Tag Archives: Christianity

The Torah’s Great Principle

April 18, 2013 James Pyles 11 Comments

Rabbi Akiva said, “Love your fellow as yourself” is a great principle of the Torah. A similar principle is gleaned from the famous story of a proselyte who wished to convert to Judaism on condition that someone would teach him the entire Torah while standing on one foot. Hillel the Elder accepted his conversion and told him, “That which you hate, do not do to your friend [the negative picture of “love your fellow as yourself”]―that is all the Torah and all the rest is commentary. Go and study it.”

Obviously, the entire Torah is a true, God-given Torah, but Hillel the Elder and Rabbi Akiva teach us that there is room to meditate on the principle that is the Torah’s “great principle”; the signpost that puts us on the right track.

The need for such guiding lights is most necessary when an outsider wishes to approach the infinite sea of Torah and needs an anchor to show him where to begin.

-Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh
“The Torah’s greatest principle”
Wonders From Your Torah

Our Master Yeshua (Jesus) taught something similar.

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 22:37-40

Referencing Rabbi Ginsburgh, I periodically write about non-Jewish people (including me) who are drawn to the larger body of Torah mitzvot and who find they have a desire to live a more “Jewish” lifestyle as a means of holiness. Essentially, there’s nothing wrong with this and indeed, the Torah was created not just for the Jewish people, but for humanity, as it is said:

For out of Zion shall go forth the Torah, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

–Micah 4:2

I substituted the word “Torah” for “Law” in the ESV translation for effect, but both terms are correct (although I’d argue that “Torah” is the more correct word to use here).

Again, as we see from Rabbi Ginsburgh’s commentary, the “outsider” (non-Jew or secular Jew) who desires to learn Torah has to start somewhere. Although as Rabbi Ginsburgh states, the entire Torah is true, it’s easy for a beginner (Rabbi Ginsburgh is talking about potential converts to Judaism but I’m applying his statements to the rest of us) to become lost, confused, discouraged or even “seduced” by the complexities of Torah and the vast span of mitzvot. I’ve seen non-Jewish people introduced to the concept of “complete Torah observance” or “obligation” who throw themselves headlong into what they imagine it is to lead a “Torah-submissive life” only to become enamored by “the stuff.”

I call “stuff” all the outward devices, objects, or activities that are typically associated with observant Judaism, such as donning a tallit gadol and tefillin when davening, wearing a tallit katan under one’s shirt daily, wearing a kippah in public daily, lacing their sentences with Hebrew or even Yiddish words, growing a long, furry beard (because they believe God wants this), and so on.

But what does Rabbi Ginsburgh, citing both Hillel the Elder and Rabbi Akiva suggest is the Torah’s “great principle?” What does the Master say is the greatest commandment?

None of those things I just mentioned. What is the anchor for “beginners” in the Torah? “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

This concept sheds light on the Jewish conception of holiness. The Hebrew word kedosh , meaning “holy,” implies separation; (See Tanya, ch. 46.) a distinction must be made between the Jewish approach and a secular approach to any particular matter, as is stated at the conclusion of our Torah reading: (Levitcus 20:26.) “You shall be holy unto Me, for I, G-d, am holy, and I have separated you from the nations to be Mine.”

Such a distinction is unnecessary with regard to the ritual dimensions of the Torah and its mitzvos. These are clearly distinct; there is no need for man to do anything further. Instead, the focus of our Torah reading is on concerns shared by all mortals. Thus the reading relates laws involving agriculture, human relations, business, and sexual morality. For it is in these “mundane” areas that the holiness of the Jewish people is expressed.

Judaism does not understand holiness to be synonymous with ascetic abstention. Instead, it demands that a person interact with his environment, and permeate it with holiness. (See Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchos De’os 3:1.)

-Rabbi Eli Touger
“What Does Being Holy Mean?”
Adapted from
Likkutei Sichos, Vol. I, p. 254ff; Vol. XII, p. 91ff;
Sichos Shabbos Parshas Acharei-Kedoshim, 5745
Chabad.org

That might be a little “intense” or at least unfamiliar to most Christians. Here’s another way of saying it.

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

–James 2:14-17

A life of faith and holiness cannot be lived apart from actually living life. Holiness is doing not just praying, meditating, studying, and contemplating. Holiness is an action. Go and do.

An emissary is one with his sender. This concept is similar to that of an angel acting as a Divine emissary, when he is actually called by G-d’s name. If this is so with an angel it is certainly true (See Iyar 6.) of the soul; in fact with the soul the quality of this oneness is of a higher order, as explained elsewhere. (See Tamuz 10.)

“Today’s Day”
Thursday, Iyar 8, 23rd day of the omer, 5703
Compiled by the Lubavitcher Rebbe;
Translated by Yitschak Meir Kagan
Chabad.org

Again, the Master taught something similar.

For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.

–John 13:15-17

We are his servants and we are not greater than he is. He gave us an example of what to do by the living of his life and his teachings. He gave us an “anchor” in the Torah as to where we should begin and where we should stay centered: to love God with all of our being, and to love our neighbor (who is really everyone) as ourselves. And just recently, we’ve been reminded that there are opportunities to fulfill the Master’s mitzvot all around us.

The Mighty Rock, Whose deeds are perfect, because all His ways are good. He is a faithful God in Whom there is no iniquity.

–Deuteronomy 32:4-5

These very sobering words are often invoked at moments of great personal distress to express our faith and trust in the Divine wisdom and justice.

People who have suffered deep personal losses, such as destruction of their home by fire or the premature death of a loved one, or who have observed the widespread suffering caused by a typhoon or an earthquake, may be shaken in their relationship with God. How could a loving, caring God mete out such enormous suffering?

It is futile to search for logical explanations, and even if there were any, they would accomplish little in relieving the suffering of the victims. This is the time when the true nature of faith emerges, a faith that is beyond logic, that is not subject to understanding.

The kaddish recited by mourners makes no reference to any memorial concept or prayer for the departed. The words of kaddish, “May the name of the Almighty be exalted and sanctified,” are simply a statement of reaffirmation, that in spite of the severe distress one has experienced, one does not deny the sovereignty and absolute justice of God.

Our language may be too poor in words and our thoughts lacking in concepts that can provide comfort when severe distress occurs, but the Jew accepts Divine justice even in the face of enormous pain.

Today I shall…

…reaffirm my trust and faith in the sovereignty and justice of God, even when I see inexplicable suffering.

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

Without trust and faith in God, it’s easy to lose faith in humanity and we are unable (or unwilling) to be the Master’s servant in this world and to do his will by loving and helping others in need.

