Shalom, My Friends,
This week, we will be concentrating on Mitzvah and Commandment, among other things. I will have more to say about this tomorrow. I am being visited by Dr. Mark Kinzer, and we have a group of crucial networking meetings concerning the future of MJTI, so I will be logging on not only today, but tomorrow and perhaps Tuesday to update your assignment. However, I wanted to get you started now.
Watching
Begin by looking at DVD’s 3.3 and 3.4 34 minutes.
Reading
Begin by reading Rothschild/Heschel pp. 155-197, which all have to do with Mitzvah. Please note that there is a disconnect between the syllabus sections named on the DVD's and our own Syllabus packet. The Section H named on the DVD's is not in our Packet, and the Section J named on the DVD's is our Section H. So DO use our Section H. In addition, use and read our Section I, at the appropriate time.
Doing
I encourage you to continue experimenting with Jewish prayer, and to share on the blog concerning your experiences. I promise you that each time you do liturgical prayer it is different, and sometimes you will be surprised by a sudden influx of insight, awareness, and companionship. Continue with the Shemoneh Esrei/Amidah especially, found on pages 99 through 119 in the Artscroll Siddur (Nusach Ashkenaz) which all of you are supposed to have. As before, the context of that praying, which should be done standing, experiment with using these benedictions as a kind of outline or agenda for prayer—that is, in the midst of certain benedictions, insert your own prayers. And again, this is especially appropriate in the benedictions for healing, for the blessing of the year (that is, for provision and sustenance), as well as others. Again, report on the texture of the experience—what can you say about it that is worth sharing? I would ask that you make three contributions to the blog on these matters, as well as supplying the traditional three questions from your reading and the DVD’s, and interacting at least twice with each other by way of comments.
This week, we will be wading deep into the issue of Torah observance and its place in Messianic Judaism. Like I said, I will log on again within 24 hours to supplement what I am saying now . . . I will augment and edit the very posting.
One of the issues you will discover in this week’s DVD watching is the proposition that doing the right thing has value even independent of the intent. It is better if you have kavvanah, but even if you don’t, deeds have a dignity and priority of their own. “The world needs more than the secret holiness of individual inwardness.” Good deeds done without love may profit me nothing (1 Cor 13), but still bring benefit to the world.
This deals with the positive role of law in the life of the Jew. On the DVD, Roger will ask a question concerning “Where does this leave the Church?’ In other words, this mentality is so different from that of the Church, and this imperative to obey the Law, is foreign to the Church’s ethos (and rightly so), bringing us into the very big question—How are the obligations of Messianic Jews different from the obligations of believing Gentiles, even Gentiles in our congregations?
As you study and each craft three questions for me this week, as is our habit, consider such questions as well as what might be the implications of such an issues for how we conduct congregational life?
More later.
HERE’S THE MORE I PROMISED!
I thought it a good idea to stay on one theme this week, so we will stick to the issue of Torah and the place of Torah in Messianic Jewish life.
Please ADD to your watching, DVD 4.4 beginning about minute 26:20 (what goes before pertains to Kavvanah, and we will handle that later).
Read as well the two additional sections I am sending you by email attachment, both from Heshel. One on “Religious Behaviorism” and the other on “The Meaning of Observance.” (If you do the assigned reading in Heschel for this week, you will be reading the chapters upon which these hand-outs are based.
If you have trouble coming up with questions this week, I will accept instead your choosing quotations from Heschel that especially grab you together with your brief discussion of why you chose what you did. (I regard Heschel as the most quotable Jew since Yeshua!).
I am also throwing in DVD 5.4, which you should watch together with Section Q in your materials packet. It is not very demanding and watching this DVD now will help reduce the rush at the end. Although not related to our theme for this week, you will find it light and interesting.
Don’t forget to check your e-mail for the attachments I promised!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Robert –
In the lecture it was stated, “Doing the right thing has value even independent of the intent. If you feed a poor child even though you don’t have the warm fuzzy feelings, you are still doing a good thing. Deeds have dignity of their own.”
