Guder extensively explores what is meant by the gospel. Much that he says is instructive for the Messianic Jewish movement, either by way of agreement or by way of contrast.
He reminds us that the gospel is first of all “the gospel of God,” “the good news of God.” He sees the gospel as a message of God’s goodness, “a goodness which God has made known, has revealed, and which defines God’s purposes” (29). And because of Israel’s history with God, the gospel is not the first good news of God: “God’s people have experienced this goodness; it has been Israel’s gospel from the call of Abraham onward. . . . Through the particular encounter of God with Israel, the good news that God is loving and purposeful enters into human history and becomes knowable” (29). I would certainly add to this, that Israel’s good news has also always been that God is Redeemer. Therefore, using a bracket, I would modify one of Guder’s cogent statements as follows: “Jesus’ coming and his message are good news, as it has always been good news when God [comes to rescue his people and] makes God’s self and purposes known” (30).
Due to its pervasive supersessionist world-view, missiology in general fails to note how Israel’s experience with God is a proleptic foretaste of the gospel. Coining the term “crypto-supersessionism” might be of help here, which term means “supersessionist presuppositions functioning at a subconscious world-view level which, while unacknowledged, become evident in their effects.” Such crypto-supersessionism is evident even in dispensationalist Jewish mission circles where supersessionism per se is flatly rejected. Even in these circles, crypto-supersessionism is known by its fruits: anti-rabbinism, anti-nomianism, and anti-Judaism. Due to such assumptions, both the Jewish missions culture and the church fail to take due note of Israel’s repeated and continuing experiences with “the gospel of God,” when God has come to rescue his people and make himself and his purposes known. These experiences are proleptic, that is, they anticipate the greater good news that comes through and with Yeshua the Messiah.
This connection between Israel’s prior and ongoing experience with God and the gospel of Yeshua the Messiah requires that all conceive of the gospel presented to the Jewish people as “more of the same (that Israel has known) and much more than that.” This viewpoint highlights the tension between continuity and discontinuity, between oldness and newness, that must be maintained if we would rightly testify to the works of God.
Once one grasps this principle, this paradigm of continuity/discontinuity, oldness/newness, “more of the same and much more than that, becomes apparent in Scripture.
For example, when God calls Moses in Exodus 3, especially verses 5-10, and as expanded in Exodus 6:1-9, he establishes that this good news, this gospel, is both what they have experienced before (I am the LORD [who] appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty [vv. 2-3], and yet something new, (“but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them”) [verse 3b).
Of many other passages that could be cited, Isaiah 63:7ff., so beautiful, it breaks the heart, speaks perhaps most poignantly of the continuity of God’s past mercies as a ground of hope for deliverance now.
7 I will recount the steadfast love of the LORD, the praises of the LORD, according to all that the LORD has granted us, and the great goodness to the house of Israel which he has granted them according to his mercy, according to the abundance of his steadfast love. 8 For he said, Surely they are my people, sons who will not deal falsely; and he became their Savior. 9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old. 10 But they rebelled and grieved his holy Spirit; therefore he turned to be their enemy, and himself fought against them. 11 Then he remembered the days of old, of Moses his servant. Where is he who brought up out of the sea the shepherds of his flock? Where is he who put in the midst of them his holy Spirit, 12 who caused his glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them to make for himself an everlasting name, 13 who led them through the depths? Like a horse in the desert, they did not stumble. 14 Like cattle that go down into the valley, the Spirit of the LORD gave them rest. So thou didst lead thy people, to make for thyself a glorious name.
15 Look down from heaven and see, from thy holy and glorious habitation. Where are thy zeal and thy might? The yearning of thy heart and thy compassion are withheld from me. 16 For thou art our Father, though Abraham does not know us and Israel does not acknowledge us; thou, O LORD, art our Father, our Redeemer from of old is thy name. 17 O LORD, why dost thou make us err from thy ways and harden our heart, so that we fear thee not? Return for the sake of thy servants, the tribes of thy heritage. 18 Thy holy people possessed thy sanctuary a little while; our adversaries have trodden it down. 19 We have become like those over whom thou hast never ruled, like those who are not called by thy name.
