Correct Explanation Of Messianic Judaism

[Hoshiyya]

Not sure I understand the intent of your comment directed to Yedida. It sounds like you are asking her ...

Please clarify ... Thanks

​

The first comment of mine is a general question.
The second, quoting Yedida, is offering my perspective on an issue she mentioned.

 

[mishkan]

My 2 cents / perspective:
Jews are from Judah. Gadites are Gadites, Naftalim are Naftalim. The common denominator is the Covenant, which makes them Yisraelim.

Yes, this is what Hebrew Roots teachers put out. But this paradigm contains a grave error.

In order to understand the use of the terms "Israel" and "Judah", you have to follow the history of Israel from at least the time of the Davidic monarchy.

• Under Saul, David, and Solomon, there existed what is known as "the United Monarchy". That is, all 12 tribes were united under a single political head.

• However, after Solomon, there was a division in the nation. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin maintained loyalty to the House of David, and followed Solomon's son, Reheboam.These southern tribes took the name "Judah", for the larger of the two tribes.

• The remaining 10 tribes followed Solomon's servant, Jereboam, and they maintained the name "Israel" because they represented the lion's share of the Israeli population.

• In 722BCE the Northern Kingdom was dissolved when the Assyrian empire blew through and scattered them.

• A similar thing occurred to the Southern Kingdom about 586BCE. However, the Southern Kingdom was able to retain a visible unified identity, largely as a result of fidelity to Hashem. The very oral tradition that is routinely denigrated by Christians and Hebrew Roots teachers actually served to preserve this remnant of Israel.

• When Cyrus released the Jewish nation to return home, any native of Israel was allowed to return. Tribal affiliation was irrelevant. Not only Judah, but Gad, Asher, Issachar, Manasseh, etc. all returned to The Land. At this point, "Jew" began to refer to any member of the 12 tribes. It was no longer restricted to the tribe of Judah. Judah then served to designate the unified national body of all 12 tribes, not a singular tribal affiliation. This is the part that puts the lie to Hebrew Roots Two House teaching.

Today, all the terms--Hebrew, Jew, Israel--are all synonymous and interchangeable. There are no lost tribes, no crypto-Ephraimites, or any other sensationalist, conspiratorial designations. There are just lots of Jews living outside the Land, who need to be regathered under the banner of the Davidic King.

 

[Hoshiyya]

...
Today, all the terms--Hebrew, Jew, Israel--are all synonymous and interchangeable. There are no lost tribes, no crypto-Ephraimites, or any other sensationalist, conspiratorial designations. There are just lots of Jews living outside the Land, who need to be regathered under the banner of the Davidic King.

Doctrine of lost tribes aside, since nobody can prove this anyway, (nobody "walks out the door" knowing they're from Gad or Naphtali or Reuben or whatever...) the application of the word Jew to describe all the ancient Israelites is inaccurate. People do it all the time, its no big giant deal, but I perceive it as inaccurate.

I further am surprised that non-Jews would call themselves Jews, the word apparently being used in a cultural sense.

 

[mishkan]

Doctrine of lost tribes aside, since nobody can prove this anyway, (nobody walks out the door knowing they're from Gad or Naphtali or Reuben or whatever...) the application of the word Jew to describe all the ancient Israelites is inaccurate. People do it all the time, its no big giant deal, but I perceive it as inaccurate.

I agree. It would be anachronistic to describe a pre-722BCE Israeli as a "Jew". That's why a solid understanding of Israeli history is so important for anyone desiring to engage in serious Bible study.

I further am surprised that non-Jews would call themselves Jews, the word apparently being used in a cultural sense.

I would also be surprised by such a practice. Who does that?

 

[Hoshiyya]

....

I would also be surprised by such a practice. Who does that?

Apparently some (ethnically non-Jewish) Messianics, and some others that are hard to label.

 

[Hoshiyya]

Yes, this is what Hebrew Roots teachers put out.....

Could you elaborate on what "Hebrew Roots" means or refers to ?

 

[mishkan]

Could you elaborate on what "Hebrew Roots" means or refers to ?

I've been writing numerous posts on exactly that for a couple of days, now.

The moniker "Hebrew Roots" is used in contradistinction to "Messianic Judaism". It is actually a shortening of the original, "Hebrew Roots of the Christian Faith".