This sounds good on paper (so to speak), but how realistic is it to believe that someone who is not motivated by the love of G-d would even want to do a “good deed” such as feeding a hungry child. Does Isaiah 64:5 (“We have become like an unclean thing and all our virtues like a filthy rag”) have anything to do with this initial question? If doing a good deed doesn’t gain favor in G-d’s eyes then why do it since performing it with the wrong heart it is like a filthy rag? I see Isaiah 64:5, as Israel defiled with sin that even their pretensions to righteousness are vitiated by a basically self-seeking motive, rather than by supreme love of God (which alone can be the basis of true morality; compare to Deut 6:5) Does my question make sense?
Q2
Roger re-asks his question about the church– “if this is such a great way of life, why doesn’t G-d call all the nations to this life? Isn’t this a case of dividing rightfully those laws which are universal as opposed to specific Jewish laws? Secondly, regarding the Gentiles in our midst, I see this as a matter of gentiles having a tremendous responsibility in making Israel jealous (Romans 11) and in this way having a priestly call to support the Jewish people to fulfill their destiny. As far as Gentiles in the MJ movement, when a Gentile is in a Messianic Congregation, they live the live of the culture; celebrating the feasts and worshipping with the Jews. They have been grafted in and are now part of the New Covenant faith and are children of Abraham. Only those practices that entail explicitly professing being a Jew are not recommended to gentiles. I find this not so problematic when Gentiles find their identity in Yeshua and get passed the concern that they are second class citizens. Is there a higher place than being in Messiah? I think not!
Q3
This is linked to Q2 above. Regarding the Jew/Gentile relationship, isn’t this relationship similar to the husband/wife relationship? I see Israel as symbolic to the husband in Eph.5 as he is the head (rosh) the same way Israel is called to be the rosh. The Gentiles are a picture of the wife as she is submitted to the husband as to the Lord (a picture of being grafted in just as the wife came from man’s side to be his help mate). Is it not fair to say that as the husband is called to lead (and with his leading comes distinction and various obligations to fulfill that are different than that of the woman) So Israel is called to lead the nations and is distinctive) while the Gentile church (a picture of the wife) has equal standing in G-d’s sight yet with a different function/calling? Is this relevant to this whole discussion of Jew/Gentile Torah observance or am I in the outfield?
Robert:
I think people completely misunderstand verses like Isa 64:5. In the first place the doctrine of depravity must be balanced with the doctrine of God's image in human beings. We are not all evil. Your experience tells you this and so does the Bible. We are not incapable of love and good deeds. In the second place, the point of Isa 64 is not that humans never do good, but that the good we do is insufficient. God does notice the good deeds of those who are not yet included in his people. I'm sure we could think of biblical precedents. Thus, an atheist or pagan or whoever can certainly act with love, sacrifice, and pure goodness. After all, that pagan bears the image of God.
Derek
Robert:
Derek
I agree with you on every point, especially when you said, " We are not incapable of love and good deeds." Maybe you missed my point. I was just expressing the importance of our motives behind our deeds, after all doesnt Hashem check our motives for all that we do?
Maybe the better question is - "How does our motive line up to the notion of doing the right thing independent of intent?"
After all Prov. 16:2 seems to emphasize Hashem checking our motive. A person may think nothing is wrong with what he does; outwardly it may seem innocent. But God knows his heart, whether the motives behind his actions are pure or not. The LORD judges people on the basis of why they act (Prov. 17:3; 21:2) because He sees human hearts ( Matt. 6:4, 8, 18)
Paul's Three Questions:
(1) Does the framework of the Body of Believers set forth in Scripture contemplate the Church being separate and distinct from Israel? Even if not, I understand that it is a present fact of life, and that we must be thankful to it for the preservation and promulgation of the Gospel. But if not, how does that affect our view of Spirituality as R. Dauermann defined it previously, being "the consideration, discussion, study, and pursuit of means toward that end[, Holiness]?”
(2) Are their distinct responses to G-d's commandments for Gentiles, Gentiles who have joined with Israel, and Israel itself? (By "Gentiles who have joined with Israel" I mean any Gentile who regularly attends shul.) If not, why not. If so, what are these distinctions, on what basis do we make them, and what does that mean practically?
