Tag Archives: Judaism

Uncategorized

Paul the Apostle, Liar, and Hypocrite

33 Comments

Apostle-Paul-PreachesFor though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

–1 Corinthians 9:19-23

What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law.

–Acts 21:22-24

In one of the conversations I’ve had with Pastor Randy at my church, we discussed the activities of Paul as recorded by Luke in Acts 21. Included in some of the questions Pastor brought up was whether or not Paul was being disingenuous by offering to pay the vow price for four men at the Temple to avoid criticism from other Jews (see the quote from Acts 21 above) and that Paul had replaced this devotion for the Torah and for the Temple with faith in Jesus Christ. Interestingly enough, according to D. Thomas Lancaster in his commentary on Acts 21:15-22:30 (see First Fruits of Zion’s Torah Club Volume 6 Chronicles of the Apostles reading for Torah Portion Shemini [“Eighth”] for details), this is exactly what most Christian commentators believe.

Paul’s participation in the sacrificial services proved to the Jerusalem believers that he was not an apostate. Ironically, many Christian interpreters would consider participation in the Temple sacrifice as apostasy from Christ. They excuse Paul’s backsliding into Judaism on the basis that he was pressured into the ceremony by James and the elders. Moreover, Paul himself said, “I have become all things to all men so that I may by all means save some” (1 Corinthians 9:22).

-Lancaster, pg 684

The quote above from 1 Corinthians 9 seems particularly damning, but I want to mention something else first. In order to believe the traditional Christian interpretation of Paul’s participation in the Temple sacrifice, we have to believe that Paul is a terrible liar and hypocrite and we have to believe that James and the Council of Apostles of Christ not only condoned his dishonesty, but actively encouraged him in it.

If these are the sorts of people responsible for writing much of our New Testament, what does that say about the foundations of the Christian faith? Did God really entrust the establishment and dissemination of the Gospel of Jesus to not only flawed human beings (and all the writers of the Bible were imperfect), but deliberately dishonest, hypocritical liars? Do the ends justify the means? Should we emulate the apostles by also lying in order to win a few souls for Christ?

Assuming he’s not also lying in the following quotes, Paul defends himself before his Jewish accusers and the Romans:

Paul argued in his defense, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I committed any offense.”

–Acts 25:8

After three days he called together the local leaders of the Jews, and when they had gathered, he said to them, “Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.

–Acts 28:17

But then what are we to make of Paul’s own words to the church in Corinth in his first letter to them? What is Paul saying?

whispererAccording to Lancaster’s commentary (pp 684-6), Paul was saying that he was merely crafting his message for different audiences, not that he was changing his overall behavior, especially in relation to Torah observance. When Paul said “to the Jews I became as a Jew,” it could hardly mean he “became a Jew” since he was already Jewish by birth (although some modern Jews believe Paul was born a Gentile and converted to Judaism). Lancaster states that in Paul saying this, he “only means that, when among Jewish people, he employed that common ground to his advantage” since he “shared with them a common cultural and historical heritage.”

I don’t have a problem believing this. My wife sometimes tells me that Jews today have a particular way of thinking and conceptualizing their world and that communication between Jews takes on a different “flavor” than between a Jew and a Gentile. It is likely that Paul would have presented his language and message within a heavily Jewish ethnic, cultural, national, and religious framework when sharing the good news of Messiah to an exclusively Jewish audience.

But what about when Paul said, “To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law”? First of all, he already said he “became a Jew” so why add the redundancy (supposedly) of saying that he “became as one under the law?” Isn’t he saying the same thing twice and worse, isn’t he saying that he acted like someone under the law but actually wasn’t under the law? Isn’t that clearly being a hypocrite?

Lancaster answers those questions by saying that those “under the law” were not born-Jews but Gentile converts to Judaism or proselytes. That answers the question of why he wasn’t “under the law” if it means he’s not a convert to Judaism (a Gentile proselyte who chose place himself under Torah observance by converting). That seems a little weak, even to me, and I wish Lancaster had cited some sources to back up his claim. Apparently, this is his personal opinion but it does tend to solve why Paul engaged in “redundant language.”

On the other hand, he could have been referring to God-fearing Gentiles who were not proselytes (or who were considering conversion but had not yet made a commitment) but who voluntarily chose Torah observance. We see an example of such a person in Izates bar Monobaz who was a disciple of a Jewish merchant named Ananias and who, because of his royal position, was discouraged by Ananias from converting to Judaism. Izates vowed to observe all of the Torah mitzvot as the Jews do and later on, converted to Judaism, as did his mother Helena of Adiabene.

I also have to wonder about Cornelius, the Roman Centurion, who Peter encountered in Acts 10. In verses 3 and 30, Cornelius is seen or relates that he was praying at the ninth hour, or about 3 p.m. which is the set time for the mincha prayers in Judaism. Although the text doesn’t make it explicit, Peter and his Jewish companions stayed a number of days in the Roman’s household (see verse 48) and so they all must have eaten meals together. Unless you believe (and I don’t) that Peter’s vision (see verses 9-33) convinced him and his Jewish companions to permanently forego kosher foods, then, since there was a synagogue and thus a Jewish population in the largely Gentile community of Caesarea, it is likely that kosher food was available.

Just how many of the laws of Torah did Cornelius adhere to in his life as a God-fearer? We can’t possibly know, but it’s at least compelling to consider the idea that he may have kept a good many of them, as his position in the Roman military allowed.

under-law-torahI’m not saying any of my suggestions are fact, but it’s another way to look at Paul’s statement about “those under the law.”