The language contrasts the light of God’s steadfast love—hesed—and the darkness of Israel’s turning away, spoken of here in such relational terms—“Surely they are my people, sons who will not deal falsely; and he became their Savior” (v. 8). Notice the echoes of the Exodus here, and of the language and the message of Moses’ call, “In all their affliction he was afflicted . . . in his pity he redeemed them . . he lifted them and carried them all the days of old” (See also Psalms 105-106).
The Isaiah passage speaks of continuity and discontinuity, of (incipient) promise and fulfillment, of the mercies of the past, the troubles of the present, and the hope of new good news from God. Past, present, future, all intermingle in this paean of praise to Israel’s God. After reviewing God’s history with Israel and theirs with Him (vv. 7-10), the passage speaks in verses 1 to 14 of how later deliverances where grounded in the precedent God’s mercies in the Exodus and wilderness wanderings. This again echoes the rhythm of God’s dealings, continuity/discontinuity, oldness/newness, more of the same and much more than that. Then, in verses 15-19, the prophet applies this pattern to the current dilemma of God’s people, using language intermingling past and present, toward the hopes of a new redeemed future.
All of this calls for a dramatic redrawing of the approach long favored by the Jewish missions culture and church whereby the Older Testament is seen primarily as prophetically predicting the realities of which the Newer Testament speaks. Such an approach is crypto-supersessionist when and where it assumes that the Older Testament is but a preparation for the Newer. It relegates the people of the Older Testament, and by extension the Jewish people throughout time, to the status of preparation but not the status of participation. Without disparaging Messianic prophecy as a phenomenon, the patterns of Scripture and the texture of God’s dealings mandate that we also see the Older Testament as more of the same that the church knows as the gospel, “the good news of God.” Against the background of a religious culture which has become habituated in seeing the Jewish people as fundamentally lost, without hope, and without God in the world, (terms Paul properly applied to pagans), the church, the Jewish missions culture, and Messianic Judaism must learn to see Jewish people as “God’s good news people,” that people who have repeatedly experienced, remembered, and anticipated “the good news of God.” In fact, if the Jewish people were not God's good news people, there would be no good news from God for the rest of the world!
Am I saying that we therefore ought not to “bother the Jewish people with our Jesus?” Emphatically, No! Do we have anything new, important and crucial to say to the Jewish world? Emphatically, Yes! But in all our saying, we must deeply know that the Jewish people are “the good news people.” It is the habit of the church and missions culture to view Jews as bad news people. According to this construct, all Jews are necessarily going to hell, except those few who believe in Jesus—that’s bad news; the Jews have a leadership that fails to lead tem toward God, and seeks to prevent their finding His embrace through Yeshua the Messiah—also bad news; their religion is one of fruitless legalism and rule-keeping devoid of the power of the Spirit and the relational reality only possible through Yeshua the Messiah—bad news for the Jews again. The church, especially the conservative church, and missions culture seem to be negative about the Jewish people’s spiritual prospects and spiritual experience. This theme plays like a tape loop in the actions and theologizing of supersessionist and crypto-supersessionist Christianity. Missing from this message is the awareness that the Jews have long acquaintance with good news from God. As mentioned earlier in my adaptation from Guder, “Jesus’ coming and his message are good news, as it has always been good news when God [comes to rescue his people and] make God’s self and purposes known” (30). And this is good news for the Jewish people, not merely “as well,” but actually, God’s good news first for the Jews, for the Jews have always been God’s good news people, and the bearers of that good news for the rest of the world.
When we present the gospel of Yeshua the Messiah to Jews, we ought to highlight the continuity of this gospel not simply with Jewish prophecy, but with Jewish communal experience throughout time and to the present day. For example, is not the founding of the Modern State of Israel, the regathering of Jews from the four corners of the earth, and related matters good news from God? Of course it is!
In this regard, it is proper to insert just one word in the song of Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people [again], and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David, as he spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old, that we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all who hate us; to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant, the oath which he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him all the days of our life.”
In Yeshua the Messiah the God of Israel has kept his promise to his people, and not to them alone. It is best that we consider these mercies as an occasion when God has done it again, and has outdone himself. It is a Dayenu experience! God did this, then this, then that, then this, but now he has outdone himself yet again.
