Staff and Member discussion thread.

[Avodat]

Wow, 2.39am Saturday and the forum isn't locked! Must be Shabbat

 

[Tishri1]

Subscribing

Torah shouldn't be debated on this forum. If people took these debates to where they should be, there would not be the problems of argument etc on this forum in that regard. The answer is simple - no Torah debate allowed outside of the 'Anything Torah!' forum. If the Mods enforce it rigidly instead of ignoring it, or even joining in, the OP would be redundant.

End of. Job done. Problem solved.

...you all do your best and we will do ours too

Can we beat 'em with sticks?

lol only with wet noodles

 

[Henaynei]

Subscribing

Torah shouldn't be debated on this forum. If people took these debates to where they should be, there would not be the problems of argument etc on this forum in that regard. The answer is simple - no Torah debate allowed outside of the 'Anything Torah!' forum. If the Mods enforce it rigidly instead of ignoring it, or even joining in, the OP would be redundant.

End of. Job done. Problem solved.

"Anything Torah" should be Torah discussions among those who ARE Torah observant, not debates about why or how much.
When created it was meant to be a safe house for the Torah Observant because having threads, meant to discuss nuances and issues regarding the what how when etc of Torah, always devolved into defending why has been a long standing issue.

There should be no debate re: Torah observance - should shouldn't who..., period.

IDEA!!
We used to have a Debate sub-forum and maybe it is time to do it again. **Marquis of Queensberry Rules** y'all! That might be a place for Messianics of all levels to hash out ideas, opinions and concepts IF they wanted, the main forum and the other sub-forums could be kept peaceable. If a thread in those forums moved into debate the mod could ask the OP if they wanted it moved to the Debate or Midrash forum, if not it could be closed or a Mod Hat warning posted.

b'Shalom {iPod touch w/CF app}

 

[Yahudim]

From the experience I had in the now still divided SDA forums, I know how you feel, as we went through similar struggles there.

A post that I just read there reminded me of this thread here. Here is the quote of that post below:

Unfortunately, that didn't keep the SDA forum from being split into two forums. They didn't listen there, however, I hope you won't make the same mistake here.

Thanks you brother Daryl,
I have reconsidered the issue and I think the rest of us have too. Now if all those that don't believe exactly like me will just be still and listen.

Just kidding!

 

[Yahudim]

"Anything Torah" should be Torah discussions among those who ARE Torah observant, not debates about why or how much.
When created it was meant to be a safe house for the Torah Observant because having threads, meant to discuss nuances and issues regarding the what how when etc of Torah, always devolved into defending why has been a long standing issue.

There should be no debate re: Torah observance - should shouldn't who..., period.

IDEA!!
We used to have a Debate sub-forum and maybe it is time to do it again. **Marquis of Queensberry Rules** y'all! That might be a place for Messianics of all levels to hash out ideas, opinions and concepts IF they wanted, the main forum and the other sub-forums could be kept peaceable. If a thread in those forums moved into debate the mod could ask the OP if they wanted it moved to the Debate or Midrash forum, if not it could be closed or a Mod Hat warning posted.

b'Shalom {iPod touch w/CF app}

Great idea, as long as the OP gets to determine if it devolves into debate.

 

[Tishri1]

I still don't get it.

By Torah debate, what is meant.

1. Debates about what is written in the Torah? Like does Genesis 3:15 refer to the Messiah? Or is the Ezekiel Temple literal? Discussion is ok
2. Debates on how to keep the law?Ideas and suggestions ok
3. Debates on who is required to keep the law?No debate on this
4. Debates on Passover, practice, meaning, and how does the commands of Jesus making it in memory of Him alter Passover?Discussion is ok

.

 

[Tishri1]

Pretty good questions really. You should start a thread. But I think he is talking about the ever-present 'Grace vs. Torah observance' debate.

Exactly

 

[Tishri1]

This is very good! What do the rest of you think ?

Yes, I agree. I don't think saying no debating the Torah as that is what we live for, there is always more to learn and glean from those words.