In a commentary on this week’s Torah portion, we learn from the midrash that one of the reasons for the death of Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu was that they loved God “too much.” They came too near the Holy One and were consumed. This was a warning to Aaron that no matter how great his love for God was and the desire to draw near the Divine Presence in the Holy of Holies, he must restrain himself.

G-d knew that Aharon’s love for Him was so great that he would always desire to enter the Holy of Holies. However, by doing so, it could cause his soul to leave his body, as happened with his sons. G-d therefore informed told him of the need to keep his soul within his body so that he could fulfill his mission in this world — transforming it into a dwelling place for G-d.

The lesson we can learn from the command to Aharon is that every Jew has the capacity to love G-d, and indeed is commanded to do so, as the verse states: “You shall love your G-d with all your heart, soul and might.” (Devarim 6:5)

While midrash may not appeal to you in a literal sense, when viewed metaphorically or as a moral lesson, it teaches that human beings, out of our love for God, can achieve greater heights of holiness, drawing nearer to God, though we can never be “greater than our Master.” Yet as servants, we must always strive to become better than we are.

It’s not easy. God never gets tired, He never gets scared, He never gets discouraged, He never wants to “throw in the towel,” but we poor, pathetic human beings experience all those things.

People think that if they are not well, they must sacrifice all meaning in their life in order to take care of their physical situation.

In fact, the opposite is true: You cannot separate the healing of the body from the healing of the soul. As you treat the body, you must also increase in nourishing the soul.

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

Just as we cannot separate healing of the body from healing of the soul, we cannot separate our personal need for healing from the needs of those around us. In fact, by acting for the benefit of others and serving their needs, we may discover that our own wounds are also being healed.

I have been guilty on many occasions of wanting to withdraw from humanity and particularly from the community of faith when it has hurt too much. God has shown me (again and again and again) that I’ve been going in the wrong direction.

When in doubt, I must return to the portion of Torah that is for all of us, Jew and Gentile alike, the anchor, the center, the love of God and humanity. Without that, nothing else we do means anything.

160 days.

Uncategorized

Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Reading the Bible in Flux

April 17, 2013 James Pyles 7 Comments

Messianic Jews accord Scripture a unique status as the inspired and authoritative Word of God. They study it, use it liturgically, and base their life and practice on it. However, Messianic Jews grapple with certain issues involved in biblical interpretation that are particularly relevant to Jewish followers of Yeshua. In the first two parts of this essay I will focus on how Messianic Jewish interpretation of Scripture is affected by interpretive traditions and how this leads to the task of shaping a post-supersessionist canonical narrative. In the third part I will focus on unique uses of Scripture in Messianic Judaism.

-Carl Kinbar
“Chapter 4: Messianic Jews and Scripture” (pg 61)
Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations

In my conversations with Pastor Randy at the church I attend, the core of our conversations are on interpretation of the Bible. Pastor says that the first step in any proper interpretation is understanding the literal meaning of the text in its original language and within its context. I can hardly argue against that, but there are two additional steps: “what the text means” and “what the text means to me.” The former is an application of the text in its original context and the latter is an application of the text today.

Hyper-literalists would say that the application of all Biblical text is uniform across time, being the same both the day it was written and right now in 21st century America. I don’t think I can go that far, since, for instance, many portions of scripture in Tanakh (Old Testament) and New Testament addressing slavery are not particularly applicable in today’s world, whether in Israel or the rest of the nations.

But Dr. Kinbar suggests a finer degree of application depending, in this case, on whether one is or is not a Messianic Jew. We do know that, depending on whether one is an observant Jew or a Gentile Christian, certain passages of the Tanakh, specifically those often understood as “Messianic,” are interpreted differently, with the latter population seeing Jesus in the text and the former group seeing the future Messiah or sometimes national Israel instead.

Even when both populations interpret the same text in terms of its literal meaning within its original context, the application, especially in the present age, differs radically because it is being interpreted by two different populations, each with a different “agenda.”

It’s what I keep trying to explain to Pastor Randy. Even multiple parties who are honest and who seek truth can arrive at different interpretations of the Bible depending on who the parties are and how they’ve been “programmed” to interpret the Bible, sometimes just based on who they are (the ultimate arbiter of scripture may be the Holy Spirit, but that doesn’t prevent many people of good faith and character from interpreting scripture quite differently from one another, sometimes even within the same church).

But Christians will always see Jesus in Messianic texts. Religious Jews, not so much.

Now Kinbar is factoring Messianic Jews into the equation in his article. What can we expect?

Perhaps no one specific application.

Mark Kinzer, another Messianic Jewish thinker, approaches the interpretation of Scripture from a different direction. He argues that the Bible must be interpreted in the context of interpretive traditions, which consist of “the accumulated insights of a community transmitted from one generation to the next. In a Messianic Jewish context, tradition represents the understanding of Scripture preserved through the generations among the communities – Jewish and Christian – within which Scripture itself has been preserved. If we are connected to these communities, then we are also heirs of their traditions.”

-Kinbar, pg 62

That’s something of an adaptation to how Orthodox Jews see Biblical interpretation. My wife occasionally quotes our local Chabad Rabbi as saying that the Bible cannot be interpreted correctly except through tradition, which in this case, means the traditions of Orthodox Judaism. According to Kinbar, Kinzer includes Jewish and Christian traditions as part of the requirement for correct Biblical interpretation, but Jewish and Christian interpretive traditions (and make no mistake, Protestant Christianity does have traditions for interpreting the Bible) are often at odds with each other, including the rather critical element of identifying the Messiah. Establishing the particulars of which traditions to use from each religious perspective must be an enormous challenge.

But there’s more than one way Messianic Jews look at this matter.

(Daniel) Juster argues for a more cautious approach toward Jewish tradition, asserting that “only biblical teaching is fully binding, whereas other authorities might be followed because we perceive wise application or respect community practices.” In other words, Scripture is the measure of tradition, never the reverse. Juster does not address the claim of traditionalists that the cumulative weight of centuries of interpretation is necessarily of greater weight than the judgment of the individual.

The positions of Juster and Kinzer on the place of tradition in the interpretation of Scripture represent the views of two branches of Messianic Judaism and are emblematic of broader disagreements in the movement over the place of traditional practices in Messianic Jewish life.

-Kinbar, pp 62-3

How I define Messianic Judaism is fairly conservative, and possibly closer to how the contributors of the Rudolph/Willitts book see the definition as opposed to how Hebrew Roots identifies the movement. I see Messianic Judaism as a “Judaism” (most or all of the other “Judaisms” in the world will disagree), that is, a religious, cultural, and ethnic group made up primarily or exclusively of Jewish people who are desiring to establish and nurture a Jewish cultural and religious community for the purpose of worshiping the God of Israel and having “fellowship” with other Jews. The distinction of “Messianic Judaism” is the centrality of Yeshua (Jesus) as the Jewish Messiah King in accordance with his revelation in the Apostolic Scriptures.

