Tag Archives: halachah

Return to Jerusalem, Part 3

ancient_beit_dinAfter they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name.

Acts 15:13-14 (ESV)

After Paul and Barnabas concluded their testimony, James the brother of the Master took the floor and addressed the assembly. He prepared to offer a formal declaration based upon the consensus that emerged around Simon Peter’s testimony

James summarized the arguments, both for and against, and then recapitulated Simon Peter’s testimony regarding Cornelius the Gentile. That story carried extra weight because it implied a halachic case precedent – something that had already been accepted and established by the assembly. Compelling Gentile believers to accept circumcision required overturning the endorsement they had granted the household of Cornelius.

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Yitro (“Jethro”) (pg 440)
Commentary on Acts 15:1-20

If you have read Part 1 and Part 2 of this series (and if you haven’t, I recommend you do so before continuing here), you know the direction this is taking. Paul and Barnabas brought with them some “opponents” from the synagogue in Syrian Antioch to the Council of Apostles in Jerusalem to settle a matter of great importance. In granting the Gentiles discipleship under the Messiah in the Jewish sect “the Way,” should the Gentiles be required to convert to Judaism and consequently, take on the full yoke of Torah, as do the people born as Jews?

Many arguments, for and against have been presented before James and the Council of Apostles and elders. Peter recounted his own experiences with the Roman Cornelius and his household of God-fearers and how they too received the Holy Spirit, just as the Jews had, but without first being circumcised and converting to Judaism. They were subsequently baptized in water. God had granted the Gentiles the Spirit as He did the Jews, but He did not require that the Gentiles convert to being Jews. And it absolutely never occurred to any of the Jewish witnesses present or the Apostles that any Gentile disciple must fulfill the full body of Torah mitzvot if they remained Gentiles and did not convert.

Now James, as head of the Council, is about to establish the official halachah on this matter, and it will become binding on the Messianic community from this time forth. It this decision a “slam dunk,” so to speak?

Simon Peter based his argument on the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit that accompanied the conversion of Cornelius and his household (Blogger’s Note: “conversion” is a poor word to use in my opinion, since Cornelius maintained his status as Gentile, but was accepted by the Holy Spirit as “a Gentile called by God’s Name,” see below). Paul and Barnabas added supporting anecdotes. Despite the weight of such stories, the sages do not determine halachah on the basis of miraculous signs. Before he could issue a ruling, James needed to provide a definitive proof text to support the decision. (b.Baba Metzia 59b.) In rabbinic disputation, a legal ruling is almost always paired with supporting proof text.

-ibid

At this point, some of your reading this may be crying “foul!” How can Lancaster use a Talmudic reference in defining the process by which James would make his determination, when the Talmud wouldn’t be documented for centuries? It is said that a significant portion of the process of rabbinic examination and judgment of issues predated even Jesus. For instance, we know that the teachings of Hillel and Shammai existed a generation or more before Jesus and those teachings are with us today in the Pirkei Avot. Lancaster may be taking a few liberties with his application, but it’s not entirely unreasonable to believe James was employing (even for that day) time-honored processes and traditions in the matter of judging halachah; traditions that were later recorded by the Rabbis and preserved for Jewish communities throughout the ages and until this day.

temple-of-messiahAssuming for the moment that Lancaster is correct in his description of what James is preparing to do (and a detailed discussion on Lancaster’s opinions regarding ancient halachah is beyond the scope of my blog post), what was the “proof text” to be used to establish the aforementioned halachah for allowing Gentile’s entry into the Way as disciples of the Master?

“After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, that the remnant [rest] of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.”

Acts 15:16-18 (ESV)

In this case, James has chosen Amos 9:11-12 as his proof text, a passage of scripture that describes the re-establishment of the Davidic dynasty, placing Messiah, Son of David upon the throne of Israel, and the presence of the Gentiles from the nations in the Messianic age seeking the Lord.

But how does that prove anything?

The phrase “all the nations/Gentiles who are called by my Name” employs a common biblical Hebrew idiom for ownership. Ordinarily, Israel is the people “called by God’s name” (see Deut. 28:10, 2 Chron. 7:14, and Jer.14:9 for example). Ordinarily, the Gentiles are “those who are not called by your name” (Isaiah 63:19). Therefore, the Amos prophesy implies that in the Messianic Era, there will be Gentiles who belong to God in the same sense that the Jewish people belong to God.

-ibid, pg 441

Lancaster offers a very detailed analysis of Amos 9:11-12 in this Torah Club study, and I encourage you to get a copy and read it for the full details. More than that, Boaz Michael’s recent book, Tent of David: Healing the Vision of the Messianic Gentile, goes into exquisite detail about how James, his proof text, and the subsequent halalaic decision regarding the admission of Gentiles into the discipleship of the Messiah, applies to all Christians today, particularly those of us who are “hebraically-aware” and who find ourselves drawn to a Jewish perspective on the Bible, Messiah, and God.

From Lancaster’s perspective, James delivers a midrash on Amos 9, rather than simply quoting the text, that predicts Messiah rebuilding the fallen Temple in Jerusalem from where he will continue the Davidic dynasty, and where God will once again place His Presence. Once the fallen “sukkah” of David has been re-established, the Gentiles among the nations will seek out God in Jerusalem.

(References are numerous: Isaiah 2:2-3, 25:6, 56:6-7, 60:6-7, 66:23; Jeremiah 3:17; Micah 4:1-2; Zechariah 14:16, and also in many of the Psalms where the nations are called to worship God, according to Lancaster’s notes).

Lancaster further states that James’s words,  “After this,” or “After these things,” (Acts 15:16) utilize a prophetic formula that alludes to various prophesies of the Messianic Age (see Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 12:15-16; also Isaiah 45:20-22).

Based on what you’ve read so far, you may be convinced that God indeed allows Gentiles to enter into covenant relationship with Him through Messiah without converting to Judaism (and most Christians believe this), but some may be asking themselves, “What is it here that says the ‘Gentiles who are called by His name’ are not obligated to the same Torah mitzvot as the Jewish awareness-of-goddisciples?” Good question, though keep in mind that Part 1 and Part 2 of this series already established that only born Jews or converts to Judaism have an obligation to the “full yoke of Torah.” Lancaster asks something very similar.

Before proceeding with Lancaster, I should say at this point that we non-Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah are not completely “unyoked” from Torah, but rather not “yoked” fully in the manner of the Jews, or as Derek Leman recently said (scroll down to the comments section), The “Father’s instructions” might be different for Jews and non-Jews. Something to consider. Much of what Jesus taught and what is practiced in many churches today comes directly from the Torah, so we are not “lawless.” The law is simply applied differently to us, and I hope to describe that a little better later on in this series. Now, back to Lancaster’s commentary.

How does this passage legitimize the decision of James and the Jerusalem Council? In what way does this passage justify a Gentile exemption from circumcision, conversion to Judaism, and full liability to the laws of the Torah?

To James and the believers in Jerusalem, David’s restored booth represented Yeshua (Jesus), the Davidic king who comes to rebuild the monarchy of Israel. He is the repairer of the broken places, the restorer of the ruins, who will rebuild the house of David and establish the Temple in the Messianic Era. According to the Amos passage, the restored Davidic kingdom will include Gentiles who bear God’s name, i.e., they belong to God.