I think it should be worded somethiung like this. Messianic Judaism honors the Torah (the instructions of G-d). Debate is allowed among members that believe that although keeping the Torah is not for salvation, it is something that both some Jews and Gentiles choose to follow out of love and respect for G-d. We do not believe that Yeshua/Jesus did away with any part of it but (Matt 5:18), but believe that he completed the payment required for disobeying it.

 

[Tishri1]

There is an enormous difference between debating Torah as such (ie the content of the teaching) and debating who can or cannot, or who should, or should not, make it central to their lives, or what degree of adherence is acceptable to call ones self a Messianic. This seems to be what the OP is getting at.

Yes

 

[Tishri1]

I don't think the debate itself is the issue as much as the approach to debate. It's one thing to state your opinion and allow for a counter opinion, but to debate with the idea that one's way is the "right" way is not productive especially about Torah. We've had too much labeling as of late. If you believe this way (because I know those who believe this way even if you might not ...) then you are a __________. And, no one here can and should decide for the rest how we are to believe, what our titles should be or the names of our forums should be.
We're all just a bunch of Jews and Gentiles with lots of opinions and that should be our banner. And even if we've written a doctoral paper, or treatise or are president of 10 clubs, our posts are still only opinion.

Yes you got it! What do you think the outcome is then?What is best for this group?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I'm glad that the latest audio teaching The Mosaic Laws is being well received.

The Mosaic Laws.

I listened to the audio and he showed the differences between believers, Messianic believers and Torah positive Messianic believers. Exactly like the other video that got ripped.

He said that most Torah positive Messianic believers doesn't recite the Shema in the morning from his 17 years experience as well as tefillin etc.as examples.

The audio was excellent

Messianic Theology in 15 Minutes - Daniel Juster ...

Thanks it he explains it well. Why is identity an emphasis, seriously? I can see someone who doesn't have an understanding that I or Juster can be ethno-centric or hmm maybe someone can shed a description. Some might view what Juster said to going to the other side of the pendulum. You see I'm a sticker for looking at both sides and or at least trying to put myself in others shoes and ask a question that someone who is somewhat opposed might ask.

Is Messianic Judaism being a Jewish organizations create separation or is the separation in the mind. I read that one woman was asked if she was concerned, found it as being 2nd class and the like about being an honorary member. Her answer was interesting and it didn't seem to bother her. 'it's a Jewish organization'. Didn't faze her about different memberships. I'm not saying I agree or disagree but I'm putting another perspective out there.

.....................

I agree with the video in that Messianic Judaism sees the church as a not by accident entity. In general there isn't really animosity against the church. In fact there's a desire for relationship with the church to seek Jewish roots. But not in a way to convert the church into Messianic Jewish congregation.


As I said before views and theologies can change as time goes. This is how splits happen. You have people or groups that split from the views of the Messianic theology video and have a stance that the Christian church is wrong and all churches should be Messianic Jewish congregations and shame on them if they are not because Messianic Judaism is the true blue 'religion'. Whether the splits are right or wrong isn't the issue. You got Hebrew roots split , two house etc.

Good points..

The Church, as it concerns the ways it developed and existed until the development of the MJish movement/outreach endeavor in the 60s-70s era was not an accident not was it ever meant to be seen in competition. It was meat to work alongside other groups, as well as being a place that could be a safe-haven for groups as well. Where others generally seek to come from, however, when it comes to noting how the CHurch was not meant to become converted into a Messianic Jewish congregation is that even the Church has Messianic Jewish roots....and for many Jews who are comfortable in the Church or feel it is just as good of a place for outreach as many MJish congregations, I have to give their voices weight.

Thankfully, what many in the CHurch are realizing is that even if one were to say that he or she doesn't need "Judaism" in order to serve the Lord (which is true), it would still be the case that the early church was one that was essentially a camp for Judaism...and more specifically, it was a sect of Judaism. The concept of the Blood of Jesus is something that was never seperate in thought from a Judaic worldview...and in accepting the concept of Jesus's shed blood for us, one is supporting Judaism by default----and this, of course, has nothing to do with accepting all other branches of Judaism as legitimate. If/when they deny the Blood of Jesus as sufficient for salvation/redeemption, they truly don't understand what true Judaism is about.