I’ve periodically encountered Hebrew Roots congregations (including the one I once attended and taught at) that have defined themselves as “Messianic Judaism,” in spite of the fact that few halachically Jewish people made up their membership and even fewer Jews within that group were born and raised in an ethnically, culturally, and religiously Jewish family. Few of the Jewish people within a Hebrew Roots “Messianic Jewish” group have any more familiarity with Jewish halachah and worship practices than the non-Jews in attendance. I base that statement on personal experience, and since I have little to no equivalent experience in more “authentic” Messianic Jewish congregations, I cannot comment on the membership demographics of their groups. I can only say that the ideal of Messianic Judaism is to provide Jewish communities for Jewish worshipers of God and disciples of Yeshua the Messiah, with some Gentile believers attending to “come alongside” their Jewish brothers and sisters.

But as we’ve seen, relative to Biblical interpretation, even Messianic Judaism as I define the movement, isn’t a single entity. If Kinzer and Juster represent two different perspectives in this arena, then there are two different expressions of Messianic Judaism based on how scripture is interpreted and subsequently applied. I’m not saying this to throw a monkey wrench into anyone’s machine, but to point out that these issues of religious identification and affiliation aren’t as simple as they may appear on the surface. Many Christians in the church see “Messianic Judaism” as a single container, and when visiting Hebrew Roots congregations, assume that all groups are identical in composition and practice and erroneously believe that all Hebrew Roots groups are “Messianic Judaism.”

Obviously this isn’t the case.

But returning to Messianic Judaism and interpretation of scripture, there are a few important matters to address.

Kinzer remarks that Christian theology generally ignores the eschatological character of Israel’s holiness and accentuates the “discontinuity between Israel’s covenant existence before Yeshua’s coming and the eschatological newness that Yeshua brings. Messiah is thus exalted by the lowering of Moses and Israel.” To the contrary, God’s presence with Israel is an ongoing reality that always anticipates the time of consummation. Kinzer agrees with (R. Kendall) Soulen’s argument that the death and resurrection of Yeshua anticipates what will be achieved for Israel and the nations at the time of the consummation of all things…Israel’s vocation is thus not occluded but brought to a new height in Yeshua, the one-man Israel. The person and work of Yeshua may thereby be seen in the context of Israel’s ongoing life and vocation and not its replacement.

-Kinbar, pg 65

In other words, the coming of Jesus didn’t do away with Israel and the Jewish people but insured their continuation into the future Messianic age. A rather radical thought for many Christians to absorb. But it’s not just Israel’s continuation as a wholly Jewish nation and people, but their ascendency to the head of the nations and the core of Christ’s Kingship on Earth that is being presented. Israel isn’t replaced by Christianity but rather, placed at the head of the table, so to speak. The Jews not only have a future, but an exalted and glorious future.

This is a unique interpretation of the Bible, not so much for religious Jews in general, but for Jews who believe that Jesus is the Messiah and who see him in both the prophesies of the Tanakh and the words of the New Testament.

There’s just one more unique Biblical interpretation attributed to Messianic Judaism I want to point out.

Among the Scriptures, the Torah (the five books of Moses) holds a primary place in the history and affections of the Jewish people as the record of the progenitors of Israel and the formation of Israel as a community bound to God by the commandments (also called collectively “the Torah”). Mainstream Messianic Jews, especially those who adhere to Jewish tradition, depart from the classic Christian teaching that the Torah was made obsolete in Messiah. Rather, they see that Yeshua has affirmed the Torah as the basis for life of covenant faithfulness in keeping with their calling as Jews (Matt 5:17-19).

-Kinbar, pg 69

Pastor Randy and I go back and forth on this particular issue, and I continue to maintain, in agreement with Kinbar, that Torah observance for Messianic Jews remains in force if, for no other reason, than such observance defines Messianic Jews as Jews. There may be a variety of other reasons for the continuation of Torah observance within the Messianic Jewish community, but if we believe that Yeshua and subsequently the Apostles, including Paul, supported such observance (and I’ve been writing a good deal lately about Paul’s life of Torah observance) as a life long pattern for Jews in the Messiah, then these are compelling reasons not only for Messianic Jews to interpret scripture in this manner, but to continue to live their lives in accordance with the commandments, as do other Jews in other branches of religious Judaism.

But this is just the beginning, and Messianic Judaism, relative to scripture and a good many others elements, has a long way to go.

The Messianic Jewish construal of the relationship between Scripture and tradition is in flux. Messianic Judaism is still in need of a canonical narrative that is clear and comprehensive, accounting for Israel’s ongoing vocation as a holy people.

-Kinbar, pg 70

The dynamic between scripture and tradition is at the heart of many arguments regarding how a Jew is supposed to relate to the Messiah. For some observers and even some practitioners of Messianic Judaism, observance of Torah is not the issue but observance of “the traditions” very much is. As Dr. Kinbar said, the debate is “in flux” and Messianic Judaism is in many ways, still a “diamond in the rough.”

Of all of the contributors to the Rudolph/Willitts book, only Carl Kinbar (as far as I know) regularly (or periodically) reads this blog and occasionally comments on it, so if I’ve gotten anything wrong in my analysis of his article, I can expect he’ll come by to correct me. While this is slightly intimidating on one hand, on the other, it is rather comforting since it is part of the expected and required dialogue between Messianic Judaism and Gentile Christianity that David Rudolph expressed earlier in the book.

If, as I believe, Gentile Christians have a major role in supporting Israel and encouraging Messianic Jews in taking up and observing the Torah mitzvot as part of the process of a returning Messiah, then conversation and cooperation between our two populations within the body of Yeshua brings us one step closer to repairing our broken world and anticipating the return of the King.

161 days.

Uncategorized

Introduction to Messianic Judaism: The Silo Invasion

April 15, 2013 James Pyles 8 Comments

A synagogue is above all a sacred community of Jewish people who gather for worship, prayer, study, benevolence, social justice, lifestyle events, outreach, and other Jewish community activities. What distinguishes Messianic synagogues from mainstream synagogues is the centrality of Yeshua, the prominent place of the New Testament, and the presence of Gentile followers of Yeshua who come alongside Messianic Jews to build a congregation for Yeshua within the house of Israel.

-David Rudolph and Elliot Klayman
“Chapter 2: Messianic Jewish Synagogues” (pg 37)
Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations

Let’s look at part of the above-quoted paragraph again.

…and the presence of Gentile followers of Yeshua who come alongside Messianic Jews to build a congregation for Yeshua within the house of Israel.