Returning to Paul’s “those under the law” statement, Paul says he is not like them “under the law” but becomes like them. If Lancaster is right and they are converts, then of course, Paul doesn’t become a convert to Judaism and thus his statement is accurate. He can communicate to them in a way that they would understand in crafting his message specifically for converts (or Torah keeping God-fearers), though.

And what of “those outside the law” (1 Corinthians 9:21)? Lancaster defines them as Gentile God-fearers who do not live by the standards of Torah. If Paul becomes like them though, doesn’t that mean he puts away his Torah observance and eats ham sandwiches and shrimp scampi right alongside them at the lunch counter? Again, Lancaster refutes this and says that, “is not to say he ate forbidden foods or unclean meats, but wherever he had room to budge, he did so.” Lancaster goes on to say (pg 685):

Paul explained that he himself is not “outside of the law,” that is to say that he was not a Gentile God-fearer. Instead, he was under the “Torah of Messiah.” He remained legally Jewish in Messiah, but he bent where he could bend and flexed what he could flex in order to win those who were not Jewish.

Again, that seems a little thin, and again, Lancaster appears to be relying on his own interpretation and does not cite other authorities to back up his claim.

Traditional Christianity would probably jump all over these verses to illustrate that Paul was a behavioral chameleon and that Torah observance meant absolutely nothing to him unless he was talking to fellow Jews. Otherwise, he was under the “law of Christ,” which is to say “grace,” rather than the “Torah of Moses” or the traditional observances of the non-believing Jews.

Is there any other way to understand all this, particularly Paul’s behavior with Gentiles?

The only other way I can think of, and I’m no expert, is to say that Paul, like any good communicator, was able to craft the same message differently for different audiences. I’m a professional writer and that’s exactly what I do when constructing technical information about a software product for technical vs. lay audiences. The Gospels are largely thought to relate more or less the same information to different audiences, with Matthew written to Jews and Luke written to Greeks.

Even in ancient days, Jewish and Greek thought and conceptualization of ideas and actions was fundamentally different, and information about the same events and thoughts had to be constructed in different ways.

That’s how I would read Paul’s “chameleon” statements.

But that’s just me.

However, I also know this about Paul:

But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting. For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!

–1 Corinthians 9:15-16

I believe Paul. I believe he’d rather die than compromise his principles. I believe that he was devoted to the Messiah and to the truth of the Gospel. In fact, Paul ultimately did die for his faith, as did Peter, and the other apostles except arguably John. Like the other apostles, Jesus hand-picked Paul for his task and added to that, he did so as a supernatural event, well after Christ’s ascension to glory at the right hand of the Father. If God knows all things, it would be unlikely that such a man as Paul would have been selected if it was known that he was going to fail spectacularly as a liar and a hypocrite.

AbrahamYes, all men of God have failed. Abraham failed. Jacob failed. Moses failed. David failed. But not one of them failed in their mission for God. They failed in many human ways, but each successfully carried out the work that God gave them to do. Abraham failed when he lied about calling Sarah is sister (although arguably as his cousin, she could be called his “sister”), but he succeeded in having overwhelming faith in God and in the binding of Isaac. Jacob failed in his many acts of deceit, but he succeeded in fathering and raising the beginnings of the twelve tribes. Moses failed by desecrating God in front of the people when he struck the rock twice, which cost him his entry into Israel, but he succeeded in leading the Jewish nation in the wilderness for forty years as a shepherd leads and protects his flock. David failed with Bathsheba, but succeeded in conquering the Land and vanquishing Israel’s foes as her King.

Paul no doubt failed in many human ways too, but he succeeded in integrity, honesty, and courage, even in the face of death, many times defying opponents for the sake of his gospel and promoting Gentile inclusion in the Way of the Messiah.

If Paul was a liar and a hypocrite, then he only claimed to be serving Jesus. He couldn’t have been a real apostle and disciple. No one behaves so badly and yet serves a God of truth and justice.

“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

If Paul is the man who most Christian commentators (and most Jewish ones as well) believe him to be, then he was a “worker of lawlessness” literally, and a liar, and a hypocrite. If he was all of those things, then his epistles are a sham and we cannot trust them or their writer. If we can’t trust Paul, then most of the New Testament is unreliable. If that’s true, we Christians are in a horrible bind and we have to believe the modern Jews in saying that Paul took the basic teachings of Jesus and perverted them into an anti-Judaic religion, preaching hate of Jews, of the Temple, of the Torah, and of Israel.

That’s not the Paul I know. I’m sorry if you believe otherwise.

Torah Portion

Shemini: Chesed to the Stranger

8 Comments

acts-of-kindnessThe following you shall abominate among the birds — they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, and the black vulture; the stork; herons of every variety; the hoopoe, and the bat.

–Leviticus 11:13,19 (JPS Tanakh)

The Talmud (Chulin 63a) states that the Hebrew name for the white stork is chasida, because it acts with kindness, chesed, towards its friends.

The Ramban, Moshe Nachmanides, a great Torah scholar, writes that the birds enumerated in this portion are forbidden for consumption because of their cruelty. Why, then, should the stork be considered “detestable” and an “abomination”? It should be permissible since it does kindness!

The Chidushai Ha-Rim answers: The stork does favors only for its friends. Since it doesn’t do chesed for strangers, it is considered not kosher. Chesed, kindness, must be done for everyone, not only one’s friends!

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

It seems strange that we could learn lessons about treating others with charity and lovingkindness from the Laws of Kashrut, but the esteemed sages have illustrated this passage thus. Perhaps you would like something more familiar.

