Do you wear a tallit in church?

[Frogster]

Frogster,

Walking through life with a Living God is not always conducive with a "One-Size-Fits-All" type of Christianity mindset. He is perfectly free to ask one thing of one person, and something completely different from someone else. If you are not feeling called to wear a talit and/or explore Messianic Judaism, then by all means don't do it!

No one is special in God's Kingdom. Jews do not have a privileged place through birthright, nor do people who happen to study their traditions. Those who learn Greek and Hebrew simply know Greek and Hebrew.

Obedience is the key. God asks certain things of us, and if we disobey we will not be happy. There is nothing wrong with sailing on a ship to Tarsus, unless you are Jonah and God has sent you to Nineveh but you are running away!

The key to a deeper (and more special) relationship with God is in being obedient to what He asks of us. For those who feel called to wear the talit, they may indeed feel as special anointing when they are obedient. This is typical for how God works. He communicates with us in this manner. When we accept the sign as directions given by Him, then we can pursue the path toward the next logical step. Baring in mind that we keep checking in with Him to make sure we go only as far as He is sending us!

The same method might be used to lead us to a new church. We might feel a special anointing when we go there, even if others around us feel nothing. Not everybody is called to do the exact same thing! So we can't just follow someone else's personal leading of the HS, because it may not include us. But when we are led to a new church by God we can still lose our way, if we forget that we followed Him and immerse ourselves in ministry ambitions and/or forget to keep following when He says it's time to leave.

well, i understand the relativity of subjective obedience, but one can be wrong objectively, while being subjectively obedient to their own emotions and limited conscience.

There is nothing in the NT text that implies we need a garment to gain the Spirit, in fact all the clear objective text, goes against this.

 

[Frogster]

does this movement teach that it's sin to eat a pork chop, or to violate other levitical restrictions? yes it does, and i am very familiar with this movement, and their doctrine, and the text that disproves it all.
yes, there are some variations in all movements, but i have captured the majority view.

 

[Tobias]

well, i understand the relativity of subjective obedience, but one can be wrong objectively, while being subjectively obedient to their own emotions and limited conscience.

There is nothing in the NT text that implies we need a garment to gain the Spirit, in fact all the clear objective text, goes against this.

Hmm...

Paul rebuked Peter for separating himself from Gentiles and eating at the "Jews Only" table. This was not a legitimate God-given tradition, but one developed by Man.

How many other Jewish traditions the the original 12 Apostles keep? How many did the Christians keep during the first couple of centuries before the Romans took over and made it into a religion?

I see Paul's objections focused on the requirement for Gentiles to keep the traditions, not on any one person's desire to study them. Forcing a convert to get circumcised; no. Learning about God through the traditions He instituted in Jewish culture... how can learning about God be wrong?


Of course, anyone who tells you that you must wear a talit to feel the anointing, or must celebrate the feasts etc etc, is in violation of the scriptures you referenced.

 

[Frogster]

Hmm...

Paul rebuked Peter for separating himself from Gentiles and eating at the "Jews Only" table. This was not a legitimate God-given tradition, but one developed by Man.

How many other Jewish traditions the the original 12 Apostles keep? How many did the Christians keep during the first couple of centuries before the Romans took over and made it into a religion?

I see Paul's objections focused on the requirement for Gentiles to keep the traditions, not on any one person's desire to study them. Forcing a convert to get circumcised; no. Learning about God through the traditions He instituted in Jewish culture... how can learning about God be wrong?


Of course, anyone who tells you that you must wear a talit to feel the anointing, or must celebrate the feasts etc etc, is in violation of the scriptures you referenced.

What makes you think Gal 2 was about traditions?


I find u to be an interesting poster, please continue.

 

[New_Wineskin]

well, i understand the relativity of subjective obedience, but one can be wrong objectively, while being subjectively obedient to their own emotions and limited conscience.

There is nothing in the NT text that implies we need a garment to gain the Spirit, in fact all the clear objective text, goes against this.

If one is using something as a "lucky charm" and providing the verbage to imply it , someone will usually say something ( in most charasmatic circles ) . That is not to say that something *should* be said - only that something will most likely be said .

 

[Frogster]

If one is using something as a "lucky charm" and providing the verbage to imply it , someone will usually say something ( in most charasmatic circles ) . That is not to say that something *should* be said - only that something will most likely be said .

true...wearing one can present a should, even without the should being uttered, no doubt peter just withdrawing spoke volumes.