Once, HR designated a group or individual who taught about the history and culture of Israel in order to enhance Christian engagement with the Biblical text. However, in the past 10-15 years, HR has taken on a life of its own. Due to increased understanding of Biblical times, followers of HR began to identify error in their churches, and turned away from the Christian community. At the same time, these people refused to adopt the Jewish community--ironically, for the same reasons.

Thus, at this point in time, HR has come to mean Bible teaching that encourages an absolutist perspective ("Everything except me is pagan!"), leading to judgmentalism and disdain for the established religious communities of Judaism and Christianity.

One of the doctrinal positions that goes with the package is Two House teaching, which allows Gentiles to entertain the fantasy that they are "true Israel" (despite the fact that there is almost always zero evidence of any Israeli blood).

 

[Hoshiyya]

I've been writing numerous posts on exactly that for a couple of days, now.

The moniker "Hebrew Roots" is used in contradistinction to "Messianic Judaism". It is actually a shortening of the original, "Hebrew Roots of the Christian Faith".

Once, HR designated a group or individual who taught about the history and culture of Israel in order to enhance Christian engagement with the Biblical text. However, in the past 10-15 years, HR has taken on a life of its own. Due to increased understanding of Biblical times, followers of HR began to identify error in their churches, and turned away from the Christian community. At the same time, these people refused to adopt the Jewish community--ironically, for the same reasons.

Thus, at this point in time, HR has come to mean Bible teaching that encourages an absolutist perspective ("Everything except me is pagan!"), leading to judgmentalism and disdain for the established religious communities of Judaism and Christianity.

One of the doctrinal positions that goes with the package is Two House teaching, which allows Gentiles to entertain the fantasy that they are "true Israel" (despite the fact that there is almost always zero evidence of any Israeli blood).

Thanks for your response.
Your definition seems to be that of (tentatively) Torah-keeping Yeshua-believers who are connected with Two House doctrines, and disconnected from any kind of Judaism.

It further seems however your definition includes that HR is inherently bad:

" Thus, at this point in time, HR has come to mean Bible teaching that encourages an absolutist perspective ("Everything except me is pagan!"), leading to judgmentalism and disdain for the established religious communities of Judaism and Christianity. "

Is this so defining of HR-people that you mention it in your definition of the term ?

 

[Hoshiyya]

All or most of the things you described were historical or doctrinal in nature, but that particular sentence I quoted I'm wondering if reflects your experiences rather than a definition of the term ?

 

[annier]

All or most of the things you described were historical or doctrinal in nature, but that particular sentence I quoted I'm wondering if reflects your experiences rather than a definition of the term ?

I was quite surprised by that myself. Considering this quote from an earlier post of his, in response to another Messianic poster.
"Your comment about "the blind" demonstrates the standard latent anti-Semitism that sits at the core of all Christian theology."

 

[yedida]

Doctrine of lost tribes aside, since nobody can prove this anyway, (nobody "walks out the door" knowing they're from Gad or Naphtali or Reuben or whatever...) the application of the word Jew to describe all the ancient Israelites is inaccurate. People do it all the time, its no big giant deal, but I perceive it as inaccurate.

I further am surprised that non-Jews would call themselves Jews, the word apparently being used in a cultural sense.

Sheesh....it's hard to talk to people at all nowadays!! I meant the literal front door of someone's home!!! Good grief!!! give me a break....

The term "Jew" inaccurate? In your opinion, what terms should be used? Please, do tell. I'm sure the Jewish population would appreciate being set straight! hmmm...I wonder if they know they're inaccurate...Has anyone told them. Something they should know, don't you think? Sorry, guess this thread will tell them, they'll get the word out. sheesh, oh sheesh I'm outta here

 

[mishkan]

Thanks for your response.
Your definition seems to be that of (tentatively) Torah-keeping Yeshua-believers who are connected with Two House doctrines, and disconnected from any kind of Judaism.

Yes.

It further seems however your definition includes that HR is inherently bad:

" Thus, at this point in time, HR has come to mean Bible teaching that encourages an absolutist perspective ("Everything except me is pagan!"), leading to judgmentalism and disdain for the established religious communities of Judaism and Christianity. "

Yes.