Ran Vander Laan, of the ministry "Follow the Rabbi" , is one believers who has often advocated how understanding the Judaic mindset/concepts is something that can never be escaped if one is to be considered a true folllower of Messiah---and for more, one can go online/look up his ministry, under the name of "Follow the Rabbi on Vimeo"( )


The other would be under the name of "Ray Vander Laan’s “Follow the Rabbi” lectures « One In Jesus" ( ).

As another said best, Judaism can exist without Christianity easily......but Christianity truly cannot exist without Judaism in order for it to be consistent with itself. One can go no further than examining how the early church operated in Acts 2:42-47 and Acts 4:32-37, with Luke showing clearly how they engaged in the practice of sharing goods, holding Barnabas as a model (Acts 4:32-37). The believers' sharing exemplified the OT ideal of there not being a needy person aong them---that is, there should be no poor in the community of faith (Deuteronomy 15:4-11). To realize this ideal, Christians would sell some of their goods and bring the proceeds to the apostles for distrubtion to the needy. Other scholars have noted how this sharing is very much what was practiced by the Essenes (a camp within Judaism)....though with the Christians, the practice was voluntary and not compelled by the government---as seen in the example of Ananias and Sapphira and how they did not have an obligation to sell their property/give away the money.(Acts 5:4). Additionally, people still had personal posessions, because they still met in "their homes" and many other Christians after this still owned homes (Acts 12:12, Acts 17:5, Acts 18:7, Acts 20:20, Acts 21:8, Acts 21:16, Romans 16:5, I Corinthians 16:19, Col.4:15. Philemon 2, II John 1:10).......and of course, all of this is in light of how there is a voluntary generosity in sharing posessions that is seen as commendable in the scriptures ( I Timothy 6:17-19, I Timothy 6:6-10). II Corinthians 8:9-15 has more to offer on Generosity.

Many Christians may get shocked wondering "How did early believers have the practices of other camps in Judaism involved like the Essenes since they're not mentioned?""...and to that, when speaking to a Jewish audience-----already aware of the fact that there's a group that is a minority (even though they had sigificance in more than one way)--then there's no need to mention them by name.....just as there's no need mentioning by name all of the historical figures/groups behind instances such as the ordering of a census or the banishment of Jews to a certain location ---such as what happened in Acts 18:1-2. SOme things are simply understood---and as said before, there are simply too many similarities/exact practices that the Essenes had that the early church had to act as if they were not there and influential in one way or another.

If indeed Qumranities or the wider group which they were apart of (Essenes) joined a new group within Second Temple Judaism, the Palestinian Jesus Movement, then they would have not only influenced with their special knowledge/mysteries...but would have been able to adapt greatly. For it is practically impossible to imagine that Acts 6:7 HAS to refer to the Sadducees....as in stark contrast to the Essenes, the Sadducees rejected the concept of the resurrection and actively persuected Jesus and his group. The Essenes were already known to be for pacifism/non-violence. Something else to consider is that in Acts 22:4, Paul discusses how he persecuted the "Way to death"--as seen in Acts 9. However, as it stands, the Essenes also referred to their sect as the Way----long before the Christians came along.....and as the term of "The Way" started to be used AFTER persecution of Chrisitians began, it makes sense to say that perhaps the Essenes influenced the Christians greatly in converting over. As the Pharisees and the Sadducees were already against the Essenes in power, it'd make even more sense as to why persecution began after Christians.