(3) What does the Aggadic form of Spirituality look like?
Robert
Q1 (for today)
I find the following quote contrary to New Covenant understanding,
“Any religious or ethical teaching that places the main emphasis upon the virtues of inwardness such as faith and the purity of motivation must come to grief. If faith were the only standard, the effort of man would be doomed to failure. Indeed, the awareness of the weakness of the heart; the unreliability of human inwardness may perhaps have been one of the reasons that compelled Judaism to take recourse to actions instead of relying upon inward devotion. Perhaps this is the deeper meaning of the rabbis’ counsel: one should always do the good, even though it is not done for its own sake. It is the act that teaches us the meaning of the act” [189].
The part, “If faith were the only standard, the effort of man would be doomed to failure” seems to me very contradictory to Hebrews 11:6 which says, “And without faith, it is impossible to be well pleasing to G-d, because whoever approaches him must trust that he does exist and that he becomes a Rewarder to those who seek him out.”
According to this verse – faith is the only standard to please Hashem.
How are we to look at Hebrews chapter 11 in its totality which places the proper importance/balance on the issue of faith? Isn't faith the sole basis for human merit = righteousness = which pleases G-d.
I stand along the lines of Stern’s Commentary on this verse which states, “The idea that it is more exalted to behave properly regardless of whether God will reward is prideful and anti-biblical; God does not require us to simulate a supposedly higher motive than he himself provides! In fact, such behavior is a form of self-righteousness.” Again, I see Heschel’s comment as placing a high view on acts and upon the rabbi’s counsel on this subject.
Friends,
What questions!
Keep it up!
Stuart
In response to Robert:
Well put. Does your position assume that faith alone and without action or some external manifestation of that faith (other than lip-service) pleases G-d?
Concerning good deeds without faith, Oskar Schindler comes to mind. Based upon what I know about him, he really didn't act like one who believes in G-d. But what he did was extraordinarily good. With that and based on what I am reading here, it would seem that it did him no good whatsoever. I raise this to ask whether our focus here should be on "good for the individual" or "good for tikkun olam" or "good for the Jewish community at large?" The Scriptures do speak of judging nations and communities as well as individuals. So are we ignoring an important aspect of Salvation in this discussion?
Rabbi D:
1st Q
Regarding faith and works, I think neither Heschel nor popular Christianity get it right. There are two problems: (1) the problem of faith without works and (2) the problem of works as an insufficient means of merit. Popular Christianity has plenty of people excusing sin and slackness because faith is all that is required (Paul would roll over in his grave as would Luther and Calvin). Traditional Judaism has too many people trusting that insufficient works are meritorious. I would like to suggest, rather than faith alone as a principle, the priority of faith with that faith demonstrated by works. Guess this was a comment and not a question.
2nd Q
Regarding Jews and Gentiles and Torah. I see it as Gentiles are not included in certain parts of Torah which are specific to Israel (kashrut, Shabbat, brit milah, and tzit-tzit). But I see much of Torah as God's universal will. In that sense, would you agree Torah is a revelation to the nations as well as Israel?
3rd Q
Can you give some specific examples of what you and Rabbi Kinzer mean by Yeshua hidden within Jewish life?
Derek
Robert
Paul –
My position is based on both faith with actions, and the Scriptures bring a proper unbiased position on the two. In my opinion, Ya’akov brings the faith and actions to its proper place. Just a few examples are; Ya’akov 1:26-27 which speaks of religious observance balanced with an action of controlling one’s tongue (this proposes more than lip-service to Hasehm).
Then in Ya’akov 3:13 speaks to the issue of demonstrating wisdom and understanding by actions producing a good way of life (a picture of actions done with proper faith)
Last but not least is Ya’akov 2:20-26 (key verse 24) “You see that a person is declared righteous because of actions and not because of faith alone.” I see this as the watershed on the issue of faith and actions. As MJ’s we are called to shomer-mitzvot (observant to the commandments) but this MUST have proper motive in Messiah Yeshua. By living a life enveloped with His commandments, we prove our loyalty not only through our declaration but by our deeds (a picture of true covenant loyalty).