The God-fearing Gentile believers fit the description: Gentiles from the nations who identified themselves with God’s name and sought after God because of the revelation of the Davidic Messiah. If the apostles required those same Gentiles to become legally Jewish, however, they would cease to be “Gentiles who are called by God’s Name.” They would be Jews. They would fail to fulfill the prophesy because a literal fulfillment of the Amos prophesy requires that both Jews and Gentiles must exist in the Messianic Era.

-ibid, pg 442

If the Council required the Gentiles to all convert to Judaism as a condition of being called by God’s Name, they would all be Jews who are called by God’s Name, not Gentiles. Not only would the Council be frustrating the Amos prophesy, but they would be robbing the Gentiles of their (our) reward and their (our) destiny in the Messianic Age.

Notice there’s still a piece or two missing. The actual decision of the Council and how it was to be expressed (in this case, by writing a letter). But for the sake of space and not requiring you to read a “meditation” that is prohibitively lengthy, I’ll save that for Part 4 of “Return to Jerusalem.”

Return to Jerusalem, Part 2

Torah at SinaiFor this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

Deuteronomy 30:11-14 (ESV)

Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

Acts 15:10 (ESV)

Peter’s statement, which seems to disparage the Torah, presents no difficulty for traditional Christian interpretation. Gentile Christianity has always taken a dim view of Torah and is glad to dismiss “Old Testament law” as an unbearable yoke. Disdain for the Torah is not a Jewish perspective. Instead, the apostles teach that “the Torah is spiritual,” “the Torah is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good,” and most pertinent to Peter’s so-called deprecation, God’s commandments are not unbearable: “His commandments are not burdensome.”

Given this positive view of the Torah and the fact that 1 John 5:3 explicitly says that God’s commandments are not burdensome, could Simon Peter have referred to the Torah as a yoke “that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?”

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Yitro (“Jethro”) (pg 437)
Commentary on Acts 15:1-20

This is Part 2 of this multi-part series on Acts 15 and its implications for Christians and Jews today. If you haven’t done so already, please read Part 1 before continuing here.

So how could Peter believe that the Torah was too difficult for his Jewish fathers (ancestors) and his Jewish people to bear and still presumably believe that the Torah was good, spiritual, holy, and righteous?

In some of my previous talks with my Pastor about Jewish obligation to Torah, one of the areas we discussed was whether or not it was possible to obey the Law perfectly. Pastor Randy says “no” and I tend to agree with him because as Paul has said, ” for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23) I may upset some of my Jewish readers, but personally, I don’t think that any Jewish person (let alone any non-Jew who has ever tried) has ever perfectly performed all of the mitzvot, from the day it was given by God to the Children of Israel through Moses, forward to the present.

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

James 2:10 (ESV)

Funny that James should write such a thing, when he was also present with the council of Apostles listening to Peter speak about how much of a burden Torah is. James seems to be saying that it is impossible to keep the Torah because there are so many difficult commandments, and this verse, along with Peter’s statement, are part of the scriptures many Christians use to justify how the Law is now dead (and sometimes Judaism along with it) and has been replaced by grace (and sometimes replaced by Christians).

Is there an alternate way of understanding all of this and also preserving Jewish devotion to Torah for the Messianic Apostles and disciples? Lancaster in his commentary on Acts 15 seemed to think so.

To insist that Simon Peter could not have referred to the Torah’s obligations as a difficult burden simply because other texts contradict that sentiment denies a literal reading of Scripture. Peter was able to articulate the idea that, though the Torah is a source of blessing and holiness, it is also difficult. A naive, rigid, theological reading, which cannot tolerate tension between one passage and another, will find this difficult, but the Jewish voice, following the contour of Hebraic thought, would find no difficulty in admitting it.

-ibid, pp 437-8

Talmud Study by LamplightNevertheless, some commentators have attempted to reduce the “tension” Lancaster mentions by insisting that the “Torah” Peter was speaking of was the “Oral Law of the Pharisees,” even though Acts 15:5 specifically references the “law of Moses.”

But Peter, as a Jew who had lived in the Jewish homeland all his life, and had observed the mitzvot and halachah all of his life, knew what he was talking about, and so did his Jewish audience. If Peter had required that the Gentile disciples all convert to Judaism, he would be requiring them to be obligated to the full weight of the Torah. While it is an honor to serve God and to walk in His ways as a Jew, it is not easy.

A yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear…

Acts 15:10

For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.

Galatians 5:1-2

Paul echos Peter’s statement and describes a state in which, should a Gentile disciple convert and be bound to Torah, he or she will be obligated unrelentingly to the full weight of the yoke of the Law. According to Lancaster this includes the following:

Previous generations of Jewish history had already proven the Torah to be an unbearable duty for sinful human beings. The Torah is a source of blessing, but outside the Messiah’s righteousness, it is also a source of curse. All men sin and fall short of the glory of God and incur his wrath. “The law brings wrath.” (Romans 4:15). Peter only means to point out that obligation to the Torah (Jewish status) is not an avenue to salvation.

In addition to the theological ramifications of forcing Gentile believers to become Jewish and keep the whole yoke of Torah, the apostles also had in mind the very practical implications of such a decision. If the Gentile believers took on halalaic Jewish status, they placed themselves under the authority of the Torah courts (including the Sanhedrin, which was at the time, hostile to believers)…

-ibid, pg 438

Lancaster may be reading between the lines about what the Apostles were and weren’t thinking about, but it’s a reasonable assumption. If the Gentiles could only be saved by converting to Judaism and converting to Judaism meant full halalaic obligation to Torah and the traditions, then any theological and legal consequences for failure to perform the mitzvot correctly landed right on their shoulders. This also means that any particular blessings Gentiles are intended to receive because they are Gentiles attaching themselves to God, would be lost when they converted.

Before we continue, I want to point out something special Lancaster said:

The Torah is a source of blessing, but outside the Messiah’s righteousness, it is also a source of curse.

If the Torah has always been too difficult to obey, and outside of Messiah, it is a source of both blessings and curses, why did God give the Torah at one point in history and bring the Messiah much later?

What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”

Romans 4:1-3

Faith in God and God’s graciousness to humanity was always the foundation. Paul made a point to tell that to the Jewish and Gentile believers in Rome. The Torah does not justify you. It never did. Torah was never the mechanism by which an individual or the nation of Israel was justified before God. It was by faith. The mitzvot were, in many ways, given originally to be sort of the “national constitution” of ancient Israel, and a description of the way of life the Israelites were to live because they were God’s chosen ones. Yes, part of the Torah was to enable Israel to be a light to the nations and to attract them (us) to God, but Torah didn’t exist for its own sake, at least not according to Paul.

What did Peter have to say about this?

But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

Acts 15:11

key-of-kingdomHis response to those Jews who believed the Gentiles must convert to Judaism to be saved was to say that by placing the Torah upon the Gentiles, it would be an unbearable yoke for them…and for the Gentiles, who after all were not standing there with the Israelites at Sinai, conversion and full Torah obligation wasn’t necessary. Like the Jews, they were also saved through the grace of Christ. Both Jewish and Gentile believers were and are saved only through the grace of Messiah, but the Jews retain additional obligations under the yoke of Torah, which they can bear because of Moshiach’s righteousness.

But where does Peter get off making such a decision (or at least arguing for making such a decision) for the Gentiles?

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 16:18-19

You may have your own opinion on what you think Christ giving Peter the “keys to the kingdom” means. Here’s Lancaster’s interpretation:

“Since the elders agreed with what had been said by Peter, the whole assembly kept quiet.” (see Acts 15:12) The Master had given Simon Peter the “keys to the kingdom of heaven,” the halachic authority to bind and to loose in matters concerning His assembly. Simon’s testimony made it clear that he loosed the Gentiles from the obligation of circumcision and coming under the yoke of Torah as Jews.