James Tabor said it best in his article entitled "Nazarenes, Ebionites, and Essenes&#8230;<< The Jesus Dynasty" ( ):

The term Nazarene was likely the one first used for these followers of John/Jesus/James (The Three J&#8217;s, as I refer to them in my classes), as evidenced by Acts 24:5 where Paul is called &#8220;the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.&#8221; Here we see the word used in a similar way to that of Josephus in writing of the four sects/schools of Judaism: Pharisees; Sadducess; Essenes; and Zealots. So the term Nazarene is probably the best and broadest term for the movement, while Ebionite (Poor Ones) was used as well, along with a whole list of other terms: Saints, Children of Light, the Way, New Covenanters, et al. We also know from the book of Acts that the group itself preferred the designation &#8220;The Way&#8221; (see Acts 24:14, 22, etc.). The term &#8220;Christian,&#8221; first used in Greek speaking areas for the movement, actually is an attempt to translate the term Nazarene and basically means a &#8220;Messianist.&#8221;

The Essenes (possibly from &#8216;Ossim, meaning &#8220;Doers of Torah&#8221, who wrote or collected the Dead Sea Scrolls, pioneered certain aspects of this &#8220;Way&#8221; over 150 years before the birth of Jesus ( see my &#8220;Basic Facts on the DSS&#8220. They were a wilderness (out in the Arava, near the Dead Sea&#8211;based on Isaiah 40:3), baptizing (mikveh of repentance as entrance requirement into their fellowship), new covenant, messianic/apocalyptic group. They believed they were the final generation and would live to see the end and the coming of the Messiahs of Aaron and of Israel (priest and king). They saw themselves as the remnant core of God&#8217;s faithful people&#8212;preparing the Way for the return of YHVH&#8217;s Glory (Kavod) as set forth in Isaiah 40-66. They too referred to themselves as the Way, the Poor, the Saints, the New Covenanters, Children of Light, and so forth. Perhaps their most common designation was the Yachad&#8211;the brotherhood or community, and they referred to themselves as brother and sister. They were bitterly opposed to the corrupt Priests in Jerusalem, to the Herods, and even to the Pharisees whom they saw as compromising with that establishment to get power and influence from the Hellenistic/Roman powers. They had their own developed Halacha (interpretation of Torah), some aspects of which Jesus picks up (ideal of no divorce, not using oaths, etc.). They followed one they called the True Teacher (Teacher of Righteousness) whom most scholars believe lived in the 1st century BCE and was opposed and possibly killed by the Hasmonean King/Priests at the instigation of the Pharisees. John the Baptizer seems to arise out of this context and rekindle the apocalyptic fervor of the movement in the early decades of the first century AD.

To some extent the terminology is flexible; there are a variety of self-designations used by the John/Jesus/James movement, most of which had previously been used by the Essenes. In that sense you might call the Jesus movement a further developed messianic &#8220;Essenism,&#8221; modified through the powerful, prophetic influence of Jesus as Teacher.




​

One of the other articles by Tabor that was interesting is called Jesus and the Essenes...and For further information, one can go online and search out articles under the following titles:

• "Basic Facts Regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls" ()

• WERE THE ESSENES THE FORERUNNERS OF THE GNOSTIC CHRISTIANS? ( )

• "Exploring the Gospel of John: in honor of D. Moody Smith - Google Books " ( )

More was also discussed here in #62 --and for good resources, perhaps one of the best books out there are the issue that has been a TREMENDOUS aid to me is known as "The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls"

One of the best reads I've ever been able to come across on the issue...and it greatly helped me to see how the Dead Sea Scrolls verify so much of what it is that we see in our times....especially as it concerns the work of Jesus, John the Baptist and what it meant to be a follower of the Way in the early church.

All of that is to say how the CHurch can NEVER escape the fact that being "Christian" according to the Bible leaves one ultimately at the place of realizing that there are Jewish roots involved/inherent in the text...and with that, one cannot say they wish to reach out to Jewish people and yet ignore where Judaism shaped the foundations of the Church that others are trying to get other Jews into as those same Jews may be leaving aspects of Judaism behind in their pursuit of Chrirst

 

[Tishri1]

Yes, that should be included that there will be no debate as to who is 'allowed' to keep Torah, it should be up to the individual.