Regarding your Oskar Schindler example, I never studied his life in depth to determine whether he believed in G-d or not or whether Hashem convicted him to do what he did. Although, I certainly agree with you that even if his incredible actions were not backed with G-dly motive, he still did as you said, an “extraordinary good” for the Jewish people. Rachav is one that comes to mind regarding a Biblical individual who was unarguably wicked in her lifestyle yet G-d used her and her faith was genuine with evidence of actions demonstrating her faith. To me, this exemplifies G-d’s chesed upon all his creation for his glory and purposes.
Your question as to what our focus should be is quite apparent to me as being unified in Messiah Yeshua. As we live a life of obedience to G-d’s mitzvot we are touching and tasting all three of your examples described.
Your last comment, “So are we ignoring an important aspect of Salvation in this discussion?” I am not sure what you are asking; can you expound a bit more on that?
Robert:
While I understand your point through the lens of Ya'akov, I am not sure that his view is the entire view. Although it is entirely valid, it may be incomplete, and that is the basis for the comment to which you refer. Our focus here appears to be limited to concern for the individual, which is important but leaving the discussion there entirely Western. The Scriptures also speak to judgment on communities or nations, which at least suggests that there is a community spirit capable of being judged. With that, it appears that the nature and character of that community spirit would be comprised of its acts, which are really a composite of the actions of its individual members and the consequences of those acts. In light of my understanding of human beings, no community could ever operate with a wholly pure or a wholly impure motive. Getting back to the example of feeding the hungry child absent a G-d based motive, how does this effect the soul of the community? Hence the statement.
Robert
Paul
You said, “How does this effect the soul of the community?” At this point I am not able to answer that question, possibly because I do not completely understand the full scope of the question. Maybe others can jump in and give their insight and from their responses I may get a better grasp?
Here we go for my three questions this week!
It seems to me that there are two views ..poles apart!
One seems to state that Mitzvot is the way to complete the "whole" picture...without it we lose the whole and end up with "shreads and strands of the Law" (Dvd 3.3).Thus Mitzvot is more than obedience but a way to a wholeness in Jewish life.
In the DVD the phrase was used Torah and Mitzvot are " training in righteousness"
Along with this is the view that "credible Jewish communites " cannot be maintained without some form of Mitzvot.
On the other hand, we have the book of Galatians! And whether we like it or not..even if it's deadly uncomfortable we have to ask just how far can we justify any taking on of Mitzvot in the light of Rav' Saul's comments.
Gal.5:1 Stand firm..do not take on the yoke of slavery.."
Are we redeemed by Messiah or not?
Heb.7:11 Why did Christ come if the Law was sufficient?
Gal.3:3 Are you trying to attain your goal by human effort?
Even our celebrating Shabbat!!
Gal.4:10 "I fear for you with your keeping of special days ,months seasons,that you are being enslaved"
And then the passage from Heb 7:18 "..former Law is set aside to give way for a better hope ,better promises"
Why am I asking all this? Haven't we done this all a few weeks ago!
True! But unless we have this clear in our heads things get very very messy!
Furthermore,all that we have seen this week concerning Mitzvot must be firmly set in the context that it does not save, not one bit!
So the question for me is "is our faithfulness and willingness with Mitzvot credible in that we are not under the same obligation to it (for salvation) in comparision to certain segments of the wider Jewish community?
Another comment and phrase intrigued me on the DVD's and in the handouts:In Christian Theology the emphasis is to seek for perfection...in Jewish spirituality the "joy" is in the "doing",NOT eclipsed by failings,which are seen as opportunities to recommence.
This is certainly helpful in considering our walk in faith and the realities of our daily failings in interpreting Yeshua to the community.But this word "Joy" keeps coming up as though it is the barometer of correct and justifiable religious practice.Coming back to Mitzvah:Our "joy " comes in the doing even when imperfect.Further, Sonsino states with examples of Jews who have returned to observant behaviour, how "joy" was ,for some of them,there guiding factor to take on certain Mitzvah,despite opposition from family,etc.
