of heights and the most abysmal depth. All issues must touch him at the innermost core of his soul, literally, because his very soul is at stake.

“Today’s Day”
Tuesday, Adar Sheini 23, 5703
Compiled by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Translated by Yitschak Meir Kagan
Chabad.org

For the past few days, I’ve written about my frustration over the apparently endless debates, which sometimes degrade into sniping and back-biting, in my little corner of the blogosphere over matters of identity and religious practice. It’s like one kid has some special toys and when he doesn’t share with another kid, the second kid just takes them and says, “these are mine, too.”

Anyway, I want to be done with all that now because I realize that it’s not really my problem.

Well, yes it is if only because I can’t be so callous about the body of Messiah and the Jewish people. As John Donne famously wrote, “Each man’s death diminishes me for I am involved in mankind.”

No one is dying on the blogosphere, but I’m still involved.

But as ticked off as I can sometimes get at the “goings on” on the web, I can’t let it affect me as a person of faith (although sometimes I do let it affect me). There are days I want to throw in the towel and be rid of the lot of you. If this is your idea of serving God, good luck with that.

But I can’t say that either, because I’m no better than the lot of you. I’m one of you if only in the most generic sense as a poorly functioning disciple of the Master and a barely ambulatory follower in Christ’s footsteps.

The above quoted words serve as message and cautionary tale, reminding us that we can choose to view the acts of God as either good or evil, and what we do can either serve good or evil. Do we magnify and sanctify the Name, or diminish and desecrate it? Our choice.

One choice I can make is to try to rise above the din and even if I should occasionally be a voice in that chorus, I don’t have to let it define me. I don’t have to crawl on the ground when I can stand up and step over the mud. As Rabbi Freeman says:

Rabbi Shmuel of Lubavitch, known as “The Rebbe Maharash,” the fourth in the golden chain of rebbes of Lubavitch, had an attitude.

Many wise people say if you can’t go under, go over. The Rebbe Maharash said, “Just go over.”

Meaning that instead of first trying to work through a problem by its own rules, and then—if that doesn’t work—gathering the strength and courage to step brazenly over it . . .

Instead, just start by stepping right over it, as though there were no obstacle to begin with.

After all, that’s why obstacles are there in the first place—so you will go higher.

Instead of considering all the religious online chatter and discord as an obstacle, maybe it exists to remind me that blogging and pontificating is hardly the end-all and be-all of a life of faith. Certainly communicating is important, but only if it serves an uplifting purpose. Too many religious bloggers use their platforms to tear down their opponents, sometimes by name. I don’t want to be among that crowd. I’m afraid of what they’ll have to face when asked by God to give an accounting of their actions.

But I too am responsible, not only for what I write on this blog, but especially for how I serve him (or fail to do so) when I’m doing everything else.

Not long ago I read about a long-distance race with a very unusual finish:

Iván Fernández Anaya was competing in a cross-country race in Spain, running second behind Abel Mutai of Kenya. As they approached the finish line, he saw the leader mistakenly stop, thinking he had already crossed the line. So Fernández Anaya also stopped – and guided the Kenyan to the line, letting him cross first.

Suffice to say, this story would not have garnered much attention if Fernández Anaya had exploited the mistake by speeding past to claim an unlikely victory. It was the act of “doing the right thing” – ostensibly at personal expense – that earned Fernández Anaya the real victory.

True greatness does not come at the expense of others. It comes from doing the right thing.

-Rabbi Shraga Simmons
“Win-Win”
Aish.com

How do you define winning?

“A person should always strive to do the ‘right thing’ simply because it’s the truth. And [if one does so], the end result will be good.”