 

[New_Wineskin]

true...wearing one can present a should, even without the should being uttered, no doubt peter just withdrawing spoke volumes.

Telling the person to *not* wear it would be inserting a law into the equation . No need to do that if the person listens to the Lord .

 

[Frogster]

Telling the person to *not* wear it would be inserting a law into the equation . No need to do that if the person listens to the Lord .

well...hmmmm..Paul told them not to get involved in all that stuff they were adding in Col 2, and showed how it was not the gospel.

But agreed, listen to the Lord, but then we can figure they listened to the Lord via Paul.

 

[New_Wineskin]

well...hmmmm..Paul told them not to get involved in all that stuff they were adding in Col 2, and showed how it was not the gospel.

But agreed, listen to the Lord, but then we can figure they listened to the Lord via Paul.

Paul certainly didn't want people to look at him as a new Moses . It would go against much of his understanding of the New Covenant . His written code was no better than any other written code . It is difficult to let go .

 

[Frogster]

Paul certainly didn't want people to look at him as a new Moses . It would go against much of his understanding of the New Covenant . His written code was no better than any other written code . It is difficult to let go .

hmmmmm..i understand your point, and it's a good one, and amen, we don't want a second mosaic ministry, but still, jesus gave him the doctrine.

 

[New_Wineskin]

hmmmmm..i understand your point, and it's a good one, and amen, we don't want a second mosaic ministry, but still, jesus gave him the doctrine.

Yes . And , we only still need it because The Law ( ie Scriptural Authority ) continues to pop up . One day , it won't be needed , anymore .

 

[Tobias]

What makes you think Gal 2 was about traditions?


I find u to be an interesting poster, please continue.

Unfortunately I think we have come to the end of my knowledge on the subject. I didn't explore Messianic Judaism because I found scriptural justification for it, but because I felt an anointing while wearing the talit (and kippa).

I pursued things as far as I could, but when I felt the weight of the Law coming down upon my shoulders, I bailed out rather abruptly. I guess the entire time I wrestled with feelings of inadequacy and inferiority around Jewish people, like somehow I had picked up the belief that they were special before God. But that went away before everything was said and done.

I feel I was blessed by the entire experience, and the scriptures open up now in a whole new light from what I learned. Like I say, the knowledge of God was passed down through Jewish tradition, which imo is the reason for the Old Covenant that He had with them. As long as they were obedient to preform the rituals that God had given them, that bit of knowledge of God was able to be preserved for many generations.

It's an interesting study if nothing else.

 

[Frogster]

Unfortunately I think we have come to the end of my knowledge on the subject. I didn't explore Messianic Judaism because I found scriptural justification for it, but because I felt an anointing while wearing the talit (and kippa).

I pursued things as far as I could, but when I felt the weight of the Law coming down upon my shoulders, I bailed out rather abruptly. I guess the entire time I wrestled with feelings of inadequacy and inferiority around Jewish people, like somehow I had picked up the belief that they were special before God. But that went away before everything was said and done.

I feel I was blessed by the entire experience, and the scriptures open up now in a whole new light from what I learned. Like I say, the knowledge of God was passed down through Jewish tradition, which imo is the reason for the Old Covenant that He had with them. As long as they were obedient to preform the rituals that God had given them, that bit of knowledge of God was able to be preserved for many generations.

It's an interesting study if nothing else.

Thanks.

 

[Yitzchak]

well, i understand the relativity of subjective obedience, but one can be wrong objectively, while being subjectively obedient to their own emotions and limited conscience.

There is nothing in the NT text that implies we need a garment to gain the Spirit, in fact all the clear objective text, goes against this.

Actually there is a specific New Testament text which goes against what you are teaching here. the handkerchiefs and aprons carried the anointing in a large enough measure that it chased away evil spirits and carried healing virtue. These were healings and deliverances which were performed by the Holy spirit through anointed objects. The people who received those healings were very thankful for the anointed objects which God provided to them in their time of need. God still does this today.

Act 19:11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
Act 19:12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.

It is a dangerous thing to take a truth out of the context of the whole of scripture and teach that as doctrine. The Bible teaches that God does indeed choose and appoint specific times and places and also objects and people upon which he places his Spirit and his anointing. The burning bush , the holy of holies , the pool of bethsaida where the angel stirred the water. none of these contradict the omnipresence of God.