How different is this from the account of ACTS 15:10 "it was a yoke that we and our fathers in faith have been UNABLE TO BEAR..."
Certainly very little "joy" in observance here!
Is there not the danger that were borrowing a little bit too much from Jewish spirituality that isn't informed with the complete picture (Salvation in Yeshua).
Are we walking G-d seeking and earnest believers along the path of Mitzvah a little too lightly...along a path that is inherently strewn with dangers of self-righteousness/ salvation by works/etc.
How is the wider Church going to interpret our lifestyle?
Isn't Messiah sufficient! could be an accusation thrown at us if we ask the majority of our members of our congregations to interact with Mitzvah in a concentrated and fervent manner?
One comment from Herschel in "Between G-d and Man" that I found interesting appears on page 161 and involves this question of "joy" "peace" in undertaking Mitzvah.." the vast numbers of Jews loyal to Jewish Law feel that many of the Rabbinic restrictions tend to impede rather than inspire greater joy and love of G-d"
"Do not consider the hedge more important than the vineyard was a warning that went unheeded by the rabbis.."
I think we have to be careful to sift through some of the rabbinic traditions attached to Mitzvah that may hinder us instead of propelling us towards HaShem...
I did the unthinkable this week and read two books offering a critique of the Messianic Movement.The Telchin book and the Moaz book! I was a little destabilised for a moment,and I honestly wouldn't suggest anyone read them,if they haven't already!
In the end it's a lot of hype about nothing!
Of course there will be differences but what both these authors haven't really addressed is the "calling" that is so evident around the world for so many to re-engage with the wider Jewish community,and interpreting Messiah to them.The way up to now hasn't really worked inspite of the reformation,vatican councils,charasmatic movements,etc.It would seem to me that the criticisms that both authors make predominately are situated on questions of unity in the church body and what reason could there be for Mitzvah in a Yeshua believers life.
I would suggest that these two writers turn to Herschel (page 164)
"It is a distortaion to think that Judaism consists of deeds...and to forget that the goal of all performing is the TRANSFORMATION
of the soul"
Yes,I know the Yeshua is the only one who can transform me completely amd without him my efforts are useless..but why are those who critique our movement so furious about practices that can "ready the soul in the SANCTIFICATION OF MAN THROUGH DEEDS" ...ready for the transforming power of Messiah?
There is no mention of any sanctification,transformation,etc in any of the two books concerning Mitzvah...just the dry retorts "Christians are freed by Messiah and should refuse these rabbinical practices as unneccessary and non Jewish (Moaz's argument that rabbinic Judaism is not Jewish!)
In response to Robert's question on the Herschel quotation on faith and purity of motivation:Of course,I agree with you,Faith is paramount.Works very important of course (James)..But in the reality, what happens! I'm not talking about what happens in theological discussions/etc but at a grass roots level..the level of practice of religion.Doesn't our faith tend to wane? and so quickly with the first wave of upsets or problems..and pure motivation...I'm not sure I've ever had it.So isn't this statement saying, that Judaism and the Rabbis counsel looked at the way things are IN REALITY, and peering into man's motives and heart found that actions, even divorced from motivation and intent,could offer the only way towards this sanctification and transformation of the soul that occurs with MITZVAH? In this way any religious system that pines it's hopes on man's faithfulness is doomed...even when the reward for faithfulness happens to be eternal promises made by an Almighty G-d...
Still mystified as to why some are so opposed to Mitzvah in a Jewish Christian lifestyle I came across these two Psalms by chance..
Psalm 92:5
"Truely your decrees and Laws are to be trusted
for "Holiness" is fitting to your house.(So we have an indication that Law certainly does bring holiness...)
Psalm 93:12
Happy the man that you teach, O L_RD
whom you train by means of your Law..(Thus the passage of Herschel "Training in righteousness)
If we're not going to go along with the "wholeness of Torah" as observant Jews engaged in Mitzvah,how can we read these passages..do we water them down,skip over them?