-Maimonides (Teshuva 10:2)

He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

–Micah 6:8 (ESV)

Now he told a parable to those who were invited, when he noticed how they chose the places of honor, saying to them, “When you are invited by someone to a wedding feast, do not sit down in a place of honor, lest someone more distinguished than you be invited by him, and he who invited you both will come and say to you, ‘Give your place to this person,’ and then you will begin with shame to take the lowest place. But when you are invited, go and sit in the lowest place, so that when your host comes he may say to you, ‘Friend, move up higher.’ Then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at table with you. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

–Luke 14:7-11 (ESV)

Today, I will look at everything we talk about, and even if it seems, on the surface, to represent strife and self-serving, I will try to see the good in it, or by God’s grace, try to find the good in Messiah.

But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing…

–2 Corinthians 2:14-15 (ESV)

Uncategorized

Sharing God

March 6, 2013 James Pyles 2 Comments

We all have moments of being struck by the awesomeness of life – whether the birth of a baby, a canopy of stars above, a piece of majestic music, or a breathtaking sunset.

These experiences are both energizing and calming at the same time. They enable us to break beyond our own limitations and to merge our (relatively) tiny, insignificant selves with the greater infinite unity. If God’s creation can have such an impact on us, how much more would an experience with the Creator Himself.

Consider someone travelling the world seeking exciting experiences. Now tell him: “In the next room, you can sit down and speak to God Almighty Himself for an entire hour.”

Wouldn’t that be the ultimate experience?

-Rabbi Noah Weinberg
“Way #31: Seek The Ultimate Pleasure”
Aish.com

I’m continuing to read comments on Derek Leman’s blog post The Sabbath is Between God and the Jewish People. Frankly, I’m beginning to see why the Gentile Christians and Jewish disciples started going their separate ways early on, that is, if they faced the same situations that are evident in the accumulating comments on Derek’s blog. I mentioned in my previous meditation (and in an extra meditation) that I’m getting a little frustrated with the whole “jockeying for position” activity going on between what we refer to as Messianic Judaism and the Christians in various expressions of the Hebrew Roots movement. Rabbi Weinberg talks about the ultimate pleasure of encountering God. Do we ever encounter God in these blog discussions?

Next to love of God, all other pleasures are insignificant. We can have delicious pizza, lots of money, love and power. But humans yearn to transcend the mundane side of daily life. That’s why mystery, magic and miracles capture our imaginations.

When all is said and done, no human being can be truly satisfied unless he reaches out and connects with the infinite transcendent dimension. We all seek to connect with that which encompasses all pleasures. Because nothing finite, nothing bound up in this world, can compare to the infinite.

Um…hello, religious blogosphere? Do you think you might be missing something?

I’ve mentioned this before, but one of the best pieces of advice I have received recently comes from a friend of mine. Seeing past all of the “stuff” we tend to argue about, he told me to not seek “Christianity” and to not seek “Judaism” but to seek an encounter with God.

In his article, Rabbi Weinberg describes ways that people can develop a love for God. You can click the link I provided above and read this entire write-up, but in general, he suggests learning to love God through nature, through history, and through Torah.

Oops! Well, as Meat Loaf has famously sung, two out of three ain’t bad. Well, maybe I’m exaggerating. As I’ve also said before, a significantly large portion of the Torah is immediately available to any Christian, whether we choose to call it “Torah” or not. In fact, one of the people commenting on Derek’s blog unexpectedly said this:

Besides, the fact that Christianity doesn’t keep the external commandments of the Torah, doesn’t mean that Christians don’t keep a *lot* of the Torah’s commands. In fact, many Christian groups keep a lot more of the Torah’s commands than a lot of the more liberal Jewish groups. So I don’t put too much stock in what these other groups do or don’t look like.

So even Christians can love God in the manner that Rabbi Weinberg suggests with only a few small adjustments (it’s unlikely that most Christians will choose to express love for God by laying tefillin or fasting on Yom Kippur nor, as we see in Acts 15, is it required) but those adjustments are probably less significant than you might imagine. But what Rabbi Weinberg says next is very illuminating.

One important manifestation of loving God is the desire to share it.