For a long time, I’ve been hearing some Messianic Jews describe the relationship between themselves and we Gentile Christians (whether we call ourselves “Christians,” “Hebrew Roots,” or “Messianic Gentiles,” in this context, it’s all the same) as two groups who come alongside each other, or more commonly expressed as “Christians coming alongside” Messianic Jews.

What does that mean?

I know the Messianic Jews who make this statement have an internal conceptualization about what it means, but I’ve never had access to that conceptualization. As someone on the outside looking in, this whole “alongside” thing has reminded me to two silos standing next to each other on a farm somewhere. Sure, silo B is standing “alongside” silo A, but otherwise, what do they have in common? They’re both silos, but let’s assume they hold different contents. Let’s also assume that there is no conduit (tunnel or other direct link) that attaches one silo to another and allows the contents of each silo to freely flow from one to another.

That’s how I’ve imagined the whole “alongside” thing.

Then I read the introduction to the Rudolph/Willitts book (pg 15) written by David Rudolph and received a revelation.

One of the main purposes of this book is to give Gentile Christians vision for the dialogical relationship they share with Messianic Jews so that they will come alongside the Messianic Jewish community and assist it. Coming alongside can take many forms, including (a) praying for the Messianic Jewish community, (b) sharing the good news of Yeshua in a way that affirms the calling of Jews who follow Yeshua to remain Jews and to become better Jews, (c) encouraging Jews in churches to be involved in the Messianic Jewish community, (d) supporting Messianic Jewish education, (e) contributing to the welfare of Messianic Jews in Israel, (f) helping local Messianic synagogues, (g) collaborating with Messianic Jewish ecclesial leaders and scholars, (h) preaching and teaching the Scriptures in a way that affirms God’s covenant faithfulness to the Jewish people and the bilateral (Jew-Gentile) nature of the church, and (i) including Messianic Jews in Jewish-Christian dialogue.

In reading Rudolph’s definitions for “coming alongside,” I seem to fit several of those points, at least as I perceive myself. Thus being alongside doesn’t mean just standing there next to, but actually being directly involved on numerous levels with the Messianic Jewish community including, as we saw in the quote at the top of the page, worshiping with Messianic Jews in a synagogue setting (and I’ll be coming alongside a number of Messianic Jews next month at the First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ) Shavuot conference).

Now, some people are going to take exception to this next part:

The demographic reality of Messianic Gentiles, including a second and third generation, raises a number of questions that the Messianic Jewish community is currently engaging. Many of these questions relate to time-honored traditions in the Jewish world concerning the participation of non-Jews in Jewish life. In mainstream synagogues, for example, Gentiles are not generally permitted to have a bar/bat mitzvah, wear a tallit, or read from the Torah because these are all activities in which a Jew affirms his/her covenant responsibilities as a member of the people of Israel, something a non-Jew cannot do. Some Messianic synagogues believe that these normative standards should be maintained for reasons of conscience and to avoid blurring the distinction between Jew and Gentile in the body of Messiah, a differentiation that the New Testament upholds (1 Cor 7:17-24; Acts 15; 21:24-25). Other Messianic synagogues contend that these customs should be modified so that Messianic Gentiles may participate more fully in Jewish community life.

-Rudolph/Klayman, pp 48-9

I remember taking my three Jewish children to the local Reform – Conservative synagogue a number of years ago. As a Gentile I felt somewhat uncomfortable in reading from those portions of the siddur where I was supposed to refer to myself as “Israel” or to the patriarchs as my “Fathers.” Since it’s a pretty liberal place, the Rabbi once offered me an aliyah (to go up and read from the Torah) but I was incredibly intimidated and turned it down. In retrospect, and given my current values, I am glad I refused the honor because in a synagogue setting the honor is not mine. My children, once past bar/bat mitzvah age, were the ones accepting the aliyot because they (and their mother) are Jewish.

But as we’ve just seen within the Messianic Jewish community, the struggle continues regarding how to include and incorporate those Gentiles who have come alongside their Messianic Jewish brothers and sisters. Messianic Judaism is still in the process of creating itself and a “silo” containing both Jewish and Gentile components.

And that’s good. There should be a struggle. There was a struggle in Apostolic times, which was the whole point of Acts 15, but the Jerusalem letter didn’t define the specific halachah for Gentile participation in Jewish worship and ritual within the synagogue setting, at least not with any detail. In other words, we don’t have a Biblical model for how to include Gentiles in Messianic Jewish communities today.

At least not a good one.

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

And he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’

Up to this word they listened to him. Then they raised their voices and said, “Away with such a fellow from the earth! For he should not be allowed to live.” And as they were shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air…

–Acts 22:21-23

As you can see, many Jews didn’t have a problem with Paul’s message about the Messiah, but they had a really big problem with including non-Jews into a Jewish worship and ritual community. At that point in history, James and the Council of Apostles were the highest authority in our world for the Messianic community. Today, we have reversed the order, with Gentiles being the largest single body of people who worship the Jewish Messiah and Messianic Jews being only a tiny minority.

So should Gentile believers have control over the Messianic Jewish community? Common sense says “no” but that won’t stop some Gentile Christians from trying. Now keep in mind that for nearly twenty centuries, Gentile Christians have been treating Jewish people and Judaism with less than kindness and courtesy. It’s understandable that Jewish people should feel a little “standoffish” when approached by Christians since historically, Christians have been responsible for inquisitions, pogroms, and burning synagogues, Torah scrolls, volumes of Talmud, and occasionally bunches and bunches of Jewish human beings.

Remember those two silos I mentioned before? Now imagine that “coming alongside” wasn’t sufficient for a subset of Gentile believers. They want inside the Jewish silo and to take possession and control of the covenant identity and responsibilities assigned by God to Jews. Frankly, it doesn’t matter to this population of Gentiles if the Jews want them to do this or not.

Which is crazy, because based on my quotes of Rudolph, both in this blog post and in yesterday’s, Gentile Christians are not just welcome in Messianic Jewish communities, but we are an integral part of the body of Messiah. Messianic Jews and Gentile Christians must be united elements in a single body in order for the body to live and thrive, just as the human body must contain a heart, lungs, and liver in order to be alive. Yeah, they’re radically different organs with different functions, roles, and purposes, but they all work together.

For the body does not consist of one member but of many. If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

–1 Corinthians 12:14-20

I know Paul wasn’t necessarily talking about differences in Jewish vs. Gentile roles, and he was likely talking about the differences between prophets, preachers, teachers, and the guy who has to take out the garbage at church, but the principle and analogy holds up, at least to a degree. There are aspects to Jewish worship and community life that confirm the covenant identity and responsibility of a Jew as a Jew. Should Gentiles in the community also claim that identity, especially by force or demand? In First Century CE Jerusalem, the Jewish Council of Apostles had the authority to issue halachah that impacted both the Jewish and Gentile believers in Messiah. Shouldn’t Messianic Jewish communities in the Twenty-First Century CE have the right to issue halachah just for themselves and whoever attends their synagogues?