The good news of Yeshua is not the first good news from God that the Jewish people ever heard. Rather, this is more of the same and yet, much more than that!
21 comments:
Robert –
The following words from R. Stuart are compelling, “The good news of Yeshua is not the first good news from God that the Jewish people ever heard. Rather, this is more of the same and yet, much more than that!
I find this as a refreshing insight in a day where majorities in the church world see God’s people as a thing of the past. Although, I do see a reasonably good shift in the evangelical thinking that do see the Jewish people as the “good news people.”
Am I correct in saying that much of the church and possibly some within our movement see the “good news” as translated “I am going to heaven?” Is this thinking possibly a form of escapism from this place called earth where Yeshua’s coming to earth was to get us out of this place? This thinking is more along the lines of an oxymoron.
I am curious to ask the question, what was the outlook or expectation in first century Judaism regarding the “good news” of Yeshua? I know they were expecting a king to rule and reign which transpired in a different way than expected, but how did this concept of “good news” get so far from its original intention? Was it redemption alone that our people were expecting, which is linked to the blog quote, “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people [again]” or was it a compilation of other expectations that many seem to miss due to the supersessionist world-view and/or the “crypto-supersessionism” mindset?
Our good friend Robert asks some characteristically good questions: "
Am I correct in saying that much of the church and possibly some within our movement see the “good news” as translated “I am going to heaven?” Is this thinking possibly a form of escapism from this place called earth where Yeshua’s coming to earth was to get us out of this place? This thinking is more along the lines of an oxymoron."
I have long been wondering about the emphasis on "find heaven/avoid hell" as the center of evangelistic concern. From what I can tell, while the Bible primarily spoke of hell as the final abode of the doggedly wicked, and medieval thought concentrated on hell as the place of punishment for wicked Christians, it was with the birth of the modern missionary movement in the 18th century, that hell came to the forefront of Christian concern. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, through entrepreneurial exploraton, Eurpope became more aware of the world outside--of other cultures, etc. With this came a burgeoning interest in the fate of the heathen.
By the mid to late 18th century, with the Moravians, the Wesleyans, And Catholic missions of various kinds, and especially with the writings and career of William Carey, the father of modern missions, the plight of the heathen, dwelling in darkness, pouring over the precipice into a Christless eternity, became the primary motivation for generations of brave and dedicated, holy missionaries.
I believe this missionary motivation has been transferred into Jewish missions as not merely a component but as central. Due to supersessionism and crypto-supersessionism, little if any thought has been given to whether it is either proper, biblical or accurate to speak of Israel, especially religious Israel, dwelling in heathen darkness. After all, these are a people who hae honored the One True God for three millennia and more!
At any rate, for a variety of reasons, I question the *centrality* of hell in the Jewish missions context. Is is a motivation better suited to another place, another people, and another time.
As for your second question, concerning the Jewish expectation at the time of Jesus, this is a BIG question, and much has been written of late on the matter. Perhaps I will track down some of the prime books on the matter and refer you to them.
Meanwhile, thanks for the great questions.
Stuart
As Robert said this is a refreshing way of looking at things,in simple terminology.
I differ slightly on this phrase "more of the same and yet,much more than that"
Going through writings by the holy Rabbi Nachman I came across a chapter explaining how G-D NEVER does the same things or similar things..there is always a wonderous freshness in all things in creation(Sichos Ha Ran 54).
I also was mesmorised by a passage in the Sanhedrin (37a) "The world was created for me ..for G-D made the perfection of the entire universe dependant upon the souls of Jewish people..in this way the Jewish people are considered partners with G-d in the act of creation" GOOD NEWS!!
"I am black ,but beautiful"(song of songs 1-5)The Midrash states "I may be black(with sin) and thus like children of Cush, in my own eyes, but I am beautiful to my creator as being one the Children of Israel..G-d's love and covenant unbreakable"(Shir Ha shirim Rqabbah 1.35)GOOD NEWS!
"If Jews only knew the love G-D has for Israel they would run like lions after him"..(sacred ZOHAR 2.5B)
"A portion of G-d is within each child of Israel,and upon him depends the repair of all the worlds..."(Likutey Moharan 1.33/11:7)GOOD NEWS!