These examples from Scripture are not superstitions of ignorant people who do not know any better. It is one of the ways in which God works. It is His sovereign choice to do so.

Joh 5:2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.
Joh 5:3 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water.
Joh 5:4 For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.

Also , another thing worth pointing out. When a student of the scripture wishes to develop doctrine , it is wise to start at the beginning in Genesis and go from cover to cover to get an accurate and balanced doctrine. The doctrines concerning the actions of the Holy Spirit begins in Genesis Chapter one.


There is a long history in God's church of the Holy Spirit working in set times , places , specific people and even objects. This is why people flock to revivals from all over the world. because in the revival anointing they recieve their healing or breakthrough when they do not receive the same blessings by staying at home.

We believe in the laying on of hands as the scripture teaches. Because there is an impartation of The Spirit which can take place through the laying on of hands and through anointing with oil. the fact that smart people do not worship the anointing oil and instead focus upon God does not change the fact that God chooses at times to work through the oil and through the laying on of hands.

What was so special about the specific river Jordan ? It is a good thing for Naaman that his servants were humble enough to receive God's healing anointing in the river Jordan instead of being stubborn. It is amazing how similar people can be today. Going on with a prideful rant about how God can heal them anywhere and why do they need Some man to lay hands upon them or why do they need to do it a certain way.

And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.
2Ki 5:11 But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.
2Ki 5:12 Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage.
2Ki 5:13 And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean?
2Ki 5:14 Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

The clear teaching of scripture is that God most often works through specific people , churches , objects , angels ,etc. It is rare that God works without one of these. Read your bible from cover to cover and see what is actually the clear teaching of scripture. Why did Jesus put mud on the blind man's eyes ? Why did the woman touch the hem of Jesus' garment and receive healing ? The garment which is called a tallit ?

This is probably the most obvious scriptural proof in favor of the anointed tallit teaching.The fact that Jesus wore a Tallit and the fact that his tallit carried enough healing virtue to instantly heal a woman who touched it. It was the combination of the woman's faith in God meeting up with touching the anointed tallit which brought healing. Otherwise she would have been healed before she touched it since her faith had not changed. It was the fullness of her faith which resulted in her taking the action of making contact with an anointed Tallit.

The scripture is full of many such examples. So is church history. the reason that the church teaches so strongly against focusing upon objects and people is because they know that God has anointed objects and people in such a strong measure at times , that the temptation does exist for people to focus upon the object , place or person rather than upon God. that temptation is much less when there is no anointing.

Take a person like John Wesley as an example. the anointing was upon him in such measure that people are tempted to follow him rather than Christ.But the truth is that the anointing was upon Wesley.

 

[Frogster]

Actually there is a specific New Testament text which goes against what you are teaching here. the handkerchiefs and aprons carried the anointing in a large enough measure that it chased away evil spirits and carried healing virtue. These were healings and deliverances which were performed by the Holy spirit through anointed objects. The people who received those healings were very thankful for the anointed objects which God provided to them in their time of need. God still does this today.



It is a dangerous thing to take a truth out of the context of the whole of scripture and teach that as doctrine. The Bible teaches that God does indeed choose and appoint specific times and places and also objects and people upon which he places his Spirit and his anointing. The burning bush , the holy of holies , the pool of bethsaida where the angel stirred the water. none of these contradict the omnipresence of God.

These examples from Scripture are not superstitions of ignorant people who do not know any better. It is one of the ways in which God works. It is His sovereign choice to do so.




Also , another thing worth pointing out. When a student of the scripture wishes to develop doctrine , it is wise to start at the beginning in Genesis and go from cover to cover to get an accurate and balanced doctrine. The doctrines concerning the actions of the Holy Spirit begins in Genesis Chapter one.


There is a long history in God's church of the Holy Spirit working in set times , places , specific people and even objects. This is why people flock to revivals from all over the world. because in the revival anointing they recieve their healing or breakthrough when they do not receive the same blessings by staying at home.

We believe in the laying on of hands as the scripture teaches. Because there is an impartation of The Spirit which can take place through the laying on of hands and through anointing with oil. the fact that smart people do not worship the anointing oil and instead focus upon God does not change the fact that God chooses at times to work through the oil and through the laying on of hands.

What was so special about the specific river Jordan ? It is a good thing for Naaman that his servants were humble enough to receive God's healing anointing in the river Jordan instead of being stubborn. It is amazing how similar people can be today. Going on with a prideful rant about how God can heal them anywhere and why do they need Some man to lay hands upon them or why do they need to do it a certain way.