I know this gets into arguments that involve “flesh” and there are accusations of bigotry and even racism that fly about the blogosphere, but Gentiles aren’t being excluded from the Messianic community. The Messianic community is just in the process of defining itself and how it is supposed to work, something that was never made clear in the letters of Paul (and who better than Paul to have known such a thing?).

Both Judaism and Christianity are communities with unique cultures and characteristics. Some Gentile believers, for whatever reason, desire or fit better within the Messianic Jewish community than the Christian church community and that’s fine. Some Gentile Christians such as myself, take pieces of that Messianic culture, identity, and conceptualization and live it out within a church setting to support and encourage an understanding of Messianic Judaism in the church. I think that’s part of coming alongside, too.

But I don’t tell my Pastor or the congregation what to do, what rights I have, how they aren’t being Biblical, or otherwise “storm the gates” of their community with my ideas and my personality just because I think the Bible tells me that I should (and I don’t think it tells me that I should). I respect the community and only speak my mind freely when invited (and Pastor Randy has been abundantly gracious with me in this area). I would never dream of going into the local Conservative – Reform shul or the local Chabad and telling the respective Rabbis that they’re doing it wrong and I’m there to straighten them out (although some local Hebrew Roots people have done exactly that in the past). Why would I do such a thing either in a church or in a Messianic synagogue? What would give me the right, even if I thought they had erred in relation to the commands of God?

In some ways, I’ve “come alongside” the church by going back to church since culturally, I’m not a “typical” Christian. Being part of a community isn’t about individual rights or making demands. It’s about being an active part of the community, making a contribution, benefiting the whole. Sure, the community gives back, but the community is about the community. We all benefit each other. I’m not there just to have my needs fulfilled, especially if that results in causing others in the community pain or discomfort.

One of the traditional songs sung at the Passover seder is Dayenu or “It would have been sufficient…” One portion of the traditional song goes:

If He had brought us before Mount Sinai, and had not given us the Torah – Dayenu, it would have been sufficient!

Part of my personal version goes:

If He had given us His only begotten Son so that the world might be saved, and had not given us the Torah – Dayenu, it would have been sufficient!

God has given us so much. What more do we want besides grace and mercy…and for believing Jews and Gentiles to come alongside each other and together bring honor and glory to King Messiah? It is sufficient.

I don’t share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they’re not alone.

-Anonymous

163 days.

Uncategorized

Introduction to Messianic Judaism: An Exercise in Wholeness

April 14, 2013 James Pyles 10 Comments

Similarly, New Testament scholars have long-held that the Jerusalem community headed by Ya’akov/James was (1) primarily composed of Yeshua-believing Jews who (2) remained within the bounds of Second Temple Judaism and (3) lived strictly according to the Torah (Acts 15:4-5; 21:20-21). Michael Fuller, Richard Bauckham, Craig Hill, Darrell Bock, Robert Tannehill, and Jacob Jervell are among the many Luke-Acts scholars who maintain that the Jerusalem congregation viewed itself as the nucleus of a restored Israel, led by twelve apostles representing the twelve tribes of Israel (Acts 1:6-7, 26; 3:19-21). Their mission, these scholars contend, was to spark a Jewish renewal movement for Yeshua the Son of David within the house of Israel (Gal 2:7-10; Acts 21:17-26).

-David Rudolph
“Chapter 1: Messianic Judaism in Antiquity and in the Modern Era” (pg 22)
Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations

I very recently discovered this book in the “New Books” section of my local library. When I saw it, I immediately checked it out (on Thursday) so that means I have only two weeks to read it before I have to return it (no renewals for new books). I was pretty excited to find this book in my local library system (which covers several counties in Southwestern Idaho) since I’ve never seen any book that could remotely be called “Messianic” in our collection of libraries before. Congratulations Rudolph and Willitts for “breaking the barrier,” so to speak.

But what made me write this “meditation” based on the Introduction and Chapter 1 of this book was the focus on a topic that has been near and dear to my heart these past few months: the ancient Messianic Jewish world and how it impacted newly minted Gentiles disciples of the Jewish Messiah.

You all know the argument. In Acts 15, what exactly did James and the Council do? Did they cancel the Torah for all disciples of Jesus or only for the Gentile disciples? Opinions vary widely (and sometimes wildly), with most Christians seeing the chapter as the final death knell of the Torah and a minority Hebrew Roots group stating that it was the foundation of universal Torah obligation for everyone.

Messianic Judaism as I’ve come to understand the movement, somewhat splits the difference.

As F. Scott Spencer points out, “The representatives at the Jerusalem conference – including Paul – agreed only to release Gentile believers from the obligation of circumcision; the possibility of nullifying this covenantal duty for Jewish disciples was never considered.” If the Jerusalem leadership had viewed circumcision as optional for Yeshua-believing Jews, there would have been no point in debating the question of exemption for Yeshua-believing Gentiles or delivering a letter specifically addressed to these Gentiles. Michael Wyschogrod rightly notes that “both sides agreed that Jewish believers in Jesus remained obligated to circumcision and the Mosaic Law. The verdict of the first Jerusalem Council then is that the Church is to consist of two segments, united by their faith in Jesus.”

-Rudolph, pg 23

Sometimes when I’m having these debates with Pastor Randy in his office, I feel like it’s just him and me (well, it is just the two of us) with my tacit partner being D. Thomas Lancaster, since it is his book we are using as the object of our talks. In finding the Rudolph/Willitts book suddenly available to me, it’s a little like finding gold or a golden information treasure trove that links back to numerous, scholarly information sources, all supporting the basic belief that the ancient Jewish believers in Jesus (Yeshua) never saw being released from circumcision and Torah observance as an option. The only question on their minds was whether or not the Gentiles had to be circumcised and thus obligated to said-Torah observance as Jews.

It’s no secret that I depend on First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ) as my primary information repository for all things Messianic (and by inference, all things Christian), but no matter how reliable a source they may be, they are still one source. It’s sort of like putting all my eggs in one basket. I know better than to believe a single source of data without searching for corroborating support. While the authors and contributors of the “Introduction” book (Rudolph and Willitts are the primary authors of the book, but there are multiple, scholarly contributors as well, so the book reads like an anthology) share many of the views espoused by FFOZ, they don’t share all of them, and that variability lends itself quite well to my corroboration requirement. Do other scholars in the Messianic and Christian academic spaces support the basic belief of early believing Jewish adherence to the Torah that was considered normative and not anachronistic or transient, and do they also share the belief that Gentile disciples were united with their Jewish counterparts in the body of Messiah without having to ever accept obligations to Torah observance that were identical to Jewish observance?