To John:
I understand your concern about "wandering down the path of mitzvot" lightly. But in as much as one can become distracted by righteousness, etc. through mitzvot, one can wander away and justify any action through "faith" and "the leading of the Holy Spirit." In the end, it comes down to something beneath the actions and the spoken intent. I believe Heschel is close to correct, if he hasn't hit the nail on the head. Love G-d, love your neighbor, and follow His instruction. As someone pointed out earlier, you will know them by their fruit.
Paul
“I understand your concern about "wandering down the path of mitzvot" lightly. But in as much as one can become distracted by righteousness, etc. through mitzvot, one can wander away and justify any action through "faith" and "the leading of the Holy Spirit." In the end, it comes down to something beneath the actions and the spoken intent. I believe Heschel is close to correct, if he hasn't hit the nail on the head. Love G-d, love your neighbor, and follow His instruction. As someone pointed out earlier, you will know them by their fruit.”
I would certainly agree with what you are saying. There needs to be a balanced approach here. Much of Heschel’s discussion on Halachah and Agadah speaks on these being interdependent. And basically what I see is that Halachah is God’s Word (the Torah, the Mitzvot) and Agadah is the Spirit-filled dynamic we experience as members of God’s kingdom, filled with the Ruach. When Yeshua says, “love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself,” he demonstrates that this is an attainable way of life. He demonstrated this because He himself lived it, but He lived this life because He was filled with the Spirit. Yeshua is the goal of the law. Living like he lived should be our aim.
And since we see this balance in His life – where He always did what pleased His father (obedience, mitzvoth), and walked in the power of the Spirit, we see that our lives cannot be one or the other. “Halakhah without Agadah is dead, and Agadah without Halakhah is wild.” It’s the two sides of the same coin. It’s the two halves of our lives, and both of these things, the Word of God and the
Questions:
1. Heschel pg. 164 ,”The Torah has no glory if man remains apart. The goal is for man to be an incarnation of the Torah; for the Torah to be in man, in his soul, and in his deeds."
Is it just me, or does it seem like Heschel is painting a picture of Yeshua, and calling us to do the same?
2. Heschel, pg 171, using the analogy of the king and his subjects, “Only after they have accepted my kingship will I issue decrees. For if they do not accept my kingship, how will they carry out my decrees?”
As I understand it, we take the yoke of God’s kingship upon ourselves when we receive Yeshua as our Lord and savior, then we are properly equipped to carry out the commands. Can you talk a bit about how this relates to an unsaved Jew (or gentile) who is seems to be carrying out the decrees of God, but in reality they have not accepted the Kingship of God’s Son?
3. Heschel page 164, “The main function of observance is in keeping us spiritually perceptive. Judaism is not interest in automatons.” I lean towards agreeing with this. Question though, is this a contradiction to being observant simply because it is commanded? Or is Heschel merely touching on an added benefit of observance?
Siddur Prayer Log 1:
I may have said this earlier, but I find the Siddur great for helping to focus prayer, both on the One we pray to, and on the needs that we actually present.
What I would like to see though is more New Covenant realities expressed in this material. For example, praise for the Spirit God has given us, or scriptures that speak of the healing Yeshua has provided for us – have this material incorporated into the Siddur. The scriptures carry Spiritual Legal weight that I feel can (or even should) be part of this time, and are instrumental for building our faith in the One we pray to.
With respect to Heschel, I found several statements quite thought provoking.
On page 184,he states that "living is not a private affair of the individual. Living is what man does with G-d's time, what man does with G-d's world". This really brings spirituality into perspective. The ususal tendency for us is to think that our life belongs to us to do with as we please and devoid of our coming to faith, this is indeed the pattern of us all. It even remains with us, even after coming to faith. However, when we realize that our lives are not for ourselves but for G-d's glory and that the time we have and the world and everything in is G-d's, it creates a whole different context and meaning for our lives. It brings the spirituality of our existence more into focus and the awareness of whom we are to serve and not vice versa!