-ibid, pg 439

In other words, Jesus personally gave Peter halalaic authority to make binding decisions for the disciples, Jews and Gentiles, who were members of the sect “the Way.”

I’ll stop here and pick up with James and his summation of the arguments that had been presented in the next part of this series, but I do want to make clear what’s been said so far. Although many Jews did not comprehend how the Gentile disciples could become disciples without conversion to Judaism, Peter (see Part 1) reminded the assembly that Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit and were baptized but were not circumcised, thus illustrating that salvation was also available to the Gentiles without converting to Judaism.

We have to go to Galatians to support Peter’s argument that only being born Jewish or converting to Judaism required a person to be obligated to perform the full body of Torah mitzvot. This was apparently a common understanding among all of the Jews present and no one disputed it.

Peter had the halalaic authority to make such decisions or at least to seriously suggest them before the council (and James was the head of the council, so his response is still required before any conclusions can be made), so that, plus his experience with Cornelius, made him more than qualified to say that the Gentile disciples should not be made to convert to Judaism and it would be “testing God” (see Luke 4:12) to do otherwise.

But the final decision hasn’t been made. We still need to review James’s response to all of the testimony presented and then his (and the Holy Spirit’s) final decision on the matter. We’ll begin with the response of James in Part 3.

Yitro: Walking with Israel

Har_SinaiOn the third new moon after the Israelites had gone forth from the land of Egypt, on that very day, they entered the wilderness of Sinai. Having journeyed from Rephidim, they entered the wilderness of Sinai and encamped in the wilderness. Israel encamped there in front of the mountain, and Moses went up to God. The Lord called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and declare to the children of Israel: ‘You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Me. Now then, if you will obey Me faithfully and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples. Indeed, all the earth is Mine, but you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the children of Israel.” Moses came and summoned the elders of the people and put before them all that the Lord had commanded him. All the people answered as one, saying, “All that the Lord has spoken we will do!” And Moses brought back the people’s words to the Lord.

Exodus 19:1-8 (JPS Tanakh)

Did you ever get angry about what someone did and say, “I would have never done that if I were him!”? Probably most of us have said that one time or another.

I’ve got news for you! You would have done EXACTLY what he did if you were him. If you had his genes, his upbringing, his education and philosophy on life along with his desires and attitudes … you would have done precisely what he did. The proof is … that’s what HE did! The difference is that you are not him and you think that with all that you are, that you would have acted differently. Hopefully, if you were in his situation, you would not do what he did.

What we have here is a failure to judge our fellow human being favorably.

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

This week’s Torah Portion is kind of a big deal. It’s the parashah where we see the Children of Israel “as one man” receiving the Torah from God! This is the defining moment when Israel truly becomes a nation before God and it also is what, more than any other single event, defines the Jewish people today, in spite of what some people may say about Jews, Judaism, and Israel.

But we have a problem, at least on the surface. The Children of Israel stood before Moses and before God and said as a single group, as a nation, that “All that the Lord has spoken we will do!” That response is not only the agreement of all the people who were actually there, but for all of their descendants across the ages as well. Israel said that they would do everything that God had spoken, all of His laws, all of His ordinances, everything.

Did they? Do they?

I won’t go through a lengthy list of quotes from the Tanakh, but the simple answer is “no.” That first generation out of Israel did not enter the Land and take it at the command of God. Forty years of wandering in the wilderness was also forty years of struggling with God as well as Moses and Aaron struggling with God to preserve the People from their own disobedience and grumbling.

Even after Joshua led the next generation to take the Land (and Moses was also disobedient and as a consequence, was not allowed to enter Israel), there were problems. In fact, reading through the Tanakh reveals a significant history of Israel and her Kings, even David and Solomon, disobeying God and failing to do all that the Lord had said.

joshua-in-israelNo, I’m not going out of my way to “Jew bash,” simply stating what we all know. Does that mean the Torah is useless, the Israelites weak and disobedient, and the modern Jewish people are followers of a “dead religion?”

Absolutely not. What it means is that they are human.

I’ve sat in a Bible study in church (not the church I go to now…this was many years ago) and heard a man, a retired Pastor (normally a very nice guy) say point-blank that “we Christians” would never disobey God the way the Israelites did.

Oh really?

Remember what Rabbi Packouz said above?

If we were living in those days, had experienced what they experienced, had lived through slavery, were suddenly thrust into a brand new world, even experienced the amazing, awesome, unimaginable presence of God among us, yes we too would have said and done all the things the Children of Israel did.

Sorry to say.

There is a saying in Pirke Avos 2:5 (“Ethics of the Fathers”), “Hillel says, ‘Don’t judge your fellow human being until you have been in his place.” It is upon us to try to put ourselves in someone else’s situation before passing judgment.

Also in Pirke Avos 4:3, Ben Azai says, “Do not scorn any person, nor be disdainful of any thing for there is no person who does not have his hour and no thing which does not have its place.”

The Torah source for this mitzvah, commandment, is “You shall judge your fellow human being with righteousness” (Leviticus 19:15). This verse obligates us to give someone the benefit of the doubt when we see him performing an action that could be interpreted in his favor.

The Torah also teaches us, “Love your fellow human being as yourself …” (Leviticus 19:18). The Baal Shem Tov used to say, “Love others as yourself. You know that you have many faults, nevertheless, you still love yourself. That is how you should feel toward your friend. Despite his faults, love him” (Likutai Abraham, p. 221).

Setting aside Rabbi Packouz, what can we learn from another “Rav” with whom we Christians might be more familiar?

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Matthew 7:1-5 (ESV)

old-city-jerusalemAll week long, I’ve been writing blog post after blog post presenting some rather unusual ideas about the Torah, the instructions to the Israelites from God, and how it is lived out in Judaism and sometimes within Christianity. My friend Boaz Michael says that the weightier matters of the Torah are also taught in church, such as love of kindness, feeding the hungry, compassion for the widow, and so on. Granted when we get into the area of halachah and how the Jewish community will walk before God, things become complicated, but lately, I’ve been encouraged to see halachah as the communal conversation and response of the Jewish people to the Torah and to God. It’s a living, interactive process by which Jews seek to obey God and live their lives before God as Jews. By definition, Christians, who are taught to conceptualize God and the Bible in fundamentally different ways, are going to have a tough time with this (even some Jewish people have a tough time with this).

But do we judge the ancient Israelites, the more recent Jewish population who lived in the days of Jesus, Peter, and Paul, and the modern Jewish community, particularly those in the Messianic space, by our own Gentile Christian standards, given that those standards do not have much of a basis in common with Judaism? Have we walked a mile in the shoes of a Jew?

Even if you are a Christian who has spent a lot of time with the Jewish community, either here in the U.S. or even in Israel, while you may have some insights into Jews and Judaism that many Christians lack, there’s still a long road between living with Jews and being Jewish. Even converts to Judaism will struggle to make up the distance, the lack of a Jewish childhood, the lack of Jewish parents and growing up in a Jewish community.

There’s a lot of judgement and disdain of Jews by Christians, including those in the Hebrew Roots community, but upon what is it based? It is especially surprising and disappointing that a Gentile Christian can say they are “observing Torah,” wear a kippah and tallit katan in their daily lives, daven with a siddur while wearing a tallit gadol and laying tefillin, keep Leviticus 11 “kosher,” and claim to love Israel and the Jewish people, and yet still judge and reject everything it is to be Jewish and to live as a Jew. Sometimes, I think it’s even worse for some of those same Gentiles who style themselves as “academic” or “resource institute” experts to treat the Jewish people as a “thing” or an “object” for study (and it’s easier to throw away an object than a human being), rather than as living, breathing, people.