The clear teaching of scripture is that God most often works through specific people , churches , objects , angels ,etc. It is rare that God works without one of these. Read your bible from cover to cover and see what is actually the clear teaching of scripture. Why did Jesus put mud on the blind man's eyes ? Why did the woman touch the hem of Jesus' garment and receive healing ? The garment which is called a tallit ?

This is probably the most obvious scriptural proof in favor of the anointed tallit teaching.The fact that Jesus wore a Tallit and the fact that his tallit carried enough healing virtue to instantly heal a woman who touched it. It was the combination of the woman's faith in God meeting up with touching the anointed tallit which brought healing. Otherwise she would have been healed before she touched it since her faith had not changed. It was the fullness of her faith which resulted in her taking the action of making contact with an anointed Tallit.

The scripture is full of many such examples. So is church history. the reason that the church teaches so strongly against focusing upon objects and people is because they know that God has anointed objects and people in such a strong measure at times , that the temptation does exist for people to focus upon the object , place or person rather than upon God. that temptation is much less when there is no anointing.

Take a person like John Wesley as an example. the anointing was upon him in such measure that people are tempted to follow him rather than Christ.But the truth is that the anointing was upon Wesley.

Just because Paul's cloth healed, does not mean that we need a tallit to get the anointing. Why didn't paul teach the church to get a cloth?

Lets not stress the garment of Jesus too much in that story.
Would the woman be healed even if she did not touch the hem? Why very little mention, to no mention of the hem in all the other miracles? He did countless mircales without a mention of the tallit. You're over pressing a text.


Why were the galatians doing fine, with miracles without judaism, or tallits?

So lets go by the whole of Paul's theolgy, and not fish around the bible trying to bind the church under tallits, shofars, shabaat, etc, thanks.

 

[Frogster]

Peter said the law was a yoke in Acts 15, he agreed with Paul, and it is a yoke, not just for initial justification, but a yoke to live under as Christians.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

People can wear whatever they want, none of my business, but my problem with it, is that those who are infusing Messianic Judaism in our charismatic churches, say that if we do wear it, we will "get the anointing".

So that means that those who don't wear the garment are not getting the ???

This is a works teaching. And personally, sorry, with all due respect, but in my opinion they look silly huddled under it, and it can be a distraction. Go huddle at home.

Needless to say, a little leaven leavens the whole lump, these are also folks who say we should do Shabbat to get peace, yet he alone is our peace according to scripture, we don't need external rituals to get peace.

These same people say God hears us better if we say the OT scriptures in Hebrew. Need I say more?

These are folks who say it is a sin to eat a shrimp scampi, after all, it is against the Mosaic code.

So, where do you stand on all this?

My stand on this is that you have greatly misunderstood...a lot.

Not all Messianic Jews are the same....just like all Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, etc. are not the same. Personally, I don't know any Messianic Jew (of the group that I'm part of) who would tell a non Messianic Jew that they needed to wear a Tallit in order to receive a blessing. I suppose there are some who "might" call themselves Messianic Jews and try to force Charismatics into participating in activity without understanding of what they are doing. However, it is my opinion that unless one has the understanding of the meaning behind it and they have the desire to do such that they should not. Doing things without understanding is what gets us into trouble. Anyway, Peter in his instructions to the Gentiles who came into the faith gave them only a short list of things they needed to adhere to immediately (nothing about a Tallit on the list) and he told them they would learn the rest of the teachings of God given to Moses when they attended Synagogue on Sabbath (read it, it's in the Bible).

I grew up in the church. I've been saved for over 50 years now. I don't need to do anything to be more saved. God led me out of my Pentecostal upbringing (there's nothing wrong with my upbringing) into the Messianic movement. I do what I do because I want to. Yes, there has been the occasion where I felt inferior, however, I learned a long time ago (via my Pentecostal upbringing) that there are just some who do that (no matter what church you attend). We don't get strong in the Lord by blaming everyone else on our personal inferior feelings and running away crying that "they made me feel bad". I have on occasion felt pressure to conform (never from the Rabbi) but I just learned to not stay around those but stayed more with those who would not pressure but teach.

I personally enjoy it and am no less saved by doing so. I know who my Redeemer is and I trust totally in Him and what He did for me for my salvation. I do what I do out of love for God and because I want to.