It would seem to me,that we speak very broadly of the big events in the bible and in a way that pushes, exclusively, the view that all leads to the birth of Messiah and his saving and redemptive act.But by doing this we may influence our congregations to skim over the Jewish worldview of their redemptive purposes in leading lives that honour Hashem and that are also very important, in some mysterious way, to the redemption of our world.
I've been struck this last week ,in scrutinizing Luke,how Yeshua had an enormous respect for the Jewish elders of his day(I gave the example yesterday of luke 7:1-10).And so should we! One only has to turn to the pages written by R.Steinsaltz(on the internet under the Aleph society) to know how much wisdom and compassion pours from this fellow.However,I think you would get a lot of "raised eyebrows" form the Evangelical world if you identify Traditional Jews as the "Good News" people!! Aren't Evangelicals custodians of the phrase?
Does traditional Judaism have the right to be called the "Good News"?
After all how can it be GOOD if it has missed the main point??
I think we have to be clear on this, otherwise we fall into the paradigm that Telchin criticises so vehemently.Yeshua can't become an option for us ..or for our outreach mindset.We can't waterdown the message..
Saying this I think we can announce the "GOOD NEWS" that we as a people have been very specially selected to reveal the workings of G-d in the world..if we turn to HIM.
"BETTER NEWS" is the coming and sacrifice of Messiah,it is sure,but one angle shouldn't necessarily have to eclipse the other.
Word of warning:Look at what Yeshua states to the Pharisees and Law makers(Whilst he was the invited guest..He sure picked his situations!!):
"Woe to you Pharisees and experts in the Law...because you have taken away the key of knowledge..you yourselves have not entered and you stop others entering also"(Luke 11:52)
Woe to us also(I imagine) if we don't announce Yeshua to our Jewish brothers and sisters and offer only Good news when it should be "Better news"..
I've just read R.Dauerman's inpu to Robert's question as to how we all got so pre-occupied with Hades,and who is or is not going to be saved.
It's just an inkling of mine,so it might not be founded on historical fact, but didn't a predominatly salvationist viewpoint to missions,and an over-emphasise on our neighbours destiny towards Hell/Hade /sheol come from a renewed eschatological viewpoint and interaction with the book of revelation and espesially REV 20:11? (the lake of suplhur/second death for those who hadn't got their names in the book of life)
+ Rev 12.17 +Then the dragon made off to make war against all who obey G-D's commandments AND give testimony to Jesus.."
John asks, "Does traditional Judaism have the right to be called the "Good News"?"
Well, this just goes to show you how careful one has to be in writing and interpreting! I never said that traditional Judaism is THE good news, although certainly it IS good news (see Romans 3:1 ff. for example). I said that the Jewish community has frequently been recipients of the good news of God--God's acts of remdemption, deliverance, intervention, revelation on their behalf.
What is called for here is balance! In thought, and certainly in feeling, much of Christendom and of the MJ Movement thinks that the ONLY good news there is the deliverance from damnation available to those who explicitly accept Jesus as their personal Saviour, and that any who have not done so, from headhunters, to murders, to Abraham Joshua Heschel are equally and universally people for whom the only news is bad news. This is, in my view, ham-fisted thinking, and certainly not biblical (Remember: "What advantage has the Jew? Much in every way!"; "He came and preached peace to those who were near (the Jews) and to those who were far off (the Gentiles"; from Paul's point of view, and from the vantage point of Scripture, the Jewish people remain a people of covenant and privilege. This is not to say that Christ and faith in him is extraneous in their case!
You say, "Yeshua can't become an option for us ..or for our outreach mindset.We can't waterdown the message."
And I have not done this. Again, your objection is based on a kind of all or nothing viewpoint that is foreign to Scripture and out of harmony with the tensions found in the text. Remember in my view, Scripture is full of such tensions which must be maintained: the tension between predestination and free will, betweeen the Jews being "hated for your (the Gentiles') sake" while also being "beloved for the sake of the Fathers," etc. We must maintain balance, without negating either pole. Look up the term antimony-very often this is what we are dealing with, an antimony.