Love your fellow as yourself: I am the Lord.

–Leviticus 19:18 (JPS Tanakh)

And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

–Matthew 22:39

But as the famous question goes, who is our neighbor?

The Torah teaches us, “Love your fellow human being as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18). It is often translated as “Love your neighbor as yourself.” However, Rabbi Mordechai Gifter taught that while the words “neighbor” and “fellow human being” are often used synonymously, in everyday speech the word “neighbor” is used to denote someone living or located nearby, while the obligation of this commandment includes a complete stranger who lives far away.

The general rule for this commandment is that anything you would want others to do for you, you should do for others (Rambam, Hilchos Aivel 14:1). The great Hillel once taught a convert, “That which is hateful to you, do not do unto others. That is the basis of the Torah.” (Shabbos 31a). The Baal Shem Tov used to say, “Love your fellow man as yourself — though you have many faults, nevertheless, you still love yourself. That is how you should feel toward your friend. Despite his faults, love him.”

-Rabbi Packouz

Not just your neighbor who is close to you, and not just your fellow who is like you, but even people who are far away and who you do not know…even people you may not like.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

–Matthew 5:43-48

What is Chesed? What is truly giving kindness if not showing love and concern for another human being, even when they’re a stranger, or even when there has been bitterness and enmity between you?

One thing I can attest for is his integrity. He was one of the few who called me after my last surgery to find how I am despite our bitter feud. None of you did. Give the guy a break, we must not take love out of the equation.

Chesed is calling up a sick person and showing compassion, even though at all other times you bitterly argue with that person. Chesed is a love note placed in a bottle and tossed into the sea for anyone who may need love to find, no matter how far away they may be. Chesed is a can of soup donated to a food bank for any hungry person to eat. Chesed is smiling at a stranger you pass on the street.

More about chesed on The Transcendent Path.

Good Shabbos.

Uncategorized

On Choosing God

2 Comments

TrustNegate your own will in favor of God’s will.

-Ethics of the Fathers 2:4

If I surrender my will and turn my life over completely to the will of God, do I not thereby abrogate my power of free choice?

Certainly not. Take the example of a child who receives money for his birthday. An immature child may run off to the toy store or candy store and spend the money on everything his heart desires. He may indeed have several moments of merriment (although a stomach ache from indulging too heavily in confections is a possibility). Without doubt, however, after a short period of time those moments of enjoyment will be nothing but a memory, with the candy long since consumed and the broken toys lying on the junk heap.

A wiser child would give the money to a parent and ask that it be put into some type of savings account where it can increase in value and be available in the future for things of real importance.

Did the second child abrogate his prerogative of free choice by allowing the parent to decide how to invest the money? Of course not. In fact, this was a choice, and a wise choice as well as a free choice.

We can choose to follow our own whims or we can choose to adopt the will of an omniscient Father. We are wise when we make the second choice.

Today I shall…

…turn my will over to God, and seek to do only that which is His will for me.

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

How much is this like the choice Jesus made on that last night?

saying, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.”

–Luke 22:42

Last week, I started talking about free will and Divine Election and how that describes the nature of man and our relationship with God. I still don’t think that we are wind up toy soldiers, pre-programmed by God in all our responses, including the most important response, accepting or rejecting the Almighty.

I don’t think this issue comes up for Jewish people, but then, all Jews are born into a covenant relationship with God just by virtue of being Jewish. Still, the recognition and acceptance of Messiah is a vital task that remains hidden from most Jews, largely due to how Gentile Christianity has “morphed” the Jewish Messiah into a Goyishe King. Still, many Jews see God, not as a harsh overseer with a whip controlling the gates of life and death, but as a teacher, gently but firmly guiding us in the lessons of life as we walk the path with our companion.

That very day two of them were going to a village named Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened. While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were kept from recognizing him. And he said to them, “What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?” And they stood still, looking sad. Then one of them, named Cleopas, answered him, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?” And he said to them, “What things?” And they said to him, “Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened. Moreover, some women of our company amazed us. They were at the tomb early in the morning, and when they did not find his body, they came back saying that they had even seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive. Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see.” And he said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

–Luke 23:13-27

Imagine having this conversation with the Master along the road, but imagine it being a picture of your entire life.

Jewish in JerusalemRabbi Twerski paints for us an image of giving our lives over to God by conscious choice. Even if a Jew is born into covenant, he or she can still completely reject God, and many Jews have done so. The majority of the Jewish population of Israel is secular, so even in the Holy Land, which contains Jerusalem and the Holy Temple Mount, most of the Jewish inhabitants choose not to connect to God.

Both Easter and the Week of Unleavened Bread are now done. Religious Jews continue to Count the Omer, but Christians just “coast” into April and for most of the church, Pentecost (Shavuot) is hardly a little blip on our radar. This is why it is so important for those few of us who are conscious of the season to remind everyone else.

The presence of Mashiach is revealed on Acharon Shel Pesach, and this revelation has relevance to all Israel: Pesach is medaleg, “skipping over” (rather than orderly progress), and leil shimurim, the “protected night.” In general the mood of Pesach is one of liberty. Then Pesach ends, and we find ourselves tumbling headlong into the outside world. This is where Mashiach’s revealed presence comes into play – imbuing us with a powerful resoluteness that enables us to maintain ourselves in the world.

“Today’s Day”
Wednesday, Nissan 23, Issru chag, 8th day of the omer, 5703
Compiled by the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Translated by Yitschak Meir Kagan
Chabad.org

After the week of Matzot, we see that beyond the Omer count, some Chassidic Jews carry forward the revealed presence of the Mashiach into the outside world with them. How much more should we, who know for certain that Messiah is revealed in Jesus Christ, should carry him forward into the world with us?