I’ve only read the Introduction and Chapter 1 of the Rudolph/Willitts book as I write this, but so far, the answer is a resounding “yes.”

Rudolph cites Philip S. Alexander’s “Jewish Believers in the Early Rabbinic Literature (2d to 5th Centuries) from the book Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries (ed. Skarsaune and Hvalvik), 686-87:

They lived like other Jews. their houses were indistinguishable from the houses of other Jews. They probably observed as much of the Torah as did other Jews (though they would doubtless have rejected, as many others did, the distinctively rabbinic interpretations of the misvot). They studied Torah and developed their own interpretations of it, and, following the practice of the Apostles, they continued to perform a ministry of healing in the name of Jesus….[T]hey seem to have continued to attend their local synagogues on Sabbath. They may have attempted to influence the service of the synagogue, even to the extent of trying to introduce into it the Paternoster [the Lord’s Prayer], or readings from the Christian Gospels, or they may have preached sermons which offered Christian readings of the Torah. The rabbis countered with a program which thoroughly “rabbinized” the service of the synagogue and ensured that it reflected the core rabbinic values.

According to Rudolph, this is a description of Jewish believers who lived in the Galilee during the Tannaitic period or during the first two-hundred years (or so) of the Common Era (CE). In other words, according to Alexander, Jewish believers in Messiah continued to live as observant Jews after the lifetimes of the original Jewish Apostles of Christ.

I know I’ll get some criticism on a couple of points: the first being “circumcision” since it’s not Biblical as a means of conversion from being a Gentile to being Jewish (it certainly is Biblical in terms of the Abrahamic covenent which was re-enforced for the Jewish people by the Mosaic and New Covenants). I’m not going to get into a big argument. The Torah doesn’t presuppose circumcision as a sign of conversion because in the days of Moses, it wasn’t possible to convert to Judaism. One does not convert to a tribe or later, to a clan. By the days of the Maccabees forward, tribal and clan affiliation as a primary definition within national and covenantal Israel had been lost and Jewish religious authorities halachically introduced the process of allowing Gentiles entry into the covenants through ritual conversion.

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte (convert)…

–Matthew 23:15

Even Jesus accepts that the Pharisees and scribes (scribes can include other sects of first century Judaism including Essenses and Sadducees) were converting Gentiles to Judaism.

The second point of criticism I’ll receive is how I believe that Jewish but not Gentile believers were obligated to full Torah observance as a result of the Acts 15 ruling (I’d receive a different criticism from most Christians by my belief that the Jewish apostles and disciples remained “under the Law”). See the earlier quotes in this blog post plus my six-part Return to Jerusalem series for my opinion and text supporting said-opinion on this topic. Again, I don’t want to spend a lot of time on this point. I have something more important to talk about.

The beginnings of this book go back to England. Joel Willitts and I met as PhD students in the New Testament at Cambridge University, where we studied under the same supervisor…

Joel and I became good friends and found that much mutual blessing took place whenever we had conversations about the Bible and theology. I valued Joel’s perspective as a Gentile Christian and Joel valued my perspective as a Messianic Jew. There was a synergy in our exchange that often led to fresh insights and unforeseen avenues of theological inquiry. My experience at Tyndale House with Joel and other Gentile Christian friends taught me that there is indeed a God-designed interdependence between Messianic Jewish and Gentile Christian ecclesial perspectives, and that one without the other is woefully inadequate.

Those were magical days in Cambridge. Joel and I talked about what we wanted to accomplish after we completed our doctoral programs and agreed to write a book together.

-Rudolph from the book’s Introduction, pg 18

The result of that dream is the book that’s sitting next to me on my desk as I compose this blog post. A Gentile Christian and a Messianic Jew collaborated together as co-authors, co-editors, and close friends to do what in all likelihood, they could never have done independently. In fact, it took twenty-six Messianic Jews and Gentile Christians to create Introduction to Messianic Judaism. The product is a physical example of an ecclesial reality. Messianic Jews and Gentile Christians need each other. Apart, each one is only half of the whole. Together they…we are the body of Messiah.

Christianity, in general, is the ultimate in inclusionist movements. Any one from any place can turn to Messiah and be accepted. No prior experience required. As it turns out in reading Rudolph, his vision of Messianic Judaism is one that isn’t whole without including Gentile Christians. Our differences complement each other, as do the differences between a man and a woman in a marriage. We aren’t complete without each other.

I look forward to continuing my reading of Rudolph’s and Willitts’ book. So far, it is inspiring hope.

Uncategorized

The Unsimple Truth

April 11, 2013 James Pyles 16 Comments

If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.

-attributed to Albert Einstein

According to Rashi, the question is directed against Rav Yirmiyah who had said that the basket in the tree does not actually have to be within ten tefachim of the ground to be valid. We are dealing with a long basket where it could be tilted and emptied even without being brought below into the reshus harabim. In contrast to this, Rav bar Sh’va brings a Baraisa where an eiruv is not valid unless it is actually brought to where it must be situated. Here, we do not take into consideration the fact that the eiruv should be valid due to the potential that it could
theoretically be brought during bein hashemashos to its destination.

Daf Yomi Digest
Distinctive Insight
from “Rabbinic injunctions and Bein HaShemashos
Eruvin 33

I’m a failure. More to the point, I don’t understand God, Jesus, faith, and spirituality well enough. I can’t explain it simply. I’m not sure I can explain it at all. Certainly the fact that I have posted nearly eight-hundred articles in this “morning meditations” blog (not to mention other blogs) about these subjects and have hardly scratched the surface must mean I don’t understand all this well enough. I can’t explain what I believe simply. I certainly can’t explain it briefly.

I quoted from a commentary on an excerpt from Talmud above to illustrate the level of complexity of the halachot related to Orthodox Judaism. Although I read from the Daf Yomi Digest daily, I scarcely comprehend what I’m reading and what I understand most clearly is that the Talmud is an enormously complex set of works. I don’t know how observant Orthodox Jews manage to obey all of the minute details involved in daily living. I can only imagine that Einstein would have contended with the sages based on his above-quoted statement (though it is unsure if Einstein or Richard Feynman actually said those words).

I can hardly be said to live anything close to an Orthodox Jewish lifestyle in my “observance” as a Christian, but as I write and write and write, and then read back what I’ve written, I realize that I am no closer to truly comprehending God and faith than I was when I first accepted Jesus Christ as Lord. Sometimes I wonder if I’ve even gone that far.

For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing.

–Romans 7:15-19

If we’re honest with ourselves as Christians, then I suppose we all have to admit that this statement of Paul’s is also true of us. How can we live a life we call “holy” and yet still struggle with the mundane, the common, and even the evil within us? If God’s Word is written on our hearts, how can we defy that word and pursue what we know isn’t right? I can only imagine that atheists have moral struggles as well, though as I recall myself from before I came to faith, they didn’t seem as dire.