You don’t have to agree with how Jewish people conceptualize their world, but then again, you don’t have to attempt to live as a Jew either, if that is your opinion.

It’s been a busy and difficult week in this little corner of the blogosphere. I don’t usually spend so much time and effort on a single topic across an entire week, but this theme took over my thoughts and emotions and I had to write (and write and write) about it.

I don’t claim to bear any great wisdom or insights, but writing is what I do when I want to explore and I’m trying to understand. Blog comment contributor “ProclaimLiberty” has suggested that halachah is akin to the Jewish communal conversation with God and the sages. Writing is part of what I do as an individual when I’m trying to talk to God. I just share the conversation (my end of it, anyway) with the Internet.

PleadThe Children of Israel failed God because we all fail God! If God’s grace wasn’t with humanity from the very beginning, we never would have survived, and there would be no human population in the world today. God is gracious and we know this, but we cannot even begin to comprehend the extent, scope, and vastness of His graciousness to us all, and especially to Israel, the apple of His eye, His treasured, splendorous people.

The Lord said to Moses: Thus shall you say to the Israelites: You yourselves saw that I spoke to you from the very heavens…

Exodus 20:19 (JPS Tanakh)

And Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

Luke 23:34 (ESV)

God speaks to us all but we don’t always understand. It would have been amazing if we could have been there among Israel to actually see and hear God speak from the very heavens, but God gives us enough. And yet we don’t always know what we’re doing, including when we curse rather than bless Israel. We should try to understand Israel and understand God.

The first positive mitzva is, in the words of Rambam, (Maimonides: Mishneh Torah, Yesodei haTorah 1:1.) “To know that there is a First Being, who caused the existence of all beings…The knowledge of this principle is a positive command, as it is said, I am the Eternal your G-d.”

This is a Mitzva relating to mind and intellect. True, every one of Israel believes in G-d with a simple faith, and his heart is whole with G-d; still it is the duty of the mind and intellect to bring this faith to a level of knowledge and comprehension. This is the meaning of “To know that there is a First Being;” the Mitzva specifies comprehension and intellectual grasp, as written in Torah: “Know the G-d of your father and serve Him with a whole heart” (Divrei Hayamim I, 28:9.) and it is also written, “know this day etc.” (Devarim 4:9.)

“Today’s Day”
Monday, Sh’vat 19, 5703
Compiled by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Translated by Yitschak Meir Kagan
Chabad.org

If we don’t understand Israel perhaps it is because we don’t really understand God, and we should spend some time in Jewish shoes; standing in their place. Failing that, we should seek God’s wisdom and particularly, we should repent and seek His forgiveness.

Erev Shabbat is coming. This would be a good time.

Good Shabbos.

Shepherd, Pens, and Flock, Part 2

rabbis-talmud-debateThe reason for any lack of “overarching standards” for halakhah is that the rabbinical system was designed to be more flexible than that, and dependent on each generation of rabbis to apply a set of common standards from common principles. That having been said, the standards are a bit less ambiguous in the orthodox realm, which is still the standard by which other modern streams of Judaism must measure themselves even insofar as they wish to diverge from them to accommodate some perceived modern situation. I will refrain from offering any comment about how well or poorly they may achieve their goals, and I will offer the observation that Judaism has preserved in its literature numerous behaviors that may be deemed more or less applicable or enforceable in any given generation but that may be revived when appropriate. I have the greatest sympathy for the Jewish Christians in your church, though I would try to persuade them that the Hebrew-Christian model developed a century ago was a temporary accommodation whose purpose has passed, and that their well-being as Jews and contributors to the Jewish enterprise would be better served otherwise. History has shown that they will not survive as Jews in a Christian environment, certainly their children or grandchildren will not, and that they are contributing to the alienation of their Jewish families from the Messiah. If they have been mis-taught that these considerations are unimportant, I can only lament their loss.

The modern Reform and Conservative streams (not to neglect Reconstructionism and others) were formulated in response to historical circumstances, and modern MJ is still grappling with a selection of halakhot that meets its needs. One of these needs or desires is to somehow reclaim a first- or second-century CE outlook, while recognizing all the subsequent influences that have affected halakhic development so as to integrate as much of Jewish tradition as may be possible and applicable into our current circumstances. I suppose that characterizes them somewhere within the Conservative spectrum. At issue is not a “doing of religion” so much as the development of a lifestyle that incorporates and illustrates millennia of Jewish civilization. It is a practical corporate educational exercise that promotes the preservation of the Jewish people and our characteristic knowledge base that is still indispensible to understanding Rav Yeshua’s and Rav Shaul’s teachings. It remains to be seen whether the modern streams of Judaism will also become increasingly anachronistic, or if some of their insights may continue to be preserved. What is currently called Reform Judaism has become quite different from its origins, especially since the Holocaust and the resurgence of Israel, though it has not yet embraced halakhah. Conservative Judaism has always applied halakhah, though it tries to adjust it to modern circumstances. On the other hand, so does modern Orthodoxy, though with a stronger emphasis on maintaining historical connectivity.

Acts 15 is quite clear that the full body of Torah mitzvot is not incumbent upon non-Jews, though it was still recommended that they learn Torah in synagogues each Shabbat. This does carry some implications about what may be permitted for the more mature non-Jew to do voluntarily and without obligation, for all the extra merit that the rabbis assigned to non-Jews who pursue Torah even though it is not their obligation (based on Is.56, among other passages). Of course, Rav Shaul re-inforced en-passant in Gal.5:3 his view that Torah is fully binding upon Jews and circumcised proselytes (i.e., converts). In his time it was also especially important to emphasize to non-Jews not to allow coercive social forces to deprive them of that potential for extra merit by becoming circumcised, which is how the Acts 15 halakhah came to be formulated.

-ProclaimLiberty, 1/27/2013
as quoted from a comment in Love and Commentary

I know it’s a long quote but I just loved the “in-a-nutshell” summation ProclaimLiberty (PL) offered in reply to my blog post and my subsequent comments on the topic (and as a counterpoint to the topics I discuss in Part 1 of this article). Not only does PL succinctly describe the history and development of Jewish halachah over the centuries, but also brings in the issue of Gentile disciples as they entered “the Way” in the late Second Temple era and the Apostolic response to their presence. In reading the original comment, I felt as if a clear vision of a valid Jewish viewpoint in relation to how tradition and Torah obedience interrelate were presented to me. It’s difficult to work through a large set of tomes addressing my questions,  and a few paragraphs that can reduce the arguments down to their basic essence is incredibly welcome.

praying_at_masadaI’m not saying there isn’t any possible rebuttal from Christianity or the other “Judaisms,” but at least we have a firm starting point as to how (and why) Messianic Jews must continue to live as observant Jews, and how halachah can be appropriately part of the modern expression of “the Way” within Jewish communities. It seems like there’s a certain amount of latitude regarding how each Jewish tradition (including the modern Messianic tradition) may select halakhot (although as PL says below, a great deal of selection may not be required) that meets its needs without running roughshod over the authority of the written Bible.