Any Jew alive on the face of this planet today is a walking miracle. Our mere existence today is wondrous, plucked from the fire at the last moment again and again, with no natural explanation that will suffice.

Each of us alive today is a child of martyrs and miracles.

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

I can only imagine that just seeing a Jew walking the streets of the old city in Jerusalem, buying falafel for lunch, davening at the Kotel, must all be miraculous. Who would have thought such a thing possible a scant six decades before? Yes, of course it is a miracle of God that there are any Jewish people left alive today in our world and that they live in a Jewish nation.

But it is also a miracle that there are any Christians, for who of his own free will and in his nature of sin, would choose the Almighty, to come to Him through His Son, unless the Spirit of God were not whispering in our ear, urging us, pleading with us, exploring our heart?

And once Moshiach Rabbeinu has opened our eyes to God, and our minds and hearts to the scriptures, and we choose Him, and we learn of Him and who we are as His sons and servants, what would we not do, from the wisest among us to the most simple, to serve Him who is the author of our story and the lover of our soul?

Choose Love. Choose God. Choose Life.

Uncategorized

Dogma on a Leash

13 Comments

dogma-on-a-leashChristian theology is the enterprise which seeks to construct a coherent system of Christian belief and practice. This is based primarily upon the texts of the Old Testament and the New Testament as well as the historic traditions of Christians. Christian theologians use biblical exegesis, rational analysis, and argument to clarify, examine, understand, explicate, critique, defend or promote Christianity. Theology might be undertaken to help the theologian better understand Christian tenets, make comparisons between Christianity and other traditions, defend Christianity against objections and criticism, facilitate reforms in the Christian church, assist in the propagation of Christianity, draw on the resources of the Christian tradition to address some present situation or need, or for a variety of other reasons.

“Christian theology”
Wikipedia

Your pastor Randy seems to be a Calvinist. Calvinism is one of the most disturbing (and erroneous) christian theologies that I’ve come across.

I extensively addressed the issue of Calvinism on my old blog site and I found that no other topic inspired so many hostile comments:

In your article you write:

“Think about it. It’s all Adam’s and Eve’s fault. They are the only ones who ever had a choice. According to ‘Divine Election,’ “

However the Calvinist view isn’t even as “fair” as that. According to Calvin:

“God not only foresaw that Adam would fall, but also ordained that he should….I confess it is a horrible decree; yet no one can deny but God foreknew Adam’s fall, and therefore foreknew it, because he had ordained it so by his own decree” (Cal. Inst., b. 3, c. 23, sec. 7).

-Onesimus, from comments he made on the blog post
Lancaster’s Galatians: Sermon Three, Paul’s Gospel, and the Unfair Election

I had a kind of revelation this morning (as I write this) while driving to work. Christians have a strong tendency to be critical of the “man-made rulings” of the Jewish sages and rabbis that are binding to various branches of Judaism. Particularly in Orthodox Judaism, Christians see the rabbinic rulings overriding the word of God and elevating the sages to a higher standing than God’s written word.

But I think Christians do exactly the same thing. Consider the words of Onesimus I quoted above. There are all manner of Christian “sages,” such as John Calvin, who issue proclamations that are considered binding by their followers.

I’m really ignorant of all the different doctrines, creeds, and dogmas running around out there, so it’s difficult for me to compare them, let alone claim a specific path for my very own. Trying to look up a comparative list of Christian doctrines is difficult, and the best I could do was About.com. In comparing, for example, Calvinism and Arminianism relative to Divine Election, I found this:

  • Calvinism – Before the foundation of the world, God unconditionally chose some to be saved. Election has nothing to do with man’s future response.
  • Arminianism – Election is based on God’s foreknowledge of those who would believe in him through faith. In other words, God elected those who would choose him of their own free will. Conditional election is based on man’s response.

These are both perfectly acceptable Christian doctrines, but they contradict each other. They are also binding doctrines in terms of the individuals and churches who follow them. How is that different from Jews who choose to follow the dictates of Reform Judaism, vs. those who adhere to Orthodox Judaism or even the Chabad?

The first Big Issue is this: If I’m going to switch my focus to the New Testament, should I continue following all the rules of the Hebrew Bible? In other words, should I keep my beard and fringes? Or should I break out the Gillette Mach3 and order shrimp fajitas?

After asking this question to pretty much every Christian expert I meet, I’ve come to this definitive conclusion: I don’t know.

You can find a small group – a very small group – of Christians who say that every single Old Testament rule should still be followed by everyone. The ultralegalist camp.

On the other end of the spectrum are those Christians who say that Jesus overrode all rules in the Old Testament. He created a new covenant. His death was the ultimate sacrifice, so there’s no need for animal sacrifice – or, for that matter, any other Old Testament laws. Even the famous Ten Commandments are rendered unnecessary by Jesus.

-A.J. Jacobs
“Month Nine: May”, pp 254-5
The Year of Living Biblically: One Man’s Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible

AJ-Jacobs-bibleI just finished this book, which Pastor Randy lent me, and Jacobs illustrates quite graphically how the Bible, and particularly Christianity, seems so strange when looked at from a complete outsider’s point of view. He had some familiarity with religious Judaism since he’s a secular liberal Jewish person and has religious relatives.