"Yet spiritual life is not a dream and is in constant need of action" and "action is verifiction of the spirit". This smacks of James , where faith without actions is dead! It is too easy to profess faith and accept the atonement of Yeshua and accept the evangelical Christian position that we don't have to do anything else and that Yeshua has done it all. While that may be true that Yeshua did it all in that we certainly could not have achieved right standing with G-d on our own, it is certainly true that the Jeremiah 31:31 new covenant tells us that we would have G-d's instructions written on hearts of flesh and all would know him from the lesser to the greater and that the Holy spirit empowers us to be active in our faith and counteract the tendency to follow our natuarl proclivity.
I also thought his comments on the fact that "there is a perpetual danger of our observance and worship becoming mere habit, a mechanical performance. The fixed pattern and regularity of our services tend to stifle the spontaneity of devotion. Our great problem, therefore, is not to let the principle of regularity (keva) impair the power of spontaneity (kavannah). Further on, he posits an answer to this when he goes on to say, "the simplest way to obviate the problem is to abrogate the principle of regularity, to worship only when we are touched by the spirit and to observe only what is relevant to our minds. But in abrogating regularity, we deplete spontaneity. Our spiritual resources are not inexhaustable. What may seem to be spontaneous is in truth a response to an occasion. So there is a dialectic in operation here in that if you take away either keva or kavvanah, there is something missing or it breaks down. He further in an earlier statement on page 180 equates "being bound to an order and stability of observance to a discipline of worship at set hours and fixed norms is a celestial routine" akin to the ordinances such as the seasons etc. This I felt was quite a profound observation and viewpoint in that G-d has a fixed order and does not veer from it or else if everything in his creation ran on spontaneity or a whim it would be quite chaotic. I t brings to question, is spontaneity really equal to kavvanah or intent? Or does a fixed order really bring out the kavvanah in due course?
In response to Rober's comments on Rogers questions in the lecture. Or should I rephrase that and just ask the question again,"where does that leave the Church"? with respect to calling?
It seems that Paul is writing halakhahic standards for the Gentiles coming into the Body and a lot of what he writes seems to be polemical to Torah but isn't it really polemical in the sense that he is telling these new Gentile believers that they don't have to be Jews?
Also, does anyone believe that somehow what we see today especially in the evangelical Christian mold is not what the early Body of Believers was like before Constantine made it into a universal religion. I would not be surprised the much of the early Gentile Believers were on the same page somehow with their Jewish brothers with respect to spiritual standards of observance and worship until the whole anti-Judaic thing got started.
The whole aspect of mitzvot observance and living a Torah observant life style for Messianic Jews seems to be in keeping with the book of Acts. It doesn't negate Yeshua. But how do the Gentiles fit into all this specifically in regard to the question,which is how are they suppose to make the Jews jealous for their Messiah? which is pointed out by Rav Shaul in Romans.
This is my thinking on this touchy question of differences between Jew and Gentile members and their respective obligations in the Messianic community.
For me it's clear:Acts 15:7-11 Why ,the, do you put G-d to the test by considering the imposition of a yoke which neither our Fathers or us have been able to bear" This is eithe scriture or it is not.
Further,There is no mention whatever of marvellous insights that Gentiles would recieve if they held on to Torah and kept the tradition.
Perhaps , the crux is why believing in Yeshua should lead anyone to adopt national customs and identity?
If no advantage is taken from the following of ritual practices that are linked to Jewish customs for the Jews ,why should non-Jews feel that for them it will bring some sort of advantage spiritually?
R.Staurt spoke of "credible Jewish communities".But this can only ever be a dream if those "credible Jewish communities" are Jewish(made up of Jews).
Maybe I've missed the point completely, but it seems to me that to avoid ridicule in the movement from mainstream Jewish communities,non-Jewish bretheren practicing Jewish rituals and living under the obligation of Mitzvah gives a very fuzzy message.The Rabbis must find it wierd that someone would want to imitate being a Jew!Why?
Certainly,paul says that there's no difference between Gentile and Jew,male and female..it doesn't me I should become like a woman!!
I haven't,I must admit,grasped the pull of gentiles to adopt Jewish practices/Mitzvah ,and why a full gentile congregational life can't be fully lived in a christian church..