Is a life of faith really that hard or that hard to explain? It certainly seems that hard to live. But then again, is Einstein’s quote the litmus test we should be using against ourselves? After all, he also said this:

If I could explain it to the average person, I wouldn’t have been worth the Nobel Prize.

Einstein made that statement in response to being asked to give a brief quote on why he won the Nobel Prize. That’s the problem with taking quotes out of context. It’s easy to make a person seem completely inconsistent. How much more difficult it is to analyze “chunks” of the Bible and find consistency and comprehension?

My conversations with Pastor Randy (which are on hiatus for the month of April and for several weeks in May) about D.T. Lancaster’s book The Holy Epistle to the Galatians aren’t hugely complex, but they do get detailed…and we’ve barely covered one chapter in Galatians! How about the book of Romans?

I know that Mark Nanos is popular in Messianic circles, but some years ago, when I tried to read his book The Mystery of Romans, I gave up, not getting very far in his book. Maybe I’d be better able to comprehend his writing now, but Paul’s letter to the Roman church is extremely dense with meaning that I wonder if I’ll ever truly understand either Paul or Nanos. I know the Nanos books on Romans and Galatians should be on my “required reading” list, but who knows if they’ll do me any good? I’m tasked to understand a scholar and author in order to understand the mystery of “letter writer.” Are these reasonable goals?

In some ways, trying to comprehend a life of faith is a fool’s errand. While the concept of Christian salvation is supposed to be simple enough for a small child to understand, the fact remains that the Bible contains depths that if plumbed, would make even explorers such as Jacques Cousteau bolt for the surface as if hotly pursued by Leviathan.

Maybe it’s not quite that bad, but I feel that way sometimes.

Of course there’s a difference between understanding a life of faith and living it. Well, maybe not for the Orthodox Jews since behavior and conceptualization are largely interwoven, but certainly for Christianity, where one can live a basic Christian life without having to know much of the Bible at all. You can feed the hungry, visit the sick, remain faithful to your spouse, give to charity, pray to God, and fellowship with other believers without having to spend even a single day in seminary. Of course studying the Bible gives such a life context and meaning, but you don’t really have to know all of the arcane debates about the doctrine of Divine Election, for example.

Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy reading. I enjoy studying. I enjoy discussing all of these little details. But at what point do you turn it all off and just spend time with God? What’s the point of all of our debates on the web? Why do you try to convince me you’re right about something and why do I try to convince you that I’m right about something? What difference does it make? OK, probably a pretty big one, depending on what we’re talking about, but we can’t all be right? Can we all be wrong? That seems far more likely.

If we believe God exists, then He must exist separately from what we believe and from the web of theology and doctrine we’ve spun for ourselves. God must be an “objective” God. If the world’s population stopped believing in God totally and completely, God would continue to exist and His plan for the universe would continue to move forward toward its ultimate conclusion. We spend all our lives examining the Bible trying to uncover the clues to that plan and what it means in our lives, but we only get bits and pieces, and much of the time, we can’t really be sure we understand what we think we’ve got in our hands.

This theologian espouses one particular theory and another theologian opposes him or her. More theories spring up, more debates occur. But God is God. Our theories and debates don’t affect him in the slightest. He exists as He exists regardless of our “religious orientation.”

We’re all seeking truth but even with the help of the Holy Spirit, who is supposed to guide us in all truth (John 16:13), we all come up with different conclusions. You’d think if there were one Spirit and He was guiding us to One truth, we’d all arrive at the same conclusion.

But we don’t.

I’m most of the way through Carlos Castaneda’s book The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge. It’s not really what I expected, but I appreciate Castaneda’s honesty in saying that he didn’t quite succeed either in his field study or as a disciple of don Juan. I decided to read this book because I hadn’t read any Castaneda before and felt I owed it to myself to have the experience.

Maybe I should just let go and move away from religious and spiritual reading altogether and just read for pleasure (not that reading books on religion and spirituality aren’t pleasurable). I used to read a lot of science fiction and mystery back in the day, with a few of the classics thrown in just for giggles. Maybe that would be more satisfying. Nothing I know or don’t know affects God. I’m not sure it even affects me. I can probably explain simply Castaneda’s book, but how could I possibly explain even one letter of Paul’s? Many have tried, including Nanos and Lancaster, but what does it matter if you end up with a body of work about the Bible that is fraught with disagreement?

I guess there’s a reason people pursue truth all their lives but either never find it or find only what some people (but not all) call “truth.” Maybe we never find it at all. Maybe we just delude ourselves and say what we have is “truth” because living a life of existential uncertainty is too difficult to bear.

Maybe that’s why there are so many atheists. There are no mysteries to the universe beyond what they can see. It’s all nuts and bolts with no colors, textures, or moods. There’s only light and darkness. More’s the pity.

One who returns from the darkness must bring of it with him and convert it to light. He must exploit his experience to surge higher and higher with greater strength.

Therefore, the one who returns from a distance is greater than the one who was always close. What matters is not so much where you stand, but with what force you are moving in which direction.

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

So which direction should I move in next in pursuing truth or God or whatever?

Uncategorized

Lost Beyond Eden

April 10, 2013 James Pyles 3 Comments

“Do not despise any person and do not disdain anything for there is no person who does not have his hour and there is no thing without its place”

-Ben Azzai
from Pirkei Avot 4:3

Just as the soul fills the body, so does G‑d fill the world.” Our bodies are vitalized by our souls, but our souls themselves are invisible. Yet, through seeing the life in the body, one can appreciate the soul within. G‑d enlivens and creates the worlds, yet He is invisible. But He is evident in every creation.

-Talmud, Berachot 10a.

I don’t know what to write about for today. I know that’s pretty strange for me, since it seems that most of the time I can’t “shut up” in the blogosphere, but as I reviewed my “resources” for today (as I started to write this) and looked for inspiration, I didn’t find any.

Well, that’s not exactly true, hence the quotes above. But what do they mean and how can we apply them to our lives as people of faith (or as people in general)?

A few days ago, I related another problem I have with religious people. I lamented how hard-hearted we can be, some of us at least. How can anyone call themselves a disciple of Christ, and yet deliberately and with malice, kick a father when he’s down over the recent suicide of his son?

Yet in reviewing the comments on Dr. Michael Brown’s article Enough With the Mean-Spirited Words Against Rick Warren (And Others)!, I found both the good and the bad.

The good:

Thank you Michael Brown, thats maturity talking. I dont understand why people cannot have compassion. When Jesus saw the people he was moved with compassion. We can agree to disagree but personal attacks especially in an emotional time like this is horrible.