However, in his inventory of the different “Christianities” he was able to contact, he showed his readers quite dramatically how hard it would be to choose one particular path and call it the “right” one. He contacted a number of Christian scholars and pastors to act as advisors, and visited such diverse groups as Answers in Genesis, Jerry Falwell’s MegaChurch, a Gay men’s Christian Bible Study in New York, and a group of “snake handlers” in Tennessee. It doesn’t get more “mixed bag” than this.

Day 292. I’ve got a decent biblical library going now. Perhaps a hundred books or so. And I’ve divided them into sections: Moderate Jewish. Fundamentalist Jewish. Moderate Christian. Fundamentalist Christian. Atheist. Agnostic. Religious Cookbooks.

I’ve tried to keep the conservative books on the right side and the liberal ones on the left. When I started my year, I thought that nothing would go to the right of my Falwell collection. But of course, I was wrong…

-Jacobs, pg 292

Of course, Jacobs was trying to live the Bible as literally as possible, so he skewed his sampling of Judaism and Christianity to those branches that express themselves in a more literal and often, fundamentalist manner. But even restricting himself to those particular “Christianities,” it was still confusing.

There’s a phrase called “Cafeteria Christianity.” It’s a derisive term used by fundamentalist Christians to describe moderate Christians. The idea is that the moderates pick and choose the parts of the Bible they want to follow. They take a nice helping of mercy and compassion. But the ban on homosexuality? They leave that on the countertop.

Fundamentalist Jews don’t use the phrase “Cafeteria Judaism,” but they have the same critique. You must follow all of the Torah, not just the parts that are palatable.

The point is, the religious moderates are inconsistent. They’re just making the Bible conform to their own values.

The year showed me beyond a doubt that everyone practices cafeteria religion. It’s not just the moderates. Fundamentalists do it too. They can’t heap everything on their plate. Otherwise, they’d kick women out of church for saying hello (“the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak…” -1 Corinthians 14:34) and boot out men for talking about the “Tennessee Titans” (“make no mention of the names of other gods…” -Exodus 23:13).

-Jacobs, pp 327-8

There’s nothing like having an outsider sincerely look at your faith to give you (or me, in this case) fresh perspective.

In reading Jacobs’ book or reviewing the websites I’ve mentioned so far, I wasn’t really satisfied that I got a good look at the different “Christianities” so I kept searching and found a chart of the differences between denominations at religionfacts.com.

It’s too long to quote from in any meaningful fashion, but if you take a look that page, you’ll see how many different ways there are to apply the different Christianities to different doctrines and topics (Trinity, Nature of Christ, Holy Spirit, Original Sin, Free Will, and on and on and on).

So when Pastor presents his point of view and backs it up with scripture, it’s not the only valid Christian point of view. If I disagree with him or even if I am aghast at something he says, it doesn’t automatically mean I have to agree with him, even if I can’t immediately come up with Bible verses that state another perspective.

I remember being told (in a seminary class) that we must choose between Armenian or Calvinist theology. I found it strange to be forced into an either/or position like that.

-Ruth on Facebook

If I were to run all this past the Apostle Paul, what would he say? Would any of this even make sense to him? Would he advise me to take a Calvinist or Armenian approach, or would he think both were equally dodgy? I don’t know. I have said that I think religion evolves over time to meet the needs of each generation, but there’s a difference between adaptation to adjust to new technologies or social situations, and totally new ways of understanding the basic nature a completely unchanging God.

rabbinThe following story is said of Moses (see Menachot 29b.) that when he was about to receive the Torah from God, he saw God attaching crowns to the letters. Moses asked why God was doing this and God answered, “There is a man who will live many generations after you and his name is Akiva, son of Yosef. He will examine every single spike of every letter and draw from them piles upon piles of halachot.”

To help Moses understand, God allowed Moses to visit a class of Rabbi Akiva. As Moses listened to the esteemed Rabbi’s teaching, he couldn’t follow any of it and “became weak with despair.” At the end of the Rabbi’s explanation, a student asked him, “Where do you learn this from,” and the Rabbi replied, “This is an oral tradition passed down from Moses.”

“By those words, Moses was set at ease.”

(see Is It Really the Torah, Or Is It Just the Rabbis for more)

This is midrash and I don’t believe God literally sent Moses forward in time to visit Rabbi Akiva in the early First Century of the common era (but what do I know?), but this tale is meant to illustrate how there can be new interpretations of our original Biblical data designed to illuminate subsequent generations. There are no doubt many matters in Judaism that Moses could not anticipate, so he wouldn’t have looked at the Torah in those ways.

No doubt, there are many issues in modern Christianity that would have escaped Paul, so he wouldn’t have written any of his letters addressing them.

Still, how far afield can Christian doctrine go before it completely escapes the bounds of the intent of the writers of the Bible and more than that, the intent of God? Does God require that we choose between Armenian or Calvinist theology or can we be servants of the Most High and disciples of our Master without doing so?

Is that like asking if a religious Jew can be a good Jew and not choose between the halachot specific to a particular branch of Judaism? If it is, then Christianity is doing almost exactly what Judaism is doing. The only substantial difference, is for Christianity the required responses are largely conceptual (what you believe), and for Judaism the required responses are largely behavioral (what you do).

Maybe we Christians should cut religious Jews some slack or stop being so dogmatic with our doctines…or both.

Uncategorized

He Will Come

6 Comments

LionIn that day, the stock of Jesse that has remained standing shall become a standard to peoples — Nations shall seek his counsel and his abode shall be honored.

In that day, My Lord will apply His hand again to redeeming the other part of His people from Assyria — as also from Egypt, Pathros, Nubia, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and the coastlands.

