ON EVANGELISM
Nathaniel raises some questions about evangelism, one of my favorite subjects. I want to raise some provocative issues in this regard, while recognizing that his questions call for better and more detailed answers than I can give here and now.
First, let’s look at the problem of sin.
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God—this includes all Jews.
I know myself to be a man of unclean lips who needs to be touched with the coal from off of God’s sacrifical altar in order to be cleansed . I know myself to be a person totally dependent upon the redemption which is in Messiah Yeshua. But I did not always know myself to be a Jew with covenant obligations.
Certainly pagans need to repent. Certainly adherents to idolatrous religions need to repent. Certainly Jews need to repent. But we also need to ask in each case the following question: “Repent for what?” Biblically, the answer to this question is different for Jews than for non-Jews.
Some wrongly imagine that I am weak on the teaching of repentance for Jews. Not true! On the contrary, I think I am more disquieted about Jewish sin than most people in our movement. And today and for the rest of my days I am calling for a deeper repentance for all Israel and for all of us than that we have inherited from the Hebrew Christian culture, a deeper repentance than generally inhabits the heart of Messianic Judaism as I have encountered it.
R. Kendall Soulen helps us with this clarifying statement:
Human sin is never merely the sin of the creature against the Creator-Consummator. Human sin is also always the sin of Jew and Gentile, of Israel and the nations.” (R. Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996:153). The sins of the MJ movement and of the Jewish people are far more dire and extensive than simply the record of individual human failings. If we would think biblically, these sins include, and indeed are foundationally, our failure communally, familially and individually to live in covenant faithfulness to the God of Israel.
Do we and all Jews need the atonement Yeshua provides? YES, by all means YES! But for reasons deeper than we have heretofore realized and proclaimed. We, the seed of Abraham and Sarah, whose ancestors, standing at the foot of Sinai, said “na’aseh v’nishmah—we will do and we will hear/obey—all that the Lord has spoken we will do”—we must repent of our general, continual and pervasive neglect of the covenant obligations to which they implicated us and of which God spoke to our ancestors all the way back to Genesis 18 and 26, much less at the Holy Mount. All of the seed of Abraham in the MJ Movement, and all of Israel, needs the atonement Yeshua provides not simply because we are individual sinners who need to be saved by grace. We need His atonement and we need to repent because we are covenant breakers and because every day we as individuals, families, congregations, as a Union, and as a wider Messianic Jewish community fail to live in manifest Torah-based covenant faithfulness, we break the word of our ancestors to which we ourselves are honor-bound (Deut 29:9-15), and we rob God of glory (see Deuteronomy 4, Jeremiah 35).
We as a movement need to repent of covenant unfaithfulness—and this means not simply asking for forgiveness, but also returning to the faithfulness we have for so long neglected. This is a message that is alien to most of the missions movement, with the exception of Mitch Glaser of Chosen People Ministries who has begun to hear it and repeat. Can we say that this is a message our movement has, not in theory but in practice, unambiguously affirmed? I think not.
Of the seventeen sermons in Acts, nine are given to Jewish audiences [ten if you include Paul’s word to Herod Agrippa]. Repeatedly the context of repentance there is NOT repentance from individual sin, not seeking atonement and forgiveness for being sinners who need to be saved by grace, but more precisely, the need to find forgiveness for having been so out of touch with who God is and what He is up to in the world, that the community was complicit in the death of Messiah, rejecting Him who God had raised from the dead, rejecting the Messiah whom God had sent, as they had they prophets before Him. And in these sermons, the language of covenant is also invoked, so that, for example, Peter could say in Acts 3:25:
“. . .you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers.” Stephen as well combines these two factors when he says in Acts seven.
“You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.” Do we see it? The sins of Israel, and of the Messianic Movement, from which we need to repent, are twofold, as is our responsibility. To love, honor and to obey. To love the Lord our God by honoring the Messiah whom He sent, and obeying the covenant he made with our ancestors and with us.
We Messianic Jews misunderstand and misrepresent the New Covenant call for Jewish repentance because we tend to construe it in individualistic terms, thinking and preaching that “Jewish people need to repent because they are individually sinners before a holy God.: There is truth in that statement, but that is far less than, and even OTHER than the New Covenant’s perspective. Rather, as Soulen so brilliantly notes, in the Bible,
“Human sin is . . . always the sin of Jew and Gentile, of Israel and the nations, against the Lord, the God of Israel.” We Messianic Jews need to repent because we have sinned as Jews, because we have been covenantally unfaithful to the God of Israel, in addition to what we have already repented of, our dishonoring the God of our ancestors in rejecting the Messiah whom he sent.
What should we do when we meet Jews who are endeavoring to be covenantally faithful. Should we call them to embrace the Messiah whom God sent? Absolutely! But we should also commend and applaud them for their pursuit of Jewish faithfulness. This is not generally the way we go about things! Not only are religious Jews doing what they should be doing: They are doing what we should be doing.