But PL has more to say:

Halakhah is the human response in the conversation with HaShem that begins with His Torah instructions. It is a re-iterated conversation that continues throughout our generations, so of course it is varied and flexible. Judaism is not constrained by a concept of “the Bible as the final sovereign word of G-d”. We view a hierarchy that begins with the Torah above all, followed by the authoritative interpretations of Torah from Israel’s appointed leaders and teachers, in the Torah-defined role of the “shoftim v’shotrim” (judges and magistrates). The Prophets decry failures to live up to the standards of Torah, but they do not contribute to any new interpretation of it. The Writings provide additional illustrations of how this plays out in history or even in hypothetical scenarios (as some might view some of the literature). The inter-testamental apocryphal writings take that farther, including some material that could be viewed virtually as “fantasy” (since it was a bit too early in history to consider science fiction), though even that period included historical records such as the Maccabbean revolt and the miracle of Hanukah. Subsequent to that we have a variety of Rabbinic literature and Responsa, of which the Rav Yeshua messianic writings are a fitting example, though a bit earlier than other Rabbinic codifications. So MJ is not required to choose a particular stream of tradition, though most of its current contributors to halakhic formulation have been influenced by the Conservative movement and its particular flexibility. The only “complication” for messianists is the desire to integrate the views of Rav Yeshua and Rav Shaul into their compilation of halakhah for a Jewish community that honors them at least as well as other rabbinic views are honored. Since there is not really any incompatibility here for the discerning halakhist, that need not present difficulty or disconnection from other halakhic compilations in other Jewish streams.

As to the difficulty of recapturing the 1rst-2nd-century worldview, more data seems to become available continually, but it is fair to say that MJ has devoted more attention to this than any other form of Judaism has done, because of its need to understand the teaching context of its primary rabbis. But from a modern halakhic standpoint, the issue is somewhat moot because of all that has happened in the past two millennia. So “… when [he] comes, will he find faith in the earth? (Luke 18:8). The linguistics of this also allow a more narrow colloquial reading asking whether he will find those who trust him in the land of Israel. Will he have any difficulty recognizing his sheep, either because of their halakhah or in spite of it? As long as MJ halakhists keep this question in mind, I’m reasonably confident of a positive response.

There is a midrash that depicts Moshe Rabbeinu as being carried by an angel across time and space to visit the Jewish Talmudic Academy of Babylon. He is terribly perplexed by the argumentation, of which he cannot make any sense. He is then consoled by its reference to the Mishnah and its quotation of the words of Torah from the mouth of Moshe. Now, while we know nothing of the conversation that occurred on the “Mount of Transfiguration” between Rav Yeshua, Moshe, and Eliahu, in some future midrashic conversation Moshe might council Rav Yeshua to be patient with his modern disciples for exactly similar reasons. And we would be similarly well advised.

-PL, 1/28/2013

jewish-handsI apologize for inserting large blocks of copied and pasted text, but the alternative would be for me to rework what PL has written and present those ideas in my words, and really, what’s the point? Better that you read what was presented in the original comments rather than risk my messing up the meaning or intent. All I really want to present are these ideas and my impressions of them.

Part 1 of this article was my continued understanding of how Torah does and doesn’t apply to Gentile Christians, including Jewish halachah. In this second part of my missive, I’m trying to show the opposite side of the coin, not so much about why Torah applies to Jews, because by definition, the entire body of Torah must apply, but how we can see the rulings and traditions of the sages as a natural extension of Torah, which includes the authority of the accepted teachers in Judaism to make such rulings.

I view Judaism as we know it today as valid and authoritative for the Jewish people. I also agree with Yeshua own words (in Matthew 23:3) that whatever (“everything”) those sitting in the seat of Moses (Jewish leaders) bid Jews to observe is bound on all Jews. He didn’t make an exception for Jewish disciples of Yeshua, but in fact was speaking to them when he said those words. He believed in the leadership of Israel, even if he condemned those who were hypocrites.

-Gene Shlomovich, 1/28/2013
as quoted from his comment in The Jewish Girl Who Saved Her Children

I’ve spent a great deal of time attempting to establish and confirm the validity and the authority of the ancient and more modern Jewish sages to establish halachah in Judaism including Messianic Judaism, such as in my recent blog post The Moshiach and the Rabbis, so I won’t go into a long tirade and repeat myself again at length, but I do want to try and tie together as many loose threads as possible.

If God is God over all and Jesus is the Jewish Messiah King and the Divine in the flesh who dwelt among us and who will do so again, then what are we to do with the post-Second Temple sages and the ancient and modern Jewish traditions and interpretations? Apparently, if you’re a Gentile Christian, you don’t have to do anything with them. As I have said on numerous occasions over the past few years, a Christian, in my opinion, is free to observe a wide variety of the mitzvot on a voluntary basis as a personal conviction and in solidarity with his or her Jewish fellows, as long as issues of Jewish identity don’t get stepped on, let alone walked all over. Saying all that, we don’t have to perform those mitzvot in obligatory obedience.

Since it’s impossible to observe the kosher laws, wear tzitzit, lay tefillin, or even daven from a siddur without encountering the sages and their judgments, any Gentile Christian who chooses to go down that path will have to make decisions about tradition as well (should I bind my tefillin by the Ashkenazi or Sefard tradition, or use the Chabad or another method?) Halachah, in this case, is unavoidable, even for the Gentile.

But for the observant Jew, it’s not a matter of whether or not to walk the steps of halachah, but to “grapple with a selection of halakhot that meets his or her needs.” God’s Word, in the final analysis, is absolute, but not necessarily halachah (of course, if you ask an Orthodox Jew about it, you might get a different answer).

Pastor Randy asked me recently if I thought it was possible for anyone to observe Torah perfectly? No, I sincerely doubt it, only because we human beings are bound to make mistakes sooner or later. So if Jews can’t keep the Torah perfectly, what’s the point of keeping it at all (James 2:10)? That’s like asking a Christian if he were to find himself looking at a woman in lust even on a single occasion, should he give up on remaining faithful to his wife, throw the Bible to the winds, and let himself be consumed by his desires for other women. It’s not about having perfect behavior, since no person is perfect, it’s about “perfecting” ourselves, continually turning away from sin, and turning more completely to God.

white-pigeon-kotelFor a Jew, that includes striving to become more spiritually elevated by correcting transgressions and continuing to master the mitzvot one at a time in order to honor God as a Jew and to sustain a Jewish presence and identity today and for future generations.

I hope this makes some sort of sense to both my Jewish and my Christian readers. I don’t have a Jewish lived experience, so I suppose I’ve made a thousand mistakes and if so, I trust I’ll be gently corrected. As far as my Christian readers go, I don’t doubt you will have many points of disagreement, if only because especially in Protestantism, tradition and Bible generally don’t mix. But we aren’t looking at how Christians walk as disciples of the Jewish Messiah, we’re looking at how Jews walk as disciples, and if we are to honor the uniqueness of their relationship with HaShem, then we must also honor how Jews are to be Jews, both in their communities, and in the presence of God.

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He makes me lie down in green pastures.
He leads me beside waters of rest.
He restores my soul.
He leads me in right paths for his name’s sake.
Even though I walk through the valley of deep darkness,
I will fear no evil, for you are with me;
your rod and your staff, they comfort me.
You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies;
you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.
Only goodness and steadfast love shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I return to dwell in the house of the Lord for length of days.

Psalm 23 (ESV)

This conversation will continue in an “extra mediation” later today, based on some correspondence with PL whose insights I’m learning to appreciate. I hope I’ve laid a sufficient foundation upon which to base a dialog on these matters. The sheep are out of the pens and gathering together as a flock in the green meadow with our Good Shepherd. It is his voice we must listen to, and if we are his, we will follow where he leads.