He will hold up a signal to the nations and assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

–Isaiah 11:10-12 (JPS Tanakh)

This passage from Isaiah is part of the readings for the last day of Pesach (Passover) which ends at sundown today (Tuesday). For any Christian, the imagery is immediately recognizable as describing Christ, and for a religious Jew, the Messiah is surely appearing here. We see part of the Messianic prophesy and what the King will do upon his return, such as bringing the scattered of Israel back to their nation from the four corners of the earth. He will also be a standard and a banner attracting we from the nations to seek his counsel and to honor his abode, which is the rebuilt Temple in Holy Jerusalem.

The last day of Pesach sends a message of hope to both the Jewish people and all human beings on earth that the Messiah will gather us all to him and he will be our King. Revelation 2:27 speaks of Messiah “ruling with a rod of iron,” which doesn’t sound pleasant, but it shows that King Messiah will have dominion and authority over everything and everyone. The Bible speaks at length about the Messiah and his rule.

It shall come to pass in the latter days
that the mountain of the house of the Lord
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
and it shall be lifted up above the hills;
and peoples shall flow to it,
and many nations shall come, and say:
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob,
that he may teach us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths.”
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

–Micah 4:1-2

For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the Lord and to his goodness in the latter days.

–Hosea 3:4-5

While we in the church firmly understand and believe in the Christ, the Moshiach, in the person of Jesus; that he walked the earth once before and will dwell among us again, this has yet to be discovered by many, both Gentile and Jewish. But is can be discovered, just by watching Jesus and listening to him. Even a simple fisherman saw this.

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

“But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

–Matthew 16:13-16

Who is Moshiach?Religious Jews all over the world desperately await Messiah, crying out to him, “How long?” In case you haven’t noticed, the world is a mess and particularly for the Jewish people, and particularly for the Jewish nation Israel, these are very hazardous times. Of course, times are always hazardous for the Jews and for Israel. It seems to be built into the very fabric of their existence that the world will always be against them. That is why it is so important for we Christians to support and uplift them. Many promises have been made about what Messiah will do for his people Israel and if the church isn’t standing for Messiah and for his nation and people Israel, then we stand against them; against Christ, very much at our own peril.

In writing about Moshiach (Messiah), the Rambam states in his Code of Law, Yad HaChazakah : “Whoever does not believe in him or does not await his coming, denies not only [the statements of] the other prophets, but also [those of] the Torah and of Moshe, our teacher, for the Torah attests to his coming, stating: ‘And the L-rd your G-d will bring back your captivity and have compassion upon you.’

-Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe
Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson for Torah Portion Balak
“The Prophecies of Bilam”
Chabad.org

In honoring the week of Unleavened Bread by eating only matzoh and reading the daily readings for this season, we temporarily draw closer to Messiah and draw him closer to us. The church also celebrates Resurrection Day bringing glory to the risen King and looking to the hope of his return, even as the Jewish people look to his coming.

Our only hope is in continuing to believe that he will come, even as it says in the twelfth of Rambam’s Thirteen Principles of Faith:

I believe with complete faith in the coming of the Messiah. And even though he may delay, nevertheless, every day I anticipate that he will come.

A couple of years ago at this season, I wrote a blog post called Why Don’t Christians Count the Omer? It’s a serious question, since Jews and Christians both share Shavuot, though we in the church call it Pentecost. There’s another reason I ask the question, though. Jews and Christians also share the same desire and the same hope for Messiah, though we understand his specific identity differently. The person is the same person (most Jews will disagree with me, of course) and the hope is the same hope. Given that, why don’t we bind our anticipation together?

Could the Messiah return on Shavuot/Pentecost? There’s no way to know for sure. If he does, then counting the Omer is sort of like a “countdown” for Messiah’s appearance as we anticipate his “coming with the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:62).

waiting-for-mannaA blogger who has asked to remain anonymous speaks of the Christian appropriation of Judaism and particularly the co-opting of the Seder for the Communion story, but while I share her desire to protect Judaism from Christian misuse, I can’t help but see the parallels. I can’t help but see my Christ and my King in the classic Jewish and Christian texts. The Messiah is there, and for those who believe, we are all waiting for him.

His “face” has been very visible and clear to me this week and I wonder, shouldn’t all Christians be celebrating Pesach, not to steal from the Jews, but to come along side them, joining our hope with theirs? Shouldn’t we also be counting the Omer, not to appear more “Jewish” but to long for the Messiah we see in the ancient Holy texts of Israel?

A bottom line requisite to bring about redemption is to eagerly “await” the Messiah with a genuine burning desire. Whether he comes in our time or, God forbid, not, we are both held accountable and credited for the quest. Nothing stands in the path of willing. We must will, long, yearn, desire, quest, beseech and pray. But as to the actualization of that long awaited promise, we must defer to the unfathomable wisdom of the Almighty.

-Rebbetzin Feige Twerski
“Bringing the Messiah”
Aish.com

Rebbetzin Twerski concludes her article by inspiring her readers to be mindful of their actions, always behaving in a manner that pursues Messiah rather than material things, to pray for others, for an end to misery in the world, and an end to the pain of God, who some Jews believe suffers right along with His Creation. And she tells us to hope, yearn, anticipate and have faith.

As it is said, “I believe with complete faith in the coming of the Messiah. And even though he may delay, nevertheless, every day I anticipate that he will come.”