The bad:

While I agree with most of your article, I suppose that vitrolic “bashers” are thinking it is pay back time for Warren; not that I support this idea or their behaviour. Rick Warren has assumed the limelight and as any celebrity is exposed to the dangers of that. While the behaviour is indeed unmerciful, Rev. Warren must have expected it and must know how to insulate himself. He is after all a professional.

Well, the bad wasn’t horrible, but the comment writer still assumes that Pastor Warren should “suck it up” so to speak, since he’s a professional.

He’s also a father, a fellow Christian, and a human being, and he, like the rest of us, was created in God’s image. When we desecrate another human being, we desecrate the image of God.

Lakanta (played by Tom Jackson): What do you think is sacred to us here?
Wesley Crusher (played by Wil Wheaton): Maybe the necklace you’re wearing? The designs on the walls?
Lakanta: Everything is sacred to us – the buildings, the food, the sky, the dirt beneath your feet – and you. Whether you believe in your spirit or not, we believe in it. You are a sacred person here, Wesley.
Wesley: I think that’s the first time anyone’s used that particular word to describe me.
Lakanta: You must treat yourself with respect. To do otherwise is to desecrate something that is holy.

–Star Trek: The Next Generation
from the episode Journey’s End (broadcast date 26 Mar. 1994)

That’s probably one of my favorite quotes from any Star Trek TV show, both because it expresses a rare spirituality for modern television, and because it speaks a rare truth. Each of us is sacred to God and we should be sacred to each other (most of the time, we’re not). If we could see all other human beings, including ourselves, from God’s point of view, we would see a planet populated by sacred, holy people; all of us being in God’s own image.

The statement that we are created in the image of G‑d means that we were formed as a reflection of our Creator’s attributes and characteristics. This cannot be taken to mean that we literally look, feel or think like G‑d does, because He has no form and is not limited in any way. Rather, we are like a one-dimensional reflection of a real object. From the reflection we can have an inkling of the original, but the reflection is literally nothing in comparison to the original.

-Rabbi Menachem Posner
“What is the ‘Divine Image’ in Man?”
Chabad.org

This week’s double Torah Portion Tazria–Metzora relates an important lesson about how we treat God’s image.

“He (the person afflicted with tzora’as) shall be brought to Aharon the priest or unto one of his sons the priests.”

–Leviticus 13:2

The Dubno Magid said that many people speak loshon hora because they are not fully aware of the power of the spoken word. How often people rationalize, “I didn’t do anything to him, I only said a few words.” The metzora, who has been afflicted with tzora’as because of his speaking loshon hora, is taught a lesson about the power of a single word. He must go to a priest who will decide if he is a metzora or not. Just one word by the priest (“Unclean!”) will completely isolate him from society. No more will the metzora minimize the destructive capability of words.

Words can destroy. They can destroy someone’s reputation. They can destroy friendships. They can destroy someone’s successful business or someone’s marriage. Therefore, we must be careful with them as we would be with explosive material.

-Rabbi Kalman Packouz
“Shabbat Shalom Weekly”
Commentary on Torah Portion Tazria-Metzora
Aish.com

You must go no further than the religious blogosphere or Christian discussion boards to find the worst examples of loshon hora (the “evil tongue”) among us. Periodically, most of us who write religion-based blogs are victims of such behavior, almost always from our fellow believers. I’m rarely “picked on” by atheists or people from other religious disciples. It’s always from the people with whom I share a nearly identical view of God, Jesus, and the Bible.

More’s the pity.

Adam trudged past the gates of Eden, his head low, his feet heavy with remorse and pain.

Then he stopped, spun around and exclaimed, “Wait a minute! You had this all planned! You put that fruit there knowing I would eat from it! This is all a plot!”

There was no reply.

Without failure, Man can never truly reach into the depths of his soul. Only once he has failed can he return and reach higher and higher without end. Beyond Eden.

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

The irony is that the minute we lower ourselves to claim superiority over a brother or sister of Christ, we have failed. Participating in gossip and “badmouthing” others drags us down…it never lifts us up. While, according to midrash, Adam “trudged past the gates of Eden, his head low, his feet heavy with remorse and pain,” most people committing loshon hora hold their heads up high and feel superior in “bringing down” a “false teacher” or some Christian who they perceive (within their own imaginations sometimes) has “fallen from grace.”

News flash: blowing out someone else’s candle doesn’t make your burn any brighter and in fact, the very light you are extinguishing is your own.

We all fail. By even in pointing out how Christians fail, in some sense, I’m failing. I’m being critical of my fellow believers. I am speaking ill of them. I should be trudging past the gates of Eden, my head low, my feet heavy with remorse and pain.

And I do. I do, even if I’m not personally guilty of misusing my tongue or, in this case, my fingers, because I am a Christian. I am a member of the body of believers. One of the other parts in the body I share has failed. That means the body I inhabit is tainted and since the outside world can’t tell the difference between one body part and the next, that means we’re all tainted. Christianity (or whatever you call your version of the disciples of the Messiah) is disgraced whenever even one of us behaves poorly. God’s Holy and Sacred Name is dragged through the foul mud and muck. In trying to bring down “false teachers” by criticizing them over the untimely death of their children, we actually bring down God and bring down ourselves.

The Image of God is sullied and soiled, all thanks to us.

But as Rabbi Freeman also says, “Without failure, Man can never truly reach into the depths of his soul. Only once he has failed can he return and reach higher and higher without end. Beyond Eden.” Like the prodigal son from Luke 15:11-32, we too must fail completely before the path of repentance and return is open to us.

Rabbi Freeman also speaks of this:

Return is the ultimate act of self-expression.

Nobody returns because he is commanded to do so. The ability to return comes from you alone.

And that itself is the evidence that you were never truly torn away: The outer garments of the soul may have been severed, but the core remained at every moment in intimate union with its Source. And from there came the message to return.

It is possible to redeem the Name and Image of God, but we must be willing to admit when we fail. We must be willing to return to God humbled and even humiliated. If men like Pastor Rick Warren have faults, they are completely beside the point right now. The Christians who have truly failed are those who took advantage of the suicide of his son Matthew to attack Pastor Warren and his family. They (we) are the prodigal sons. If we are wise, we will return to God in submissiveness. There is a way back.

Or we can continue to walk away from Eden and away from God forever, even as we operate under the illusion that we are His and He is ours through Messiah.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

–Matthew 7:21-23

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

–Proverbs 16:18

We can remain arrogant and lose ourselves in the darkness beyond Eden, or return and walk back home in humility and to the service of the King. Which choice will we make?

“Saints are sinners who kept on going.”

-Robert Louis Stevenson
Scottish novelist, poet and essayist

"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