As for your passionate woes to us about not preaching the gospel, they are heard and received. However, the way the gospel is usually preached to the Jewish people is against the background of a negating dismissal of all of their privileges, and a glib pronouncement of doom upon almost all of their ancestors.
I am arguing for presentation of the gospel to Jewish people which affirms the way of life we received from our ancestors, directs us to it, which commmends the much more that we have in Messiah, and which, imagine this, leaves to God the fate of those who went before. What a concept!
As for John's statement, " . . didn't a predominantly salvationist viewpoint to missions,and an over-emphasise on our neighbours destiny towards Hell/Hades /sheol come from a renewed eschatological viewpoint and interaction with the book of Revelation and espesially REV 20:11? (the lake of suplhur/second death for those who hadn't got their names in the book of life)", the question is not "What proof text is used for this position," but rather, "How did this text and position become so central?" While it MAY, as you suggest be due to a renewed interest in eschatology, the text which you adduce is most interesting. Look what it says is the basis for judgment:
Rev 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it; from his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, and all were judged by what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; 15 and if any one's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
It is curious that all, or nearly all NT texts on judgment revolve around assessment of deeds done. Therefore, texts like this are not strong ones upon which to base an "accept Jesus or go to hell" position.
Also germane to the discussion, from Rev 21:7 He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son. 8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death."
These terms generally describe the commitedly wicked--the demonstrably corrupt. Whether the lake of fire awaits those pious Jews who did not believe in Jesus is something some people may wish to argue, but can such a position reasonably be done from these texts? Can it not be argued that God does or even may have something else in store for the committedly righteous and faithful, who followed the God of their Fathers with determination even if not perfectly?
And ought we not to present the gospel to them as the validation of their holy tradition and as the reward for their faithfulness, rather than as the holy something next to which they have precisely nothing, desite their allegiance to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?
Again, I would be the LAST to argue against evangelizing our people. But I would be the FIRST to say that the way we normally do so is bad news for the Jews.
As far as the "Good News" goes, it has been, in the mainstream Jewish paradigm, nothing but bad news - hence the "no" to Messiah. Thankfully, it is changing, albeit slowly.
Turning to "evalgelizing the Jews," I cannot say I am for it or against it. It all depends on what you mean by the term. If you mean that you have to make "accepting Jesus" an unavoidable issue and that "if you don't, you are headed to hell." Which, by the way, implies that your dearly departed are already roasting despite their good life and love of the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, then I am staunchly opposed. It just doesn't work, even if it were true. All that this kind of approach does is to further galvanize unbelieving Jews against Yeshua. So this is clearly the wrong answer.
So how do we reach out, or rather, in? The Jewish people are "us" so aren't we "in-reaching?" Rabbis Dauermann and Kinzer are correct in that we are in a post-missionary phase and we have to adjust accordingly. We are in the midst of drastic change and need to keep our wits about us. If R. Dauermann is correct, and I believe he is, that we are near the end of the fullness of the Gentiles and are transitioning in to the fullness of the Jews, then we need to expect that we will be in process. As one of my instructors once told me, "The only easy day was yesterday." There is much to consider here and I know that I will finish this course with more questions than answers. With that, there are three basic areas of knowledge each of us posses - what we know that we know, what we know that we don't know, and what we don't know that we don't know. I suspect that the third area is growing slightly smaller while the second seems to be growing exponentially.
The notes from R. Stuart are a refreshing insight into the present situation. I had never heard the term crypto-supersessionsism before and am in strong agreement about the fruits of it as has clearly been manifested as R. Stuart has indicated by anti-rabbinism, anti-nomianism and anti-Judaism in dispensationalist Jewish mission circles. The experiences of Israel as proleptic forecast of the gospel and the furtherance of this by Israel's communal experience of the founding of the Modern State of Israel, regathering of Jews from the four corners of the earth and related matters as a fulfillment of prophecy and as an experienced good news is really quite profound and a very vivid distinct reality staring us in the face.
It seems that somehow the evangelical missions thing has taken alife of its own and has given an interpretive schema that somehow omits what Rav Shaul states in Romans 11:25, the mystery that a partial hardening has happened to Israel UNTIL the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; v 26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it has been written, and so on as Shaul explains the ongoing mystery. I believe that this is so overlooked even by those who say they are supportive of Israel or crypto-supersessionists! I believe this mystery is going to be played out in a big way which again is good news and that the Church will begin learning from a paradigm shift which is badly needed in the Gentile church body.