Uncategorized

Lancaster’s Galatians: Sermon Three, Paul’s Gospel, and the Unfair Election

18 Comments

voting-ballot-electionFor I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

–Galatians 1:11-12

What did Paul mean by “man’s gospel”? He did not mean a false gospel, or a corrupt gospel, or something fleshly and worldly. He meant to differentiate the way that he became a believer from the way that people ordinarily became believers in that day, and he wanted to differentiate between his gospel message and the one the other believers ordinarily proclaimed in his day.

-D. Thomas Lancaster
“Sermon Three: Paul’s Gospel (Galatians 1:11-24)” pg 33
The Holy Epistle to the Galatians

I’m depressed. I’m hitting walls I didn’t know were there, probably because I don’t have much of a formal education in theology or Bible studies.

But let’s go back to the beginning.

Last night was my scheduled Wednesday night conversation with Pastor Randy. I arrived at his office as he was finishing his dinner salad for our discussion on Chapter Three of Lancaster’s book. We ended up talking about topics that didn’t directly relate but were nonetheless interesting (Revelation and the rapture, and the age of the universe, but those are topics for a different time).

As I said in my previous blog post, we’ve been searching for some common ground on the definition of “Torah,” and that does figure heavily into last night’s conversation and this missive.

We focused on Paul’s “my gospel.” Pastor Randy and I agreed that Paul literally wasn’t preaching a separate gospel from the one taught by the other apostles or the one that we have with us today. The differentiation, as we both understood it, was how Paul received the gospel vs. just about everybody else. Paul didn’t take lessons from James and Peter, he received his information, at least initially, directly from Jesus through supernatural means.

“As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me. And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ And I answered, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me. And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.’ And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.

“When I had returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, I fell into a trance and saw him saying to me, ‘Make haste and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about me.’ And I said, ‘Lord, they themselves know that in one synagogue after another I imprisoned and beat those who believed in you. And when the blood of Stephen your witness was being shed, I myself was standing by and approving and watching over the garments of those who killed him.’ And he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’”

–Acts 22:6-11, 17-21

According to Lancaster (pg 36), the difference between man’s gospel and Paul’s gospel is that Paul’s gospel teaches:

  • Gentiles can inherit eternal life.
  • Gentiles can become part of the Kingdom of Heaven.
  • Gentiles can experience resurrection from the dead.
  • Gentiles have standing among the people of God (i.e., Israel) without becoming Jewish.

It certainly seems to me that Paul “pioneered” the idea that Gentiles could become full covenant members of “the Way” without having to convert to Judaism, but did Paul write his letter before or after Peter’s encounter with Cornelius in Acts 10? Assuming it was after, did Paul know about that encounter? And how do we know that Jesus gave Paul specific instructions relative to the Gentiles that no one else had, particularly by the time he was writing his Galatians letter?

I’m not saying it’s impossible, but Paul still had to come under the authority of the Jerusalem Council, so he couldn’t “shoot from the hip” as far as his ministry to the Gentiles was concerned. The whole point of Acts 15 was putting the status of Gentiles in the Way to the test to determine if they had to convert to Judaism or not. Even if Paul’s authority came directly from Messiah, he still had to respond to James and the Council of Apostles as the Master’s primary representatives in our world.

album-unsavedBut that’s not what worries me.

Pastor and I got around to talking about what Jesus did for the Jewish believers (what he did for the rest of us should be obvious…but apparently it isn’t). I said that he fulfilled the Messianic promises and gave hope for redemption, not only for individual Jews but for the redemption of national Israel. So what did the Jews do for salvation before Jesus? Did the sacrifices in the Temple and earlier, in the Tabernacle save?

No, of course not. Faith is what saves. That goes all the way back to Abraham. It wasn’t the sacrifices as such, but due to their faith, the Jews were saved and they fulfilled the requirement of the sacrifices out of obedience. It’s always been about faith in God, otherwise millions upon millions of Jews who had lived before the birth of Christ would have been set up for failure.

Pastor Randy agreed.

But…

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.

–Acts 13:48

I added the emphasis above to make a point.

I’ve probably heard of the Christian Doctrine of Election before, but never in any real detail. According to Paul (Ephesians 2:8), “for by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.” OK, I get that. There’s nothing I can do to earn salvation. No matter how many good deeds I commit, that doesn’t add any “bonus points” to my “salvation score.” Only by the grace of God am I saved.

But what’s my part in the deal? It’s not like I just sit around watching television and God comes over and randomly “zaps” me with salvation. Don’t I do something? Well, Paul did say, “saved through faith.” That is, I have to choose to have faith in God through Christ in order to be saved.

But Pastor Randy asked if even the act of choosing to have faith a “work.” That seemed kind of a stretch to me. In order to be a part of anything, it really helps if you contribute something, even just a tiny bit, so as to have a sense of “ownership” in the process, including salvation.

Long discussion short, Pastor Randy says that God preselects individuals to have faith. Thanks to Adam and Eve, we are all born into a state of sin as our basic nature. We can’t help it. We have no say in the matter. But here’s the kicker. Supposedly, we also have no say in the matter in regard to being saved. By nature, we all would reject Christ if given a choice, because of that nature. Only God implants faith in a human being and only those human beings who God has “programmed” to be capable of faith will ever be saved.

The rest of humanity, not so much. Fires of hell for them, no matter how many times they hear the words of the gospel.

One of my favorite sections of the Bible is the sequence that describes Jacob wrestling with the Angel. From a Jewish point of view, this gives human beings a broad license to “wrestle” with God on ethical and moral issues. We can actually debate God if we think He’s advocating for a position that is unfair or unjust. After all, Abraham did it in the matter of Sodom and Gomorrah. God doesn’t seem to mind.