We must overcome the Second Century reflex of commending the gospel by downgrading Judaism. Rather, we should be telling them about Yeshua because we have been commanded to do so and because he IS the Messiah whom God sent, and it is a sin, yes, but more than that, a scandal and insult to the Holy One when Jews fail to welcome him.
I also suggest that we need to jettison couching our message in an avoid-hell find-heaven mode. Even though this approach is a non-negotiable for the Jewish missions movement and for many if not for most in the UMJC, it is not once demonstrated in the sermons of the apostles, and increasingly, the wider missions world has come to see that the emphasis is not biblical, and is effective in varying degrees depending upon contextual factors.
A month or so ago I spoke at the US Center for World Mission. The last question I was asked concerned what I would say to a hasidic Jewish man my questioner had met at an airport. Here is what I would say: “Sir, if Yeshua is not the Messiah, then you had better make absolutely certain. For if He is, and you do not embrace him, then you dishonor the God of your ancestors.”
Jews should believe in Jesus. Jews should also be communally covenantally faithful. Anything less, is sin. But that includes the MJ Movement.
Are we ready to repent of our own covenantal neglect and covenantal ambivalence? I suspect that the answers in our movement are uneven. For many of us, the answer is “Yes! But how?” But it cannot be denied that there are also some who will say, “I don’t see things that way—we are not under the law,” or perhaps, “Not entirely,” or, “Are you trying to make us all Orthodox?” or perhaps, “Please explain further.” And I continue to believe that part of the reason for this widespread communal reluctance and ambivalence on these matters is the spores of antinomianism, anti-rabbinism, and anti-Judaism, weeds that encumber our pathway of faithfulness.
By all means, let us preach Yeshua to all the people of Israel. But not because of their special neediness, which has often been predicated on the alleged futility of the Jewish way of life, but because He IS the Messiah whom God sent in fulfillment of his promise, whom God raised from the dead, whom our leaders rejected, but whom Israel is called to receive.
I think it better that we concentrate on why Jews OUGHT to believe in Yeshua rather than why they NEED to believe in Yeshua. The latter approach tends to focus on proving to the Jewish person their own neediness, sinfulness, and the inadequacy of their religious commitments. I submit that this approach is reflexive in our missional approach to Jews, and that it needs to be forsaken as both ineffective and inaccurate. I prefer the other approach, of stressing why Jews ought to believe in Yeshua, because it focuses on Yeshua’s credentials and why Jews should welcome him.
We must urge the Jewish community to repent wherever we find that these
“. . .heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with our fathers” are guilty of (1) rejecting the Messiah whom he sent, and (2) failing to obey the Law we received from God. This call to repentance is enduring and vital. But this call to repentance is also directed to us as individuals, to our leaders, to our Union, and to our entire ambivalent movement,
“who received the Law as delivered by angels but did not obey it.” It is time to believe, and also time to obey.
Against the background of such a view of sin, the good news of Yeshua for the Jewish world is different than we normally construe it.
Messiah died not simply for Jewish people’s individual sinfulness. Messiah has come to atone for Israel’s covenant failure. And he is coming again to take away ungodliness from Jacob, when all Israel will be saved (Romans 11). He has also come to atone for the Messianic Jewish Movement’s covenant disobedience and, for the most part, our abominable indifference to our covenant obligations. If we would receive His atonement, then, ought we not to turn to that obedience we have so long neglected, we “who received the Law as given by angels but did not obey it?”
And is it not part of the good news that the Holy Spirit comes to help us enter into that covenant obedience through the Son of David? (See Ezekiel 37:21-28 for example, and of course, Jeremiah 31:31 ff.). Again, if we are grateful for the atonement, are we going to repent of our covenant failure by seeking and cleaving to the pathways of covenant obedience?
ON LEGALISM
Nathaniel addressed the hot-button issue of legalism last week, which issue needs to be addressed. He said this:
So when I look at this issue of Torah-observance and NC halakhah, I think of Yeshua's words that all the law and all the prophets hangs on the 2 great commandments (love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself). Now how does this relate to handwashing or the proper amount of liturgy? Where is the line drawn between trying our best to live a life that is an authentic expression of a Jewish faith in Yeshua, and the danger (or fear) of becoming legalistic?
Robert responded with some maturity too the issue, saying:
I believe as MJ's we need to value some of the traditions of Judaism, yet not out of a legalistic tradition that is likened to a straightjacket, but allowing for the leading of the Ruach and the wisdom of G-d fearing leaders to discern what works for that community. Regarding liturgy and the other ceremonies you mentioned, I believe this is part of who we are as Jews and as MJ's we should have a goal to discern from the Spirit, submit to the Scriptures and realize that we are connected to Klal Israel although our involvement will bring forth respect as well as disagreement. Any viable relationship has its pro's and con's but ultimately there is a bond of commitment that cannot be broken. Hope this helps.