When you love God and you see other people getting caught up in all sorts of trivialities, it hurts. Why? Because it pains you to see a fellow human being missing out on such an awesome pleasure. So when you’re filled with enthusiasm about being close to God, you want all of humanity to have that relationship, too.

This is not like human beings who become jealous when the attention of their beloved is directed elsewhere. When it comes to God, there’s no jealousy when other people have a relationship with Him. Because God is infinite.

Wow! Let’s go over that again and apply it to the theme of today’s missive:

When you love God and you see other people getting caught up in all sorts of trivialities, it hurts. Why? Because it pains you to see a fellow human being missing out on such an awesome pleasure.

My point exactly!

The rest of what he says sounds almost “Christian.” I mean after all, what are we urged to do as part of our Christian faith but to share the Gospel with everyone we meet. The church I attend has a strong missionary component. The head Pastor was a missionary and is the son of missionaries. The church supports numerous missionaries all over the world. Pastor Randy encourages us often from the pulpit to share our faith, to be active, to be vocal, to live holy lives.

When it comes to God, there’s no jealousy when other people have a relationship with Him. Because God is infinite.

God is infinite. His love, mercy, grace, compassion, and kindness are infinite. He provides for us in unlimited amounts. We cannot exhaust His supply of His gifts for humanity by sharing them with too many people. We are commanded to share. We are commanded to love.

But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

–Matthew 22:34-40 (ESV)

In my previous meditations, I compared some of the mitzvot to “toys” and painted a picture of how children are usually taught to share what they have. It doesn’t mean they’re surrendering a thing, it just means they’re sharing something pleasurable with a friend or even with a stranger. Children will start playing with a kid they don’t know faster than any adult will begin a conversation with a lonely stranger.

Again, I’m not trying to convince Jewish people to violate their sense of covenant identity by agreeing to a “one size fits all” philosophy regarding Torah, but I am saying that Paul didn’t seem to have a problem with the Gentiles meeting in a synagogue with Jews on Shabbat. Peter ate with Gentiles. It’s likely Cornelius davened at the set times for the prayers. This didn’t make Gentiles “Jewish” or “Israel,” but it did allow them to worship God using the only model they had available.

And style and lifestyle aside, isn’t experiencing God the whole point?

We are called “strangers” before we are reconciled to God, but God doesn’t let that stand in His way. He is completely and totally accessible to anyone who wants Him at any time and from any place.

So for those of us who (in theory) are reconciled with God, who know Him, who walk in the footsteps of our Master, why should we be afraid to share our pleasure in Him rather than continually drawing lines in the sand and saying which toys are “obligated” to the grafted in branches vs. which toys only belong to the natural branches? If someone who is unfamiliar with these sorts of debates is trying to make up his or her mind about whether or not to devote themselves to God, what are they going to learn when they visit your blog or mine? Are we sanctifying His Name or desecrating it, even inadvertently?

God is infinite beauty, grace, power, wisdom and meaning. What have you done to share that with someone today? What have I done?

Tomorrow, a more optimistic view.

Uncategorized

Should Our Children Imitate Us?

March 5, 2013 James Pyles Leave a comment

Pesach is coming! Monday night, March 25th is the first Seder. What kind of Seder will you have for your family and friends? Will it be “Let’s hurry up and get to the food” — or something more meaningful, uplifting, impactful? There are 3 types of people: Those who make things happen, those who watch things happen … and those who ask, “What happened?” The kind of Seder you have is up to you and depends on what you do starting NOW! Make it more than — “They wanted to kill us. We won. Let’s eat.”

The Seder should help your children to feel positively about being Jewish. You cannot transfer feelings, but you can create the atmosphere and the experience which will engender positive feelings. Many people who love being Jewish, fondly reminisced about their Zaideh (grandfather) presiding over the Shabbat table and the Seder or their Bubbie (grandmother) lighting Shabbat candles … and their Seder! You are a link in that chain!