Cornelius - Thank you for your kind words. By the way, the reason you have never heard of crypto-supersessionsm before is that I just coined the term. I am researching a writing a book, and in the midst of it all, have devised this term and its definition to call attention to a usually hidden reality germane to discussing the state of matters.
Hello all:
I have been following this ongoing discussion carefully and my reactions have ranged from shocked, to appreciative, to self-reflective.
As we are talking about the very important issues of evangelism, Gentile believers in the Messianic community and our witness to the larger Jewish population (as members of the Jewish population) - all of these issues are emotional, which makes it hard to be totally open to change, and moreover, makes opinions that seem totally opposite very difficult to swallow.
I am still digesting much of the dialogue, but I want to touch on 2 main points that have been shared.
1. Carl had an extremely refreshing and outside the box recommendation
"So the issue really comes down to: What becomes of preponderantly Gentile congregations, especially with a Gentile leader?
IMO, the answer is NOT to close the doors but for such congregations to take a deep and serious look at their own communal identity -- who they really are as a people"
Wow! What a great and honest way of doing things. I do not know of any scriptural backing for this course of action, but it resonates with my spirit. (As an aside Carl - I am very interested in any of the underlying scriptures that support this way of doing things)
I would have thought that by now my identity was fully shaped, but as I get a bit older (I am 25 now), the Lord is showing me areas that need some adjusting. It's not fun - but it's necessary for growth - as a movement, this honesty is very important and I look forward to how God moves us fresh in this area.
2. Roberts comments on Gentile leadership in the movement.
"There are those gentiles who will align themselves to the movement and I think they will be to our benefit if they are given correct understanding from the beginning."
Education is extremely important for all leadership. And especially for Gentiles who feel called to live amongst the Jewish people, their education is especially relevant because the additional knowledge will help bring clarity to their specific calling.
Question to go along with the observation: "What are the proper forums for educating. Are theological training and messages straight from the pulpit the only recognized options, or are there others that I am not entirely aware of?
Thanks R.dauerman for your great ways of clarifying issues!!
Whilst I take the point on antimony and the "tension" that is present all through the Tanakh and Brit Chadashah,(predestination/free will,Hate/love,Good news/more Good news)I feel personnlly that the word "tensiondraws into to the argument a sense of opposing forces that may not be explicitly there.Maybe all what we see and interpret as tension is in fact part of the "Mystery" of faith that one just has to accept.We'll never understand or have a theologyoverwhelming enough to put all the peices of the puzzle together...
I especially liked your last paragraph which cleared up the issue for me:"The presentation of the Gospel that affirms the life recieved from our ancestors,directs to it and leaves to G-d the fate of those who went before.."
This sums it up for me.But them we have to ask ourselves do we really outreach to our people in a way that affirms the life recieved from our ancestors?And why wouldn't we want to do it in such a way?
Probably because we have in the back of our minds the realisation that when we bring Jewish people to know Yeshua we also are asking them to give up much(Family ,friends,Yeshiva's,Chabad schools for their Kids,the synagogue..the very hearth of the Jewish soul)
I was referee at a football match today,strangely enough at a Lubervitch school...As I looked at all those guy's playing in the team,I couldn't help feeling so sad for any that would come to Yeshua!!They would probably have to leave all their friends,maybe even move to another neighbourhood,certainly bear the brunt of much mockery...And on the "Other side" would they find their place..In either a Christian church or Messianic community? BIG question.
I found myself,I'm ashamed to say,toying with the idea that the best way forward maybe to to live as "Hidden christians" in the Jewsih community...although I know that wouldn't be an asnwer either.
So doesn't that leave us with,in a way,the ONLY posible evangelical path interms of outreach:By example.Hand on heart ,I can honestly say that I don't think we HAVE to mention Yeshua at all..if not asked(Telchin and Moaz would have a fit if they were aware of what I ve just written).
As debate,and intensely interesting food for thought,these are vital questions:
Defending our viewpoints or putting these ideas,even those of the "Good News" across to our congregations is quite another matter however!!