“Legalism” is a significant underlying issue in debates and feelings about Torah observance in our Union. Following is an article I found on-line, denouncing the kinds of things I champion as being Grace-less legalism, and my brief response. I cannot say too strongly that a misunderstanding of this term is a hindrance to our movement’s obedience, maturation and growth in covenant faithfulness.
What do you think?
Dismantling Legalism In the Messianic Jewish Movement Today
Marshall Beeber
Found on line 7/14/06 at http://www.messianic-literary.com/dismantle.htm
The greatest threat to the Messianic Jewish (Hebrew Christian) Movement in the 21st Century is the de-spiritualization of it's ranks by legalism in the form of mandatory Torah observance. I believe the reason why the "gospel of grace" was overtaken by "Torah observant legalism", is due to a spirit of unbiblical compromise and conformation to a false spirit of religiosity among Messianic Jewish leaders. To make the situation worse, grace oriented Messianic Jewish (Hebrew Christians) leaders have themselves been polarized by various secondary issues. To reverse the stemming tide of legalism before the entire movement is lost, we must put aside our differences and work together for the common goal of the gospel.
. . . . Let me take some time to explain why legalism in the form of strict Torah Observance has successfully overtaken the correct doctrine of Grace and how Grace oriented Messianic Judaism can regain the hearts and minds of believers.
The Messianic Jewish Movement grew out of rebellion against Protestant Christian missionary programs which did not understand the needs of Messianic Jewish (Hebrew Christian) believers. Doctrine was oriented towards grace, with oversight that would prevent believers from professing and teaching Torah observance. Such programs only perpetuated a "second class" Hebrew Christian citizenry within the Church, causing worshippers to mistrust their leadership. In the late 70s through the 80s the Messianic Jewish movement teaching in most congregations was still largely Grace oriented, accompanied with some Torah observance. This form of worship and daily practice still remained true to New Covenant standards and gave worshippers the freedom to express their Jewishness.
In the mid-90’s David Stern’s revolutionary book , "The Messianic Jewish Manifesto" started turning belief towards strict Torah Observance. I believe that Stern’s intent was that of dismantling the "Pauline" teachings of Grace, to revert back to the Law. He and other supportive Messianic Jews resented the teachings of Grace having supremacy over Torah. He therefore intentionally rebelled against New Covenant doctrine believing that Jews would not accept any Gospel except one that was totally Torah observant. In doing this, he and other supportive teachers adopted a dangerously heretical course. Strict Torah observance has now become the standard in much of the Messianic Jewish movement. Today almost all dissenting teachers have been ostracized from much of the movement. Those that remain but disagree have learned a certain "politically correct" posture to take regarding legalism and have therefore been neutralized. Both the UMJC and MJA are now supportive of Sternian doctrine. Major ministries like Jews for Jesus and Chosen People Ministries spend little effort in combating this legalism, despite their Grace oriented teaching. They have both largely capitulated their efforts in maintaining basic doctrinal integrity within the MJM as a whole. It looks like the battle against legalism is being lost! But the legalist leaders have not yet faced the repercussion of their folly , nor the full opposition of their Grace oriented Messianic Jewish and supportive Christian brethren. . . .
Legalists must realize too that they cannot continue to teach doctrine opposing basic New Covenant truths without suffering the paralyzing spiritual consequences. The constant hope for "revival" in the MJM cannot be met until the Spirit is given the freedom to touch individuals. The perceived strength in legalism is its insistence upon conformity within the movement. This of course, has always been the true weakness of the Law. It cannot succeed in emancipating souls by liturgical means. Only by the Spirit and the freedom of Grace are sinners truly freed from the power of sin and death.
How shall we respond to this? Well, many ways. There are a number of read herrings, half-truths and mischaracterizations in this document. But for today, let’s settle for just one—a better definition of “legalism.’
I like the definition given by Charles Caldwell Ryrie, a well-known Christian theologian, and icon of Dispensationalism:
"Legalism may be defined as a fleshly attitude which conforms to a code for the purpose of exalting self. The code is whatever objective standard is applicable to the time; the motive is to exalt self and gain merit rather than to glorify God because of what He has done, and the power is the flesh, not the Holy Spirit. It cannot be emphasized too strongly that having to do something is not legalism, but the wrong attitude is ----- Israelites had to bring their sacrifices, otherwise they would have suffered certain penalties. It was the attitude toward doing what they had to do that determined whether or not their action was legalistic ------ Having to conform to a law is not of itself legalism" (Charles Ryrie, "The Grace of God", pages 117-118).“Legalism” is a word commonly thrown around by people seeking to either avoid or discredit Torah observance. It is not usually defined, and is seldom defined clearly. I believe that Ryrie’s approach is most helpful.