But am I wrestling with God or with a specific Christian doctrine? I’m definitely wrestling with Pastor Randy. It was one of those times when I was acutely aware that his education in religious matters far, far outstripped my own, and I was absolutely fighting under my weight. It was like I was Justin Bieber trying to go a couple of rounds in the boxing ring with Mike Tyson.

I was going to get slaughtered.

Saying, “Hey, that’s unfair” or “That’s not right” doesn’t cut it if I can’t support my position from the Bible. God doesn’t have to be fair. He told Job that after all the arguing had stopped. He who makes the universe makes the rules. Fairness doesn’t come into play.

But in the aforementioned debate between Abraham and God, Abraham invoked God’s attribute of justice. If God is just, can He perform an unjust act?

Abraham,God_and_two_angelsIf God is just, is it right for him to automatically condemn some and probably most of the entire human race across all of history to eternal damnation and horrible, flaming agony, while preserving only a remnant…and absolutely none of those human beings have a choice in the matter?

Think about it. It’s all Adam’s and Eve’s fault. They are the only ones who ever had a choice. According to “Divine Election,” if you’re saved, it wasn’t your choice, you just got lucky. If you’re not saved, same deal. You just have really crummy luck.

This is why atheists say Christians are crazy and even cruel. I mean, it’s one thing if Jesus offers me the free gift of eternal salvation and I throw it back in his face. Then I can see how I’d deserve condemnation. But to never even have a shot at it?

Pastor Randy, at one point, shared how incredibly grateful he is to God for choosing him for salvation. That’s good for him and maybe good for me, but what about the poor, dumb, characters out there who are among the unchosen and don’t even realize what they’re facing…and if they did, there is absolutely nothing they can do about it. No amount of repenting of sins, turning to God, professing faith in Christ will save them.

Of course, according to Pastor Randy, they wouldn’t desire to do any of that anyway, but no one is born with that desire if we are all born in original sin. What’s the difference between Pastor Randy, who came to faith early in life, and me who came to faith after the age of forty? Was my program from God somehow slightly defective that it waited so long to start to run? I’d heard about Jesus for decades before I came to faith. How come my program didn’t kick in before it did?

However, there are other perspectives. According to Richard Land in his article at ChristianPost.com:

First, we must understand that the Bible reveals two different kinds of election, and much confusion has resulted from failing to see this distinction. Abrahamic Election is substantially different from Salvation Election. Abrahamic Election (Gen. 12:1-3) explains how God chose the Jews to be His chosen people. Salvation Election pertains to God’s elective purpose in how He brings about the eternal salvation of individual human beings, both Jew and Gentile, in both the Old and New Testaments.

Abrahamic Election is corporate, is to special people status, and is not related to anything. Salvation Election is individual and is to eternal salvation. In God’s providence, He has chosen to reveal His dealings with His people more fully in the New Testament. In doing so, a third difference between Abrahamic (corporate) and Salvation (individual) Election is underscored. God revealed in the New Testament that Salvation Election is somehow intertwined with, and connected to foreknowledge in a significant way (Rom. 8:29-30; 11:2; I Pet. 1:2).

“There is no question here of predestination to Heaven or reprobation to hell; …. we are not told here, nor anywhere else, that before children are born it is God’s purpose to send one to heaven and one to hell….The passage has entirely to do with privilege here on earth.” (Ironside, Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans, p. 116)

What if the Bible is telling us in the concept of “foreknowledge” that God does not just know all things that have, or ever will happen, as if they were the present moment to Him, but that He has, and always has had, the “experience” of all things, events, and people as a punctiliar present moment?

That makes a bit more sense and satisfies my personal value of justice. We all have free choice and can choose to accept or reject Jesus. God just knows what choice we’ll make because, while history and our lives seem like a movie that he have to live through frame-by-frame, God sees everything all at once, as if it were a snapshot.

I doubt that’ll satisfy Pastor Randy, and he admits agonizing over this issue before coming to a final decision, but if I have to err, I’d prefer to err on the side of mercy and compassion.

Because if Pastor Randy is right, how does anyone know if he’s really saved?

“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

condemnedObviously, not everyone who thinks they’re saved is really saved. Mistakes will be made and errors encountered. What if someone who isn’t supposed to be saved becomes convinced and believes they have faith in Jesus. Maybe they really don’t, but they think they do. It’s not like they’ve made an internal error in thinking, they just aren’t “programmed” to be saved. It’s impossible, from a Divine Election point of view, for that person to be saved.

So on the last day, they find out, “Oops, I’m condemned” and appeal to Jesus and he blows them off, just like that.

Not that it was the person’s fault because they had no choice in the matter!

You can see why I’m depressed and a little disgusted. I think I can remain a Christian and still not have to marry the “Divine Election” theory because if that were the only option, my faith would hang in the balance.

In my last blog, I said:

No human being is a perfectly neutral, objective observer. We all tend to read the Bible, even in its original languages, in terms of what we already “know” about it; that is, what we already believe is says. We translate the ancient Greek and Hebrew text in a manner usually consistent with those beliefs and that means we generally never surprise ourselves with the outcome.

The Bible is the Bible, but doctrine is man-made. The fact that there’s more than one way to interpret how people get saved means there’s more than one way to view the Bible, and thus, God. Right now, I’m a little too upset to go into cold, dispassionate research on this matter, weighing the pros and cons. Right now, if God really is programming us like little widgets, deliberately condemning people to eternal damnation for no better reason than they were just born as human beings in a fallen world, then I am up for a good old fashion wrestling match with God.

I’ll probably lose…but so have billions of other human beings out there. They never had a chance.