As in Jeremiah 31 it explains that each will die for their own sins, so we are each responsible for what we do. As Yeshua said, if we believe in Him we will be in the kingdom but if we teach others to not keep the commandments, even the least of them we will be the least in the kingdom.

------Tishri, I have to go out for the day but will be back tonight. Please don't close the thread too soon. Remember some are busy getting ready for Shabbat and this thread wasn't reopened until the wee hours on the East coast as well as we have members around the world .

Shabbat Shalom to all!

I won't, I just needed to before so I could get caught up but I'm all caught up now

 

[Gxg (G²)]

..We need everyone to respect each other and approach arguments POSITIVELY. IF we keep addressing posts in the negative, we're just going to see more and more fur fly.

I believe if we did a book series together as a study, perhaps starting with the Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, and then moving on to something like "Boundaries" By Townsend and Cloud - we might get somewhere. We might better understand the other posters, their backgrounds and the abuse that has gone on in their past, and we might figure out some better boundaries for each other without having to have the moderators and administration step in.

I like G's suggestion of Skype, but the reality is that we live in vastly different time zones and continents, so this will be difficult. I can't imagine a time where I could catch Contra for example, in that he's around 9 hours difference from me. I might catch you or Ani in the wee hours of the morning, because you're in California. I could catch anyone here in Europe rather easily, because our time difference is probably plus or minus 2 hours vs the vast difference of -5 to -9 hours.

We do need fellowship threads, but those are not going to happen with the break down we currently have. It's like trying to thrust two opposing football fan groups together. It's going to end in riot and much damage.

We need clear rules so we can work together. Until those rules and protections are in place, no one will feel completely at ease opening up their hearts again, when they've been stomped all over with spiked shoes..

"Boundaries" is an excellent book and one that really blessed me when I read it back in the day. WOuld be good to connect everyone together if they were able to do something like what you suggested---although that'd be more in line with the "fellowship" dynamic. Still, it'd bring people together since it seems that people are better able to understand others and interact when they find that they can relate to one another in other areas of everyday life...and indeed, alot of the friction is due more so to rules of interaction more/not understanding personality or cultural differences (including experiences that may influence others to interpret events a certain way).

 

[Tishri1]

Yes, that should be included that there will be no debate as to who is 'allowed' to keep Torah, it should be up to the individual.

 

[Tishri1]

Very true, I think.

Without starting a derail here, hopefully, should there be a separate slot for discussions regarding the above underlined?

Those topics should be off limits I would say

 

[Gxg (G²)]

We Jews like to rock the boat. I definately think it's perception too. We are online in a forum and lots can get mixed up or mis perceived.

If all of us were able to be in active interaction with one another like at a conference, I think alot of things would be different.

Who knows if perhaps there'd be an online way of greeting each other with a Holy Kiss ( Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12, 1 Thessalonians 5:26, 1 Peter 5:13-14 ) and showing ways of affection....even though that can be misinterpreted just as the Romans misinterpreted the believers when they did it (even though it's done in certain places still)---and for every disagreement, perhaps it could be the case that more attempts were made to at least leave debate with having something positive to share about the person whom debate/disagreement occurred. For if people take the stance that others have NOTHING good within them after disagreements, something may be off...

 

[Tishri1]

Yup, I agree.

But since Messianic Judaism is about Yeshua, I don't weigh either the NT or the Torah as more central then the other. They are equal weight, and indivisible. They are all one book.

So, the Torah is important to all Messianics.

And as far as degree of adherence, that is not the factor which decides who is a Messianic and who isn't. All who are a part of Messianic Judaism, are Messianics. Messianic Judaism has a definition of who is a part of it. To vary from that definition is not a good idea.

Just keeping this out of conversation is best I think

 

[Tishri1]

Yup, I phrase it that all should be allowed to choose, but I think that is that same thing you are saying. It is up to the individual. I view it as a calling.

Amen we can leave it at that

 

[Tishri1]

And as per the rules no one is to try to diminish or sabotage if someone is called.

Right?

Good call

 

[Tishri1]

For both Messianic Jew and Messianic Gentile - yes?

Yes