-Rabbi Kalman Packouz
“Shabbat Shalom Weekly”
Aish.com

All in all, this year’s Passover seder in my home was pretty lousy. There are a lot of reasons for this, most of which I am not at liberty to discuss. It’s wasn’t anyone’s fault. No one burned the roast, or behaved poorly, or arrived abysmally late to the event. But it certainly wasn’t the joyous occasion of freedom that I usually anticipate…at least not on the surface.

But I was disappointed and sundown at the end of Shabbat and the first full day of Passover was a sad relief. At least it was over.

-Me from my blog post
The Uninspired Passover Seder

Easter and Passover are coming and I’m dreading them both. I’m dreading Easter because I haven’t observed it in a very long time. But now that I’m going to church, I am faced with a sunrise Easter service followed by brunch (I can only imagine what’s on the menu), and then a more traditional service afterward. Don’t get me wrong. I have no problem with celebrating the resurrection of the Master, but the event seems so disconnected from the way I think and feel about God, Messiah, and the Bible. But then again, that’s how I felt about church before I let myself return.

I’m dreading Passover because of what happened last year. I recall that my wife and I decided on having a seder at home at the last possible second and everything came off just as we planned…that is, we had no plan. Everything was rushed. Everything was disorganized. I felt like I’d never even seen a haggadah before let alone held one in my hand and read from it. It was miserable and I blame myself for pushing it through. I should have left well enough alone.

But I have another reason for dreading these events as they are rapidly approaching. I’ve been complaining lately about the fussing, fighting, and turf wars in the Messianic and Hebrew/Jewish Roots movements and I know the whole “Easter is pagan” stuff is about to be spewed all over the blogosphere. It’s really a war about what’s more important to us, the death of Messiah or the resurrection of Christ. It’s really a war about the cultural context to which we prefer to be adhered. It’s really an opportunity to complain and kvetch about which religious expression is “better” and how we are all trying to justify our choices for worship and identification.

Face it. All of you. It all has very little to do with God and celebrating the Messiah. Why even bother?

Remember that the Seder is for the kids, to transmit our history and understanding of life. You’ve got to make it interesting and intrigue them to ask questions. If a person asks a question, he’ll be inclined to hear the answer! The only way to transmit your love and feeling for Judaism is through shared, positive experiences. You need to be excited about the Seder!

If I was a traditional Christian traveling along the usual Christian path, Easter would be one of the most important times of year for me. But if I strip away the cultural history and context that has built up over the long centuries, in celebrating the resurrection of Messiah, we’re celebrating the entrance of hope into the world for all of humanity. Watching the sun come up on Easter Sunday while praying and singing hymns and praising God for His Son must be like watching the dawn of an era of grace and illumination, the promise of peace to all mankind through our Lord Jesus Christ.

If I was a traditional religious Jewish person, Passover would be a time to be very excited. It’s yet another wonderful opportunity on our calendars to celebrate our liberation, our identity, our journey to the Torah, and the platform upon which we can pass what it is to be a Jew down to the next generation, participating in the continued survival and existence of the Jewish people, illustrating that against all odds, God cares about us and He is with us, and He is sufficient for us.

But I’m neither of those things. In spite of all my efforts, I’m still a person journeying between different worlds. My “traditions” aren’t set in concrete like those of most other Christians or Jewish believers. I exist in a molten plastic universe where I’m exploring concepts, ideas, realities, and existences. I can see the Shabbat from a direction of devotion and a rest in Messiah for human beings, and also from a direction where it appears exclusively Jewish. I can see the vital importance of Christians celebrating Passover as a connection to the seder of the Messiah, and I can also see it as a wholly Jewish experience.

And I’m still getting really, really tired of all of the bitching about who owns what and who is obligated to what and the perpetuation of the split between believing Gentiles and Jews that was already in progress, even as Paul was still preaching in the synagogues to the born Jews, the converts, and the God-fearing Gentiles at the beginning of his “missionary journeys.”