One last thing I’d like to add is a short video made of Boaz Michael presenting the Gospels as the oldest written record of some of the Jewish oral traditions. I hope you’ll find this information as compelling as I do.

The Evolution of Judaism, Part 6: Evolutions

ancient_jerusalemThe best evidence that the temple was the locus of prayer during the First and Second Temple periods is the book of Psalms. Virtually all the biblical psalms, even those that lament personal or national catastrophes or that hail a king at this coronation, are hymns of praise to God. They range in date from the period of the monarchy, if not earlier (some of them are Israelite versions of Canaanite or Egyptian hymns), to that of the Maccabees.

All these texts imply that the recitation of prayers was a prominent feature of Jewish piety, not just for sectarians like the Jews of Qumran but also for plain folk. Jews who lived in or near Jerusalem prayed regularly at the temple. This is the plausible claim of Luke 1:10, “Now at the time of the incense offering, the whole assembly of the people was praying outside [the temple],” and Acts 3:1, “One day Peter and John were going up to the temple at the hour of prayer, at three o’clock in the afternoon.”

By the third century BCE, diaspora Jews began to build special proseuchai, which literally means “prayers” but probably should be translated “prayer-houses.” Instead of “prayer-houses,” the Jews of the land of Israel had synagogai, which literally means “gatherings” but probably should be translated “meeting-houses.” Whether they prayed regularly in their “meeting-houses,” which are not attested before the first century CE, is not entirely clear.

The history of this (Amidah or Eighteen Benedictions) prayer is immensely complicated, but its basic contours were established no later than the second century CE, and its nucleus certainly derives from the latter part of the Second Temple times. It bears obvious similarities to the Lord’s Prayer (Matt. 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4).

…by the end of the Second Temple period, sections of the Torah were read publicly in synagogues every week.

The purpose of all these rituals was, as the Torah repeatedly says, to make Israel a “holy” people (Exod. 19:6; Lev. 19:2; Deut. 7:6). To better achieve this objective, the Jews of the Second Temple period developed new rituals, broadened the application of many of the laws of the Torah, and in general intensified the life of service to God.

After the destruction of the temple, the petition was changed from a prayer for acceptability of the sacrifices to a prayer for their restoration, and the petition entered the Eighteen Benedictions. In rabbinic times, the prayer was still in flux.

This practice is based on the idea that God can be worshiped through the study of his revealed word.

-Shaye J.D. Cohen
Chapter 3: The Jewish “Religion:” Practices and Beliefs
From the Maccabees to the Mishnah, 2nd Ed.

Forgive the rather lengthy history lesson from different portions of this chapter in Cohen’s landmark book, but as I’ve continued to read from his work, I’ve been struck by how Judaism developed significantly in practice and in its comprehension of a life of devotion to God from the days of the Mishkan (Tabernacle) in the desert to the post-Second Temple era. Some time ago, I began a series of blog posts intended to outline the evolution of Judaism as it applies to Yeshua (Jesus), halakhah, and the “acceptability” of the various Judaisms in any given age and across time to the God who established Israel as a nation. You can follow the link at the end of Part 1 of the series to review all of my comments to date, which ends at Part 5. I had intended for Messiah in the Jewish Writings, Part 1 to be the “sixth” part of the series, but it was pointed out to me that certain “weaknesses” in the scholarship of the material from which I was quoting made it unsuitable for that purpose.

Before proceeding, you should probably review Noel S. Rabbinowitz’s paper “Matthew 23:2-4: Does Jesus Recognize the Authority of the Pharisees and Does He Endorse their Halakhah?” which can be found as a PDF as published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46:3 (September 2003): 423-47. That, along with reading the other “Evolution” blog posts in this series, should provide the foundation for continuing (and ultimately concluding) the discussion here.

In providing the series of quotes from Cohen’s book, I intended to illustrate how what was acceptable Jewish practice in worship, Temple sacrifice, and prayer developed over time and was never a single, static set of religious rules and procedures that perfectly reflected the intent of the Torah and God in the life of Israel. Sometimes in certain corners of Christianity and its variants, we find people who sincerely are seeking a more authentic method of practicing their faith, based on some sort of idealized and perfect template or model that was established, either by Moses or Jesus. Somehow that particular set of behaviors is believed to be what God wants us to do and is the only valid model by which we should construct our faith practices in the present age.

But as the title of this series implies, perhaps the human practice of worshiping God can never be static nor was it ever intended to be a single set of rigid rules and concrete regulations that never modified in the slightest across the long centuries between Sinai and the present.

I don’t mean that right and wrong don’t have timeless value and that God changes His requirements for humanity at a whim, but humanity changes, circumstances change, and what seems right to do at one point in human history seems very much different at another point on the timeline of existence. Surely how Solomon viewed what was proper worship differed greatly from what the Rambam might have considered right Jewish practice, and yet can we say that either one of them (or both) was wrong? They were both certainly convinced that they were doing what God required, but who they were, where they lived, and the demands of history upon both of these men (and the untold scores that lived before and since) were radically dissimilar.

But while you may understand this relative to the history of the Jewish people, what at all does this have to do with believers in Jesus and who we are in Christ?

Agrippa’s first full year as king over Judea (41/42 CE) was a Sabbatical year. Drought had already begun to hamper the land. The people were gathered for Sukkot to pray for rain and to hear the new king read from the Torah (see Deut. 31:10-11). The apostles and the disciples of Yeshua were present along with the rest of the pious of Israel to witness the historic event. Their hearts burned within them, jealous for the Master. They longed for the day when King Messiah will stand in the Temple and read the Torah aloud to the assembly of Israel.

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Shemot (“Names”) (pg 329)
Commentary on Acts 12:1-24

Yom Kippur prayersLancaster is no doubt taking a bit of poetic license in describing whether or not the hearts of the apostles were “burning” on this occasion, but it does cast the early Jewish disciples of “the Way” in a light that integrates them with overall Jewish religious and social participation. In the church, we tend to think of the “early Christians” as a body wholly apart from the various Judaisms that surrounded them, but as I’ve mentioned before, the Jews who were devoted to the Messiah as part of “the Way,” were just as much a valid sect of Judaism as any of the other Judaisms (Pharisees, Essenes, and so on) with which they co-existed.

In fact, the Jewish disciples of the Master in the days recorded by Luke in the book of Acts can only be separated from overall, normative Judaism anachronistically.

The King James Version of Acts 12:4 translates the Greek “pascha” as “Easter.”

The Greek word “pascha” (which transliterates the Hebrew “pesach”) occurs 27 times in the New Testament. In every instance except Acts 12:4, the King James translators rendered it as “Passover.” In Acts 12:4, they retained William Tynsdale’s anachronistic, Christian rendering and translated it as “Easter.”

The translation betrays a theological bias. It assumes Christianity replaced Judaism. Christ cancelled the Torah, and the Christian Jews would not have been keeping Passover any longer. In reality, the apostles had never heard of a festival called Easter. They had no special Christian festivals. They kept the Passover along with all Israel in remembrance of the Master, just as He had instructed them… (Luke 22:19)

-Lancaster, pg 338

Lancaster continues in his commentary, explaining that the separate Christian observance of Easter wouldn’t be established until the Second Century CE as the Gentile believers in Rome began to neglect observing Passover, but began to revere the Sunday that fell during the week of Unleavened bread as the day of Christ’s resurrection. As you can see, the passage of time and the demands of history have resulted in both Judaism and Christianity evolving and changing how they practice their divergent methods of worshiping God. In fact, the divergence of “the Way” from the rest of the Judaisms post-Second Temple is likely part of those historical requirements.

