There is only one Gospel whose power and gracious freedom overcomes sin and death throughout the world. But if the Gospel's freedom is suppressed for the sake of upholding the Law (Torah), then those that put Torah above the Gospel must abandon the contradictory elements of their theology and submit their Torah observance to New Covenant principles. This does not mandate the banning of Torah observance; however, it does restrict Torah observance to that of "non-obligatory" compliance in Messianic Jewish worship and daily practice.
In Messianic congregations in the USA and abroad, doctrinal error due to explicit Torah observance appears to be wide spread. One must ask; Is it that hard to determine error from correct doctrine? What initially appeared to be a clear-cut issue of historical inaccuracy and miss-interpretation of Scripture twenty years ago, today appears to be a mute point among most Messianic brethren. Why so? Some of this lack of interest in historical and biblical accuracy is due to the human tendency to accept only the interpretation of scripture that fits one's doctrinal stand, no matter how absurd it may be. The other tendency is to believe false doctrine simply because it has not been rejected yet by its constituency. In either case, the reasons for accepting such doctrine are weak indeed.
In the 1980s some Messianic Jewish teachers came up with the idea that they could reshape Messianic believers perception of the "Gospel of Grace" and "Torah Observance" by simply re-inventing the persona of the Apostle Paul into the "Torah Observant "Rabbi Shaul", all accepting of modern Messianic Jewish thought. In doing so, they had to develop an approach that would disregard the accurate history of Paul in his evolution from "Saul of Tarsus" persecutor of the Church in Israel and the Diaspora, to "the Apostle Paul", church founder, teacher and evangelist to both Jew and Gentile alike. They would have to sell to their flock the idea that Paul remained Torah observant, even while ministering to the Gentiles in the Greco/Roman provinces of Asia Minor. They also had to assert that the proselytes of Rav Shaul were Torah observant. The task of selling this "spin" was simple for most of the devoted believers within the Messianic Jewish movement, but much less so for those educated in Church history and New Covenant teachings. Was this error one of confusion or design on the part of some Messianic leaders? I am sure we will know one day.
To be more specific, 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. Stern's book adopts a "Social Darwinist" form of deception by promoting an erroneous historical portrait of Paul to conform to his religious and social agenda. Social Darwinists justify promoting the "big lie" if it serves to promote the continuity of their social cause. It may have been a 'Freudian slip" when Stern used the term "manifesto" in his revolutionary book. Stern's use of Marx missed the Biblical mark!
There are also erroneous motivations underlying Torah Observant Messianic Jewish believer's acceptance of either the "Rav Shaul" or "Heretic Paul" historical scenarios. If you read between the lines in some of their statements, you will find that Torah Observant Messianic believers who know their history only give "lip service" supporting "Rav Shaul", and are actually Anti-Paul and consider his teachings heretical. In the USA, most Anti-Pauline Messianic Jewish believers hide behind the "Rav Shaul' history nonsense. In Israel though, most Anti-Paul MJs do not hide their sentiments concerning their oppostion to Pauline doctrine. Most Messianic Jews that support the Rav Shaul or Heretic Paul historical scenario, do so for the sake of what they perceive to be a necessity. They truly believe that only by holding to an erroneous viewpoint that supports obligatory Torah Observance will they successfully evangelize the Jewish people.
We should question Torah Observant Messianic Jewish doctrine seriously by first concentrating on the teachings in the epistles to the Hebrews, Romans and Galatians. Above all the other apostles, Paul was given the divine task of proclaiming the principles of the New Covenant to Jew and Gentile believer alike. Let us endeavor to take His new revelation to heart. The "Messianic Literary Corner" has published a study series entitled "Submitting Torah Observance To New Covenant Principles" to discuss this very important doctrinal topic.
Personally, I don't know why Messianics and even Christians for that matter have such a problem reconciling Paul's writings with torah. They go hand in hand. And thank God we have the statements made by James and Peter and even by Paul himself that yes, he was torah observant and taught torah!
Acts 21:21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles
to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
Acts 21:24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads:
and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that
thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the torah.
Acts 24:13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.
Acts 24:19 Who ought to have been here before thee, and object, if they had ought against me.
20 Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evil doing in me, while I stood before the council,
21 Except it be for this one voice, that I cried standing among them,
Touching the resurrection of the dead I am called in question by you this day.
Personally, I believe the italicized to mean 'touching the resurrection of the
One who was dead (Yeshua)'. They can't have been against him believing in the resurrection of the dead because the Pharisees believe that as well! But if Paul was preaching, teaching, and doing that which is against torah, they would have had something against him! They would've stoned him on the spot just as they did Steven! But Peter says of Paul's writings
2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things;
in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