Is this so defining of HR-people that you mention it in your definition of the term ?

Yes.

 

[mishkan]

All or most of the things you described were historical or doctrinal in nature, but that particular sentence I quoted I'm wondering if reflects your experiences rather than a definition of the term ?

There was a time when I would agree with you. But the attitude has become a predominant characteristic. It is part of the group-think that goes with being an HR believer. Some seem to escape it, but they be few and far between.

 

[Hoshiyya]

Sheesh....it's hard to talk to people at all nowadays!! I meant the literal front door of someone's home!!! Good grief!!! give me a break....

The term "Jew" inaccurate? In your opinion, what terms should be used? Please, do tell. I'm sure the Jewish population would appreciate being set straight! hmmm...I wonder if they know they're inaccurate...Has anyone told them. Something they should know, don't you think? Sorry, guess this thread will tell them, they'll get the word out. sheesh, oh sheesh I'm outta here

Well Yedida, I emphasized that it is a small matter, in a post responding to Mishkan, so I don't get why you say "sheesh".
Since you raise the issue: Do you find the term Jew/Yehudi a word truly accurate to apply to the ancient Israelites from the tribe of Levi, Reuben or Dan, or the other tribes ?

BTW I'm not correcting Mishkan or anybody else. Your tone seems to assume I was, for some reason.

 

[mishkan]

I was quite surprised by that myself. Considering this quote from an earlier post of his, in response to another Messianic poster.

"Your comment about "the blind" demonstrates the standard latent anti-Semitism that sits at the core of all Christian theology."

Why do you question that conclusion? Please share with us what study you have done in the historical development of Christian theology.

 

[Hoshiyya]

Why do you question that conclusion? Please share with us what study you have done in the historical development of Christian theology.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "Christian."
If you mean medieval Catholicism, then yes. If you meant Hitler's "Positive Christianity" then yes. But like are all modern Catholics latent anti-semites inasmuch as they are in step with their doctrine?

 

[WOFFED]

Today, I attended a Messianic Hebraic Roots congregation for the first time and learned that they fellowship with the Messianic Judaism congregation that I usually attend.

So, even though there are some MJs here that seem to make a distinction between One Law and Two House (as if there is no bridge between the two) you can occasionally fine unity. Some MJs just seem to like pointing out walls of separation that sometimes don't even exist. This seems to upset some MJs as if you have to be either one or the other and preferrably the one they prefer in order to worship more correctly.

It's just more of the same old, same old religiousity that has seemingly been a divisive character trait of mankind forever and ever.

​

 

[annier]

Why do you question that conclusion? Please share with us what study you have done in the historical development of Christian theology.

I do not want to get another violation in this particular forum sorry :-( I can only say so much. But I am sure others can approach this from their perspectives of course.

 

[mishkan]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "Christian."

If you mean medieval Catholicism, then yes. If you meant Hitler's "Positive Christianity" then yes. But like are all modern Catholics latent anti-semites inasmuch as they are in step with their doctrine?

No, I don't mean any particular branch of Christian sectarianism. I refer to the spectrum of standard Christian topics, and the reasoning that is applied--regardless of the conclusions reached.

We can talk further, but I strongly recommend R. Kendall Soulen's book, "The God of Israel and Christian Theology". Soulen is a Christian theologian who documents the implicit anti-Semitism that is evident in Christian theology since the time of Justin Martyr.

The error lies primarily in two areas--

1. implicit supercessionism and
2. a misunderstanding of the literary genres contained in the Messianic Writings.

 

[WOFFED]

Today, I attended a Messianic Hebraic Roots congregation for the first time and learned that they fellowship with the Messianic Judaism congregation that I usually attend.

So, even though there are some MJs here that seem to make a distinction between One Law and Two House (as if there is no bridge between the two) you can occasionally fine unity. Some MJs just seem to like pointing out walls of separation that sometimes don't even exist. This seems to upset some MJs as if you have to be either one or the other and preferrably the one they prefer in order to worship more correctly.

It's just more of the same old, same old religiousity that has seemingly been a divisive character trait of mankind forever and ever.

I smell a Hebrew Roots teaching coming on.

No sooner spoken and right away another divisive MJ comment from another thread
​

​