Is all this desirable? Probably not. That is, it would be great to have a Christianity that actually remained a normative part of Judaism and was able to include Gentile practitioners who came to faith in the Messiah, but such was not to be.

Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Romans 11:25 (ESV)

Paul seems to be telling us that the schism between the Gentile and Jewish believers was inevitable for the sake of the Gentiles and that, referencing Isaiah 59 and Jeremiah 31, by doing so, all Israel will be saved. (see Romans 11:26-27)

If Judaism was practiced differently and in fact, in radically different ways between the ancient times of Moses, David, and Solomon, the time of the Babylonian exile, the time of Herod, the Second Temple, and the rise of “the Way,” and in the post-Second Temple rabbinic period, can we say that all of these Judaisms are “valid?” I don’t think we have much of a choice but to say that they are. If you disagree, then you have to point to some place in history and say “here’s where the Jews made their big mistake.” I know that many Christians will point to Jesus and say that the Jewish rejection of their own Messiah caused them to become lost and gave rise to the “age of the Gentiles,” but be careful. For the first fifteen years post-ascension, only Jews were disciples of Jesus Christ. Even after Peter’s fateful meeting with Cornelius and the subsequent mission of Paul to the Gentiles of the diaspora, Jews remained in total control of the “Jesus movement” within Judaism until the fall of Jerusalem and the scattering of the vast majority of the Jewish population among the nations (there has always been a remnant of Jews living in the Land). It is rumored that there were Jews in synagogues acknowledging Yeshua as Messiah into the second, third, and possibly even up to the fifth century CE or later.

Rabbi Joshua Brumbach wrote a blog post called Rabbis Who Thought for Themselves which records the lives of a number of prominent 19th century Rabbis who all came to the knowledge and faith of the Messiah in the person of Yeshua (Jesus), and we know of a remnant of Jews in the 21st century who also have come to faith and yet have lives that are completely consistent with modern Jewish halakhah.

At no one point in history will you find the quintessential moment where you can say “that is the true Judaism” or for that matter, “that is the true Christianity.” Humanity in all our forms has been struggling with our relationship with God, what it means, and how to live it out since the days when God walked with Adam in the Garden. We never get it quite right because we live in a broken world and our vision of who we are, who God is, and what it all means is fractured and distorted, even with the Spirit of God residing with us as a guide.

staring-at-the-cloudsWe can look at the mistakes we have made and are making even now, but we cannot say that “at such and thus time, we got it all right.” We never got it right, we just made different mistakes. But faith and devotion have been a constant thread running through the tapestry and that is what we can find tied to our own heartstrings. We can then grab hold of that thread and pull ourselves along the line, touching the lives of the saints and tzaddikim who came before us, who like us, got some things right and some things wrong, but who like us, did their very best to serve the God of Heaven.

It’s easy to point a finger at history and at men who have been dead for hundreds or thousands of years, and vilify them in order to make ourselves look better, but in reality, they were no different from us in the important ways of how human beings work. Our only constant is love of God and of each other. We look to God to be the unchanging part of our own ever-changing universe. And we wait for the day when King Messiah will stand before Israel in Jerusalem and before the body of believers from the nations, and read the Torah aloud, and we will all hear his voice, and we will all know that we are his.

64 Days and 41,000 Paths to Follow

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated, common men, they were astonished. And they recognized that they had been with Jesus. But seeing the man who was healed standing beside them, they had nothing to say in opposition. But when they had commanded them to leave the council, they conferred with one another, saying, “What shall we do with these men? For that a notable sign has been performed through them is evident to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But in order that it may spread no further among the people, let us warn them to speak no more to anyone in this name.” So they called them and charged them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.”

Acts 4:13-20 (ESV)

Solemnly charged not to speak in Yeshua’s (Jesus’s) name, the apostles replied, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.”

The Sanhedrin could argue that they were God’s ordained authority on earth, therefore disobedience to them was disobedience to God. It was a difficult contradiction, and one faced by others in Jewish history. Decisions the legislators adopted by majority consensus were also adopted as the ruling in heaven. (see b.Bava Meitza 59a-b)

What does one do when God-ordained institutional authority rules in contradiction with the will of God? The Master had already prepared his disciples for just such a circumstance. He had foreseen the way things would go and had assured His disciples that they would possess “the keys to the kingdom of heaven” and the right to make legal determinations of binding and loosing. (Matthew 16:19) As apostles of Yeshua, the twelve disciples represented the authority of the throne of David. That important legal power gave Simon Peter and the Twelve the right to overrule the Sanhedrin if necessary.

-from Torah Club, , Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
Torah Portion Lech Lecha (“Go Forth”) (pg 78)
Commentary on Acts 2:42-4:31
Produced by First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)

It’s all fine and well for Jesus to assure “His disciples that they would possess ‘the keys to the kingdom of heaven’ and the right to make legal determinations of binding and loosing,” but what about us? The apostles represented a direct link to the Messiah, since they had been taught by him and the giving of the Holy Spirit to them, in a very public visible and physical demonstration, was only days or weeks old. While the Sanhedrin could attempt to refute and even defy their “Messianic authority,” a good many witnesses in Jerusalem were more than convinced, and correctly so. Not only that, but there could have been no doubt in the minds of Peter, John, and the rest of the apostles, that they were in the right. Thus they had not only the authority, but the confidence and certainty of mind to be able to stand up in defiance of an order of Israel’s authentic and authoritative legal court system.

But how does D. Thomas Lancaster’s commentary on the legal authority of the apostles to defy the legal authority of the Sanhedrin affect us? That is, who holds “the keys to the kingdom of heaven” today?

You might say, “the church,” but which one? How many denominations of the Christian church currently exist?

According to the Center for the Study of Global Christianity (CSGC) at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, there are approximately 41,000 Christian denominations and organizations in the world. This statistic takes into consideration cultural distinctions of denominations in different countries, so there is overlapping of many denominations.

-quoted from “Christianity Today – General Statistics and Facts of Christianity”
christianity.about.com

Oh my!

That’s a lot of denominations, and they don’t take into account a lot of the more fringy or cult-like groups who also claim some sort of authority to interpret scripture over their flocks in a legal manner.

And then there’s the Internet. As we’ve seen in a seemingly endless stream of religious blogs and their associated comments, there is a plethora of groups and individuals who claim to collectively or personally possess “the keys to the kingdom of heaven” and the right to defy the more established Christian authorities.

I suppose we could split the difference 41,000 (legitimate) ways within the body of Christianity and say that each church possesses a set of keys as applied to their own communities, and that their authority, as it were, is limited to the confines of said-communities, but that’s not really satisfactory. There are not 41,000 Gods and there are not 41,000 Christs, and there are not 41,000 Holy Spirits. God is One. While I believe, to a certain degree, that how the Bible principles are applied may vary and even evolve over the centuries in order to serve the needs of each generation, there is still an objective God; a God unto Himself, the One God with One Mind, and One Spirit, who cannot be subdivided in any manner, even though we may want and even need Him to do so for the sake of our own priorities.

So who inherited the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” or were they simply lost over the course of time?