I suppose I'm a steadfast Brian Stokes supporter,(the center of all believers life must be the christian church..national ethnicity must never be a point of difference)
In response to Nathaniel's question:
I have also had the same thought as yourself in that maybe the Siddur that we use as Yeshua believers should include many more New covenant passages and teachings...and not only in a hidden discrete way! We should not be ashamed of being Jewish and of the gospel...
I sometimes have the impression that the Siddur as an aid to daily prayer is great but must be reinforced with the teachings,instructions lessons of Yeshua and from new covenant sources.
Shouldn't the Movement as a whole advocate a Messianic Siddur?
Why are we content with only half the picture?
I think Jeremiah Greenberg has produced some sort of Messianic Siddur...but it's must shorter(doesn't have the full Amidah) for most of the prayers
Firstly..hope I didn't OFFEND any of you guys with my last comments on the Gentile/Jew issues in terms of Mitzvah!
Secondly,just for the records..I haven't adopted an anti-Messianic stance..In fact, I think that what most people fail to see with teshuvah amongst Jews coming back to Torah/Mitzvot,etc is the eschatological sitution.We are in different times than first century Christianity,we also believe we have been called to follow a distinct Jewish lifestyle..not for ourselves but for our people,in some way inciting them to come back to HIM who they reject.I don't know how all of this fits together,but it seems to me that the two critiques that I read this week(Telchin/Moaz) are very fluent on destroying the movement but very VERY scanty on where to go forward in the wake of the movements disappearance.It is early days yet...and we won't get everything right..but I DO believe Yeshua is announced by our being more involved with Mitzvot/Torah..by the transformation that these deeds have on our own day to day life.
Proclaim Yeshua..Of course..
but sanctify your very banal day to day actions that go with that proclamation.
In this ,for me ,is the answer to the question of whether a good dead is good because of the intent or the action.We have to look at the whole context of the life in which the action is carried out
To Nathaniel's reply on Halakhah:
What a brillaint phrase:"Halakah without Agadah is dead,and Agadah without Halakhah is wild"! Reminds me what happened when the Toronto blessing fell on some churches and members became roaring lions,eagles,birds,etc!!
But seriously,I couldn't help thinking that Yeshua also said "Be perfect as your Father is perfect".Is this ever attainable?Why say it if it is not possible?It maybe because it is again one of those "spirit of the Law" questions...the "Intent".To love your God with all your heart and neighbour as yourself is the endpoint..but will we ever attain it in this world?..why offer the unattainable as standard?
This clears up the issue for me with the Herschel statement on the supposition that religion based on purity of intent is doomed to failure.He's being real...this will never be completely attainable in this life...and thankfully Yeshua has relieved us of the guilt surrounding this deficit,by redeeming the situation once and for all.
John:
"To love your God with all your heart and neighbour as yourself is the endpoint..but will we ever attain it in this world?..why offer the unattainable as standard?"
My view on this is that is a reality that is attainable! I like what it says in Hebrews that God, "through one sacrifice (Yeshua), has made perfect forever those who are being made Holy." (hebrew 10:14)
I probably quoted this passage before, but this I believe answers the question: We are perfect forever in God's eyes, and we are being made Holy. God sees the finished product (us perfected) and we are able to have those breakthroughs by the power of the Spirit.
I am sure we all have had those moments where we KNOW we are doing God's perfect will, and God is able to do something awesome through US!
So Yeshua always walked in this perfection, and I believe that we CAN, but it's a process that has a lot of give and take.
One thing I feel that is needed to be pointed out. It is my understanding that the Jewish concept of G-d's redemption and salvation is simply trusting that He will and that this too is a mitzvah.
My three Questions:
Q1) Do you feel there are aspects of the Siddur that non-Jews should not pray (besides the main bracha in Birchot HaShachar that thanks G-d for not having made me a gentile)?
Q2) Are there any brachot you feel we as Messianic Jews should not recite (like birkat haminim)?
Q3) Do you feel there is a need for Messianic Siddurim? And if so why and what differences should they contain?
Post a Comment