Thanks R dauerman for the thoughts on REV. I hadn't noticed that the passage talked about deeds almost exclusively...
Of course ,the other thing that we have to think through is "How to go about bringing Yeshua to traditional Jews
I can't go down the "Jews for Jesus" road and hand out fliers in the street..the idea of taking Jews away from their traditional lifestyle seems to be verging on the sinful to me.So how? Messianic music? Most of it is pretty devoid of any traditional basis as well,and verges on Gospel,although I don't put down any music that seeks to worship G-D.
So what tools are available,and what approach? Any down-to-earth offers?
I've just reread Romans 11:16-32 and have answered my own question:
"If the Hallah ,the firstfruit is holy the rest is holy too"It is that stoniness has come upon Israel until the Gentile world enters it's fullness..then all Israel will also enter into salvation...(Stern)
This seems to me to mean that, perhaps,evangelisaton is but part of the story..there is a hidden plan and timetable that is operating without us...which would seem to plead for us to maintain a holy and righteousness Jewish lifestyle as honouring G-d,with the rest up to Hashem,blessed be his name.
It just so happens that I also just finished reading "Faith or Fear - How Jews Can Survive in an Christian America" at about the same time we conclud this discussion.
First, I highly recommend the book. The informaion is well presented and balanced. As R. Dauermann said on DVD, his conclusion is inescapable. I will further say that there are other sources, such as R. Jason Sobel's article, "A Sketch of a Better Tomorrow" published in Issue 21 of Kesher, that lend further credence to Mr. Abrams' compelling conclusion.
The jury is in. The only vehicle that carries the Jewish community into the future is Judaism - the response to G-d by faithfully observing His Torah, written and oral. While the thought of Torah observance may cause some to believe that we are somehow forsaking what Yeshua has done for us, per Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the fruit of the Holy Spirit is Torah observance. What is more, Yeshua bids us to follow Torah. So in seeking to respond to G-d through Torah is really d'vekut upon Yeshua and is a form of the manifestation of the Ruach HaKodesh as well as making a mishkan for it. And in fixing this as our Polar Star by which we should be guided in our Spirituality, are we not responding to G-d as He has asked us to? In light of Abrams/Sobel, in responding to G-d in this way, not only are we showing our love for Him, we are also maintaining the only vehicle that has show itself capable of carrying the Jewish community into the future. Turn any other way and we carry those with us into obscurity.
Turning more specifically to the Messianic community, we have to respectfully and meaningfully address the issue of Gentiles in our movement. Underlying this is the issue of honesty in identity as individuals, congregations, and as a movement. Along with that goes understanding and meeting our responsibilities in light of our identity. If we do not address this, then we are neglecting, in significant part for our movement, to address what it means to obey Torah, the only vehicle proven to carry us, as a community, into the future.
I don't want to insert myself unduly into the class discussion, but Nathaniel asked a question that I should respond to.
I had suggested that congregations "take a deep and serious look at their own communal identity – who they really are as a people". Nathaniel commented, "Wow! What a great and honest way of doing things. I do not know of any scriptural backing for this course of action, but it resonates with my spirit."
First of all, thanks for the "Wow," Nathaniel. That suggestion sometimes provokes a very different reaction.
Stuart notes in a comment that the same search applies to individuals – we all need to know if we are Jew or Gentile. If in doubt, and under certain conditions, IMO conversion to Judaism should be an option (for most, this would be within Messianic Judaism, and the issue is identity and NOT whether other Jews accept the convert).
The idea of communal identity permeates the Scriptures. God chose Israel not as an aggregate of individuals, but as a people (Am Yisrael), one of the nations of the earth. God made a covenant and gave the Torah to this people and a fabric of communal obligations and privileges. The Scriptures everywhere speak of Israel and the Nations & Jews and Gentiles with Torah in mind.
In Shaul’s letters to the Romans, he speaks of the Jews and Gentiles within the city-wide congregation as forming distinct groups and has a distinct message for each. Back then, almost everyone knew which group they were a part of. That is not the case in our movement, but individual identity is not the focus here. Let’s assume that individual identity has been clarified. The question is then: is this community (this congregation) predominantly Jewish or predominantly Gentile? For the sake of simplicity I will eliminate congregations in the gray area. On what Scriptural basis do we make this move to examine our communal identity?