That’s the problem we are having today. Look at the struggles the “early church” had in Jerusalem. They never became a major power in the Jewish hierarchy. They remained a small Jewish sect operating within the larger collection of valid Judaisms of the late Second Temple period and to some small degree, beyond the destruction of the Temple (but not very much farther). If there was one authentic Messianic (Christian) Jewish authority with the living apostles of Christ among the many Judaisms, when the Jews either surrendered Christianity to the nations or were “kicked out” of the assembly of the Messiah by the Gentiles, what happened to that authentic authority? Was it divided and subdivided, and subdivided again, endlessly across history, like a single-celled organism replicating, evolving, developing to form some vast living mass that is associated but not particularly unified? Is that authority shared among 41,000 living “cells” in what is (loosely) collective Christianity today?

Who currently has the right to make legal decisions that are binding both on earth and in Heaven and to defy all of the others who claim authority over the “Christian church?”

Oh, it gets worse.

It has been taught: On that day R. Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument, (Lit., ‘all the arguments in the world’) but they did not accept them. Said he to them: ‘If the halachah agrees with me, let this carob-tree prove it!’ Thereupon the carob-tree was torn a hundred cubits out of its place — others affirm, four hundred cubits. ‘No proof can be brought from a carob-tree,’ they retorted. Again he said to them: ‘If the halachah agrees with me, let the stream of water prove it!’ Whereupon the stream of water flowed backwards — ‘No proof can be brought from a stream of water,’ they rejoined. Again he urged: ‘If the halachah agrees with me, let the walls of the schoolhouse prove it,’ whereupon the walls inclined to fall. But R. Joshua rebuked them, saying: ‘When scholars are engaged in a halachic dispute, what have ye to interfere?’ Hence they did not fall, in honour of R. Joshua, nor did they resume the upright, in honour of R. Eliezer; and they are still standing thus inclined. Again he said to them: ‘If the halachah agrees with me, let it be proved from Heaven!’ Whereupon a Heavenly Voice cried out: ‘Why do ye dispute with R. Eliezer, seeing that in all matters the halachah agrees with him!’ But R. Joshua arose and exclaimed: ‘It is not in heaven.’ (Deut. 30:12) What did he mean by this? — Said R. Jeremiah: That the Torah had already been given at Mount Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heavenly Voice, because Thou hast long since written in the Torah at Mount Sinai, After the majority must one incline. (Ex. 23:2 though the story is told in a legendary form, this is a remarkable assertion of the independence of human reasoning)

R. Nathan met Elijah (It was believed that Elijah, who had never died, often appeared to the Rabbis) and asked him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do in that hour? — He laughed [with joy], he replied, saying, ‘My sons have defeated Me, My sons have defeated Me.’

Baba Mezi’a 59b

The Torah Club commentary, from which I quoted above, refers to this Talmudic story, and it is believed in observant Judaism, that the right of the Rabbis to interpret and apply halakhah in an authoritative manner derives from this passage as attached to Deuteronomy 30:12 (Stone Edition Chumash):

It is not in heaven, [for you] to say, “Who can ascend to the heaven for us and take it for us, so that we can listen to it and perform it?”

My Christian reading audience is probably asking why any of this matters, since the Jews do not have authority to interpret scriptures for Christians, and especially not to establish halakhah for us. That’s a good question and you’re right. We don’t expect any of the Talmudic rulings to have any sort of impact, let alone authority, over any of the 41,000 Christian denominations (and their variants, spin-offs, or edge case adaptations) today.

But what about Jews who profess Jesus Christ as the Jewish Messiah King, not as members of a Christian church, but as disciples of Yeshuah HaMashiach (Jesus the Christ) within a wholly Jewish ethnic, cultural, and halakhic religious and lifestyle context? What about Messianic Judaism?

When G-d intrusted Israel with the Torah, He commanded them to appoint leaders to interpret the Torah and to judge whether or not the people had broken the Torah. Inherent in this process is the development of case law, history, tradition of the Jewish people which establishes the precedence that fleshes out the full meaning and implications of each of the commandments. This body of tradition was created by the Jewish people at the commandment of G-d…The Torah invests the divine authority in the spiritual leaders of the Jewish people (this is in the Deuteronomy ch. 17), where their rulings are called…”a word of Torah”. Any Israelite presumptuous enough to reject the rulings of the judges of Israel was cut off from his people, the same punishment as for someone who rejected the written Torah. How much more presumptuous is it for a gentile to cast off entire body of Jewish tradition and claim the right to act as the judge and definer of the Torah?

-Boaz Michael
President and Founder of First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Speaking at the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations (UMJC) July 2012 conference in Baltimore, Maryland
as quoted by Gene Shlomovich on his blog
Daily Minyan

We see that in some corners of Messianic Judaism (as I define it), there is a serious devotion to the authority of the Jewish people to define themselves as Jews and to determine halakhah for themselves based on the authority of the sages. This rather flies in the face of we non-Jewish Christians but is a particular “thorn in the side” of some of those non-Jews who have either directly (by attending authentic Messianic Jewish congregations) or tangentially (through an affiliation with some form of the Hebrew Roots movement) attached themselves to a (more or less) “Jewish” viewpoint on the New Testament scriptures, Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, and God as the God of Israel.

I’ll tell you right now that I don’t know what all this means and that I don’t have the answers to the questions I’m asking. Because of this, some people accuse me of not knowing if I’m coming or going, and I suppose that is a valid concern from an outside observer’s point of view. On the other hand, there are others who feel exactly the same way about the impact and the consequences of a real, authentic, and transparent life of faith and trust in God as we attempt to grasp the meaning of the Bible across the history of the Jewish people and the world.

The Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council (UJRC) has established a written Standards of Observance (PDF) document that is intended to guide its member synagogues in the appropriate halakhic rulings as adapted for Messianic Jews, but it is only one body and cannot possibly represent all Jews who profess Yeshua as Messiah everywhere. It also, by necessity, defines a varying level of halakhic response for the non-Jewish disciples who come under the MJRC’s authority, but again, the scope if such authority is limited. These standards do not solve the problem or answer the questions I’ve been posing in today’s meditation however, but only because, like the multitude of Christian churches that exist today, it can’t, at least not outside its own community. We don’t have a universal legal and theological interpretation of scripture where “one size fits all.”

We long for the coming of Messiah. Christians desperately await the return of the King in all his glory. We have many reasons for doing so but one of the reasons I seek him and his presence is to help me understand who indeed on earth holds the “keys to the kingdom,” if anyone. Many claim to hold them or at least know the path on which to travel to find them. Many would-be “Messiahs,” religious leaders, pundits, and self-taught scholars of one stripe or another, profess to know “the truth.” But who are we to believe except God Himself, but how we understand God through the Bible and even through the Spirit, is split at least 41,000 ways, from a Christian perspective.

How am I to choose among 41,000 paths, and probably more if I factor in my own fascination with Judaism, as applied to my Christian faith? I can’t. I can only choose one of the myriad ways as they stand before me and start walking, trusting that God will not allow me to travel the wrong path, nor select a guide made out of my ego, my biases (at least not too severely), or my weaknesses, but only His Son, and the lamp of the throne of David.

May he and I walk together discovering the truth of his existence and my own. May God grant you this gift as well, for this may be all we can do until Messiah returns to rule in Jerusalem, and reveals clearly the One God and the One Way from His Temple.

Blessed is Hashem from Zion, He Who dwells in Jerusalem. Halleluyah!

Psalm 135:21 (Stone Edition Tanakh)

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

Micah 4:2 (Stone Edition Tanakh)

64 days from now, on my path, chosen from among 41,000 paths, (and probably more) where will I find myself?