I’m convinced that if Jewish and Gentile believers in Messiah historically ever formed any sort of unified community, it must have been one that Paul didn’t write about, and the event probably lasted about forty-five seconds until someone found a reason to argue about whether or not Gentiles should be circumcised or if a Gentile should or shouldn’t be wearing tzitzit.

You shall converse in the words of Torah and not in other things.

-Yoma 19b

The Talmud explains “other things” as referring to idle, meaning less things.

The Hebrew language has words that mean rest, play, relaxation, and pleasant activities, while it has no word for “fun.” A “fun” activity has no goal, as is implied in the colloquial expression, “just for the fun of it.” In other words, the goal of the activity is within itself, and fun does not lead to or result in anything else.

This concept is alien to Judaism. Every human being is created with a mission in life. This mission is the ultimate goal toward which everything must in one way or another be directed. Seemingly mundane activities can become goal directed; we eat and sleep so that we can function, and we function in order to achieve our ultimate goal. Even relaxation and judicious enjoyable activities, if they contribute to sound health, can be considered goal directed if they enhance our functioning. However, fun as an activity in which people indulge just to “kill time” is proscribed. Time is precious, and we must constructively utilize every moment of life.

Furthermore, since people conceptualize their self-worth in terms of their activities, doing things “just for the fun of it” may in fact harm their self-esteem.

Today I shall…

…try to direct all my activities, even rest and relaxation, to the ultimate purpose of my life.

-Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski
“Growing Each Day, Adar 23”
Aish.com

There are days when I think the perfect life of devotion would involve the destruction of the Internet and me with my nose buried in book after book in some vast library containing all of the great Jewish and Christian wisdom of the sages and tzaddikim. It would be an old-fashioned library where people would have to be quiet. I would have my little corner with my table and chair, my reading lamp and my stack of books. I could pray uninterrupted. I could even dream of the day of Messiah’s return when he would bring peace and abolish discord.

But that doesn’t work, because faith was never intended to exist in isolation which is why, in spite of the enormous risks of mixing with foreigners, Israel was meant to be a light to the nations.

More’s the pity.

What will my seder look like this year? I don’t know that I’m going to have one. If my wife expresses the desire, then of course, we shall have one and invite as many guests as want to attend. If my wife and daughter choose to attend the public seder at one of the local synagogues, then I hope they have a marvelous time. If we are invited to someone else’s home for a seder, assuming my wife wants to go and it’s appropriate for me to go with her, we’ll go and I presume it will be a wonderful time.

I can attend a sunrise Easter service. I feel that I somehow have to as part of my commitment to my church and my renewed “Christian walk,” though I still travel a rather unusual path. I just need to pull my head out of the computer and remember that despite all of the problematic people and problematic conflicts I encounter on the web, God is not on the web nor is he confined to someone’s pet theology, doctrine, or dogma. God is God and I am grateful each day that He is so far above all of the mucking around we mire ourselves in.

If there is a perfect seder or a flawless Easter, that is yet to come…perhaps at the feast of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven…

–Matthew 8:11 (ESV)

I don’t desire that anyone be thrown into the outer darkness but rather that we all learn what is really important in the Kingdom of Heaven, and then we all choose to participate in that effort. Jesus said to the Roman centurion who had been pleading for his suffering servant, “let it be done for you as you have believed.” Remember, what we believe and how we act will also be done for us, for good or for ill.

Your future is whatever you make it. So make it a good one.

-Doc (played by Christopher Lloyd)
Back to the Future III (1990)

Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never failed to imitate them.

-James Baldwin

Remember, all of this isn’t just for us but for our children. Our children are watching us. Heaven help them if they should decide to imitate us.

"When you awake in the morning, learn something to inspire you and mediate upon it, then plunge forward full of light with which to illuminate the darkness." -Rabbi Tzvi Freeman