The Scriptural basis for examining ourselves as communities is that Torah is not only an individual but a communal obligation. Torah has been given to Jews and not to Gentiles (though there is certainly an overlap of obligations that apply to both: love of God and neighbor; do not kill or steal; do not eat meat with the blood still in it; etc.). It is therefore of utmost importance for a congregation to know its identity because it needs to know whether it is communally responsible to keep Torah.
A majority Jewish congregation is communally responsible to keep Torah and contextualize its relationship with God and others through Torah as applied to Jews in the Apostolic Writings. In other words, having received Yeshua as Messiah, such Jews remain under the same communal obligation as other Jews. In such a congregation, Gentiles are like the God-fearers of Second Temple times, though joined through Yeshua to the Jewish members as one body of believers. Because this course is in “Messianic Jewish Spirituality”, this kind of congregation is of particular concern.
I don’t see in Scripture any obligation for a majority Gentile congregation to keep Torah. It is obliged to contextualize its relationship to God and others through the lens of the Apostolic Writings, but outside the realm of the Torah. (The presence of Jews in such a congregation leads to the issue of how a Jewish minority can express its communal identity and keep its covenant obligations in the midst of a Gentile congregation.)
One of the problems we encounter in grasping this scenario is that we tend to view relationship with God in very individualistic terms. A bunch of individuals make up the congregation. Scripturally (as brought out strongly in the Jewish tradition), it is the opposite. God relates to individuals in communal context. The Tanakh is filled with scriptures about God relating to Israel as a people. When we read the Tanakh, we often focus on individuals, missing the crucial fact that, beginning with Abraham, the lives of individuals are recorded only in the context of their participation in, and importance to, the Jews as a people. We should focus not only on their individual character traits but the embedding of their personalities and lives in the communal reality of Israel.
It is for these reasons (and more) that the voice of Scripture cries out for our congregations, our communities, to find themselves, to know their identity.
I realize that this comment probably brings up more questions than it answers, and I will be unable to add additional comments.
As MJTI Provost I am available as a student advisor to our degree students and those considering becoming degree students. Feel free to email me any time at ckinbar@mjti to discuss these matters or your future at MJTI.
Great post Dr. D.!!!
I also appreciated your commets on "crypto-supersessionism." You hit the nail on the head!
I also like your quote:
"When we present the gospel of Yeshua the Messiah to Jews, we ought to highlight the continuity of this gospel not simply with Jewish prophecy, but with Jewish communal experience throughout time and to the present day."
Amen...so let it be!
Great questions in your first post Robert!
Great post John!
Dr. D.:
You commonly comment that more often than not the Good News id Bad News for the Jewish people. To this I agree. One of the things I have gotten out of this class is just thinking more in depth about this. I have always thought that our paradigms have been broken and seriously in need of revamping. And I have put alot of thought into this (hence even my article in the last issue of Kesher on Outreach). Yet you have given me even more to chew on.
Nathaniel's comment in wich he brings back up education is indeed important. For much will also be cleared up with a better jewishly educated MJ - both Jews and non-Jews in our midst!
A couple times the issue of converting non-Jews in our midst has arisen. And Rabbi Kinbar also made the point in his post:
"IMO conversion to Judaism should be an option (for most, this would be within Messianic Judaism, and the issue is identity and NOT whether other Jews accept the convert)."
This issue of the primacy of identity of a particular Jewish Movement is being raised right now in reform Judaism (and in some ways, always has been with them).
Just last week, in the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, was an article dealing with the Reform Movement's new campaign to actively prostelitize to non-Jews. Here they are desiring to be in our situation. The are actively seeking to recruit non-Jews into Reform Judaism. And they are not basing their decisions on the positions of other forms of Judaism accepting their conversions.
If they are successful, it will be interesting to watch how they begin to deal with the issues we are currently dealing with.
Steps must be taken. And I think there is presedense for taking certain steps. If a large conversion of specifically commited non-Jews is a psossibility. Maybe we should indeed consider it?
Post a Comment