To put it in my own words, “Legalism is an attitude which seeks to leverage God through human performance, often serving as a basis for claiming or feeling oneself superior to others.”
Saying that God requires certain kinds of conduct from us, including commandment keeping is not legalism. It is obedience in the context of seeking to honor God. It only becomes legalism when it leads to feeling proud, superior, or entitled, when it is used as an occasion for dominating others, and when it obscures the fact that confidence with God is, was and always will be grounded on His grace and mercy, not our own achievement.
It is also wrong to imagine that something is “legalistic” except when it involves a subjective sense of being led by the Spirit. Think of it in terms of parent-child relations. When a child knows it is his job to clean up his room or wash the dishes, is it legalism that he is required to do so even when he doesn’t feel like it? The assumption that “the leading of the Spirit” must precede obedience is a product of post-Enlightenment rationalism which moved the center of authority from God to the individual. Obedience is not legalism: it is respect for authority.
ANSWERING SOME OF DEREK'S QUESTIONS
(1) Not directly on topic, but you brought it up—the Takhanun. When praying the core prayers of the Siddur, I pray in Hebrew and have gained enough familiarity to know what I am praying. But with prayers like the Takhanun that I am less familiar with, I pray in English. I always feel guilty. If I pray unfamiliar Hebrew I get nothing from it. Am I justified in praying some parts of the Siddur in English as I am learning? (I don’t mean to give the impression that I pray the Shakharit daily—I am lax in prayer).
Of course you are justified in doing so, and standard Jewish practice says as much, although some hard line halachic sources say that the obligation is only discharged when Hebrew is used. The latter is NOT the prevailing operational consensus.
(2) We frequently use the term Yeshua-centered in MJ. I read some years ago Bonhoeffer’s Christ the Center. You persuaded me we must be God-centered. Now I am looking for a good verb to go with Yeshua: Torah-based, God-centered, Spirit-empowered, Klal Israel-oriented, Yeshua-________?
How about Yeshua-honoring?
(3) When you say that MJ spirituality involves Torah-based holiness exemplified by Messiah, are you being too weak on Messiah’s contribution? You also referred to Hays’ theory that Paul means “faithfulness” when he uses pistis. I find that thesis very problematic (consider Rom 3:25). Isn’t Messiah’s contribution far greater than an example of obedience?
Yes, Yeshua’s contribution is far more than obedience, far more than being simply the ideal/model/obedient Jew. See my response to Joshua concerning MJ Halacha. As for Richard Hays’ position and Romans 3:25, let me get back to you on it. Still, I think his emphasis that we are saved by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ (through His redemptive and atoning obedience) rather than through something in ourselves (our subjective faith) is a healthy corrective to the notion that we are saved by our faith rather than by the grace of God!
CONCERNING PARADIGM SHIFTS
Nathaniel says:
Questions 2 and 3 are related:
2. Concerning paradigm shifts, where and when does the rubber meet the road? Can you give past examples of this from the Messianic Movement?
3. Is the Messianic Movement going through a paradigm shift right now? If so, what do you hold as the central truths that we need to gravitate to? The entire Messianic Jewish Movement is an example of a paradigm shift. When I came to faith in Yeshua in 1961, it was universally assumed that Jewish believers in Jesus were to be functioning members of a local Bible-believing Church. This was the Hebrew Christian model. True, some Jewish believers would have fellowship meetings with other Jewish believers (the Hebrew Christian Alliance), but this was a side-line. In fact, the Hebrew Christian Alliance had gone on record as denouncing the idea of Jewish Yeshua-believing congregations as heretical, The very idea of Messianic Jewish Congregations is a huge paradigm shift.
Is the MJ Movement going through a paradigm shift right now? In parts of it, yes. The older Hebrew Christian paradigm looked at Torah living as an exercise in nostalgia and missionary expediency—a good way to attract and reassure other Jews. But some of us are saying that it is very much more than that: it is a matter of covenant faithfulness, or the lack of it, a matter of repentance, and a matter of eschatological inevitability. This is one of my chief contributions to the current climate in Messianic Judaism and I have written on it extensively, including a recent sixty page paper, “Seeds, Weeds and Walking the High Wire,” which I may share with you folks before this class is out.
Another paradigm shift taking hold in our Union is seeing the Jewish community as our primary community of reference, “raising up congregations for Yeshua within the Household of Israel.”
Finally, if you will look at the Definitional Statement on the UMJC homepage, and the supporting documents attached to it, you will see imbedded a number of paradigm shifts such as I have alluded to here. That definition is something that was unimaginable when I came to believe in Yeshua in 1961.
Mark Kinzer does a wonderful job of chronicling a number of our paradigm shifts in
Post Missionary Messianic Judaism.