I think Yitzchak explained things quite well.

Do your own research. Not from others who agree with you and only tell you what you want to hear. I remember when I first brought up the Messianic movement to one of my Pastors. He went on and on about how "they believe this, and they believe that". I was surprised. I had been attending the Messianic services and not one of the things they supposedly believed (according to him) was true. I don't do third party anymore because of that. Again, though, not all Messianic's are the same.

 

[Frogster]

My stand on this is that you have greatly misunderstood...a lot.

Not all Messianic Jews are the same....just like all Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, etc. are not the same. Personally, I don't know any Messianic Jew (of the group that I'm part of) who would tell a non Messianic Jew that they needed to wear a Tallit in order to receive a blessing. I suppose there are some who "might" call themselves Messianic Jews and try to force Charismatics into participating in activity without understanding of what they are doing. However, it is my opinion that unless one has the understanding of the meaning behind it and they have the desire to do such that they should not. Doing things without understanding is what gets us into trouble. Anyway, Peter in his instructions to the Gentiles who came into the faith gave them only a short list of things they needed to adhere to immediately (nothing about a Tallit on the list) and he told them they would learn the rest of the teachings of God given to Moses when they attended Synagogue on Sabbath (read it, it's in the Bible).
I grew up in the church. I've been saved for over 50 years now. I don't need to do anything to be more saved. God led me out of my Pentecostal upbringing (there's nothing wrong with my upbringing) into the Messianic movement. I do what I do because I want to. Yes, there has been the occasion where I felt inferior, however, I learned a long time ago (via my Pentecostal upbringing) that there are just some who do that (no matter what church you attend). We don't get strong in the Lord by blaming everyone else on our personal inferior feelings and running away crying that "they made me feel bad". I have on occasion felt pressure to conform (never from the Rabbi) but I just learned to not stay around those but stayed more with those who would not pressure but teach.

I personally enjoy it and am no less saved by doing so. I know who my Redeemer is and I trust totally in Him and what He did for me for my salvation. I do what I do out of love for God and because I want to.

I think Yitzchak explained things quite well.

Do your own research. Not from others who agree with you and only tell you what you want to hear. I remember when I first brought up the Messianic movement to one of my Pastors. He went on and on about how "they believe this, and they believe that". I was surprised. I had been attending the Messianic services and not one of the things they supposedly believed (according to him) was true. I don't do third party anymore because of that. Again, though, not all Messianic's are the same.

Acts 15:21, (red above) was in no way telling them to go to the synagogues, they went back to Antioch glad they did not have to become Jews, it's all there in Acts15, James was just saying try not to freak out the weak conscience Jews, all they knew was Moses for 15 centuries. The churches were intermingling more and more.


The persecutions started in Acts 8, and intensified by 12, they hated Paul, they whipped him 5 times at the synagogues, no way would they would welcome his uncircumcised, Jesus praising gentile disciples in their synagogues, and don’t forget the Jewish militant groups were intensifying too, and they hated Gentiles. Very unsafe there.

Plus, the last place Paul would want his disciples to go to would be near more Judaistic influence. That was why he had to go to Jerusalem in the first place, to stop it. So why have them go to synagogues now, back around the very thing he was stopping?

 

[Frogster]

Yes . And , we only still need it because The Law ( ie Scriptural Authority ) continues to pop up . One day , it won't be needed , anymore .

Yes, the perfect is coming, 1 Cor 13.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Acts 15:21, (red above) was in no way telling them to go to the synagogues, they went back to Antioch glad they did not have to become Jews, it's all there in Acts15, James was just saying try not to freak out the weak conscience Jews, all they knew was Moses for 15 centuries. The churches were intermingling more and more.


The persecutions started in Acts 8, and intensified by 12, they hated Paul, they whipped him 5 times at the synagogues, no way would they would welcome his uncircumcised, Jesus praising gentile disciples in their synagogues, and don’t forget the Jewish militant groups were intensifying too, and they hated Gentiles. Very unsafe there.

Plus, the last place Paul would want his disciples to go to would be near more Judaistic influence. That was why he had to go to Jerusalem in the first place, to stop it. So why have them go to synagogues now, back around the very thing he was stopping?

It's pointless for me to discuss this with anyone who refuses to check out the scriptures more thoroughly for themselves instead of taking up the misguided arguments of others and not even staying on the subject they started.