Balance between Messianic Judaism?

[Gxg (G²)]

That's evangelicalism that is discussed in another thread in comparing the 2 Messianic Jewish organizations. That's what Christianity teaches per se but Messianic Judaism depending teaches that in light of what you said.

My apologies - as I was trying to follow the vernacular but some of it wasn't lining up. To be clear, you were saying that the other thread elsewhere in comparing organizations (called Article: differences between UMJC and MJAA ) was focused on saying Church and Israel were divorced from one another - or that Messianic Judaism advocates such depending on where one goes?

As it concerns Evangelicalism, the movement itself is seperate from other parts of the Church (namely Ancient Christianity or Eastern Christianity ) - but the view of Israel being divorced from the Church or claiming Jews don't represent the Church and are only Israel is something that very foreign to Early Jewish Christianity in the 1st Century - the "divorce" dynamic arose in language during the 1960s with Modern Messianic Judaism - and while trying to combat where they saw others in the Church say the Lord was not concerned with the Jewish people anymore (Replacement Theology) and now trying to combat others doing the same in the form of One Law Theology (i.e. Gentiles replacing the Jews by claiming they must look/act like the Jews in all ways and be called "Israel" in order to be accepted), many ended up missing where the Early Jewish Christians noted that Christianity was always about Remnant Israel (blood Hebrews and Gentiles grafted in) reaching out to the nations and ethnic Israel (i.e. descendants but not saved of Jacob) - all of it in line with the ideology that there was an expansion of the covenant God made first with Israel to bring forth a Redeemer through their physical line who would redeem people from every tribe, nation, kindred and tongue. That includes Jews and Gentiles, by grace through faith in Christ.

Unfortunately, this was a view that got them a lot of trouble from both the Jews who felt they were traitors and the Gentiles either persecuting them/all Christians or Gentiles who didn't want anything to do with the Jews (anti-Semitism) ...or those Gentiles who ended up trying to resist the other camps of Judaism in their day that focused on trying to convert all Gentiles away from following Christ and into a system that said they had to convert to Rabbinical Judaism in order to be pleasing to God.....and of course, within that, you also had to deal with issues WITHIN their camp (such as those who were either for the heresy of Marcionism or Ebionitism - more shared in #27 /#24 as well as here and here).

But all of it was very intricate of a matter. For good review, I think one of the best articles is Israel and the Church - - Hebrew for Christians - as it concerns the concept of Remnant Theology in the Church.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

My apologies - as I was trying to follow the vernacular but some of it wasn't lining up. To be clear, you were saying that the other thread elsewhere in comparing organizations (called Article: differences between UMJC and MJAA ) was focused on saying Church and Israel were divorced from one another - or that Messianic Judaism advocates such depending on where one goes?

Yes that thread. Just making a comment that I quoted you that Messianic Judaism can be evangelicalism.

Paul hearts desire was that his brethren in the flesh could be saved. So being Jewish didn't matter for salvation.

I guess if you follow this view with a Messianic significance like you posted you might say it's Christian doctrine in modern times. So in this camp you have Jewish people as Jews who follow evangelicalism with a Messianic significance.

Anything wrong with that?

 

[MWood]

I do think that it can be problematic whenever the Church is something others claim they don't want to associate with - for whether people really prefer it or not, when you say "Yes" to Yeshua, one automatically says "Yes" to the Church and becomes a part of it. And thus, people fight against themselves/Christ in trying to claim no connection or allegiance to it.

The basis of what Messianic Judaism was in the 1st Century is exactly what Christianity in its formation was about. It was never Greek philosophy/mindsets of "Gentiles replace Jews!!" that Christianity was born out of no and there is not a shred of evidence that has ever been placed forth to substantiate the point.

And I am still surprised every time I've been able to talk to Jews who came to believe in Yeshua and noted how much they took issue with other Gentiles claiming that Israel/the Church are not the same and then assuming Jewish cultural norms require Jews to not see themselves as such.


And it was not something done (when noting Jews were seperate in practice from Gentiles many times) to say Gentiles were NOT important.

As Brother Contra said best:

[/INDENT]



The Church of Jesus Christ is not something separate from Israel, but is the true Israel --the true manifestation of the Chosen People (see Gal 6:16, 1 Peter 2:9-10, etc.). It is because of this that the Eastern Church is correct to refer to the saints of the Old Testament as "St. Abraham" and "St. Moses," etc.

For, we are not a replacement for Israel of old, but an unbroken continuation of Israel under the promised King and Messiah of Israel, and His Church is His Kingdom of Israel, expanded to include all the Gentile peoples of the earth. And so, in Acts of the Apostles, when you have Jewish Christians addressing their fellow Jews who are not yet full Christians, you will see them refer to it as "the Way" -- that is, the true manifestation of Israel -- the "sect" that truly represents Israel, as opposed to the other Jewish sects (the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots, etc.) who did not recognize the true King of Israel, Who is the only "Way" -- the "Way, the Truth, and the Life."

Because the Church is remnant Israel, Paul--certainly a member of the Church--could say that since he was a believer in Jesus, he was part of remnant Israel (Romans 11:1-5). Because the Church is remnant Israel, Paul could say that Gentile believers in Jesus have been grafted into remnant Israel (Romans 11:17). Because the Church is remnant Israel, both Paul and Peter could say that Jews who didn't accept Jesus would be cut off from Israel (Romans 11:17; Acts 3:23). Because the Church is remnant Israel, Paul could say that Gentile believers are no longer "excluded from citizenship in Israel" and no longer "foreigners to the covenants of the promise" (Ephesians 2:12). Because the Church is remnant Israel, Paul could say that Gentile believers "are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household" (Ephesians 2:19).


Christ was present within the early Jewish community (alongside Gentile Churches where the Gospel was contexualized in their frameworks , Romans 16:3-5 ), as it pertains to the ecclesia/local bodies (Acts 8:1-3 , Acts 9:30-32, Acts 15:40-41, Acts 16:4-6, Romans 16:15-17, 1 Corinthians 7:16-18, 1 Corinthians 11:15-17 , 1 Corinthians 14:32-34 , 1 Corinthians 16:18-20, 2 Corinthians 8:17-19 , Galatians 1:1-3, 1 Thessalonians 2:13-15, Revelation 1:3-5 , Revelation 22:15-17, etc ) and the issue of where the Lord proclaimed how He would establish His Church upon the apostles ( Matthew 16:17-19, Matthew 18:16-18 )...


As said before, Messianic Judaism doesn't equate to not being Christian in thinking (false scenario) at any point - and Biblically/historically, Jewish believers in Messiah - whether in Jerusalem or in the Diaspora - had NO problem identifying as Christian since the Way/Nazarene Sect within Judaism was also known as that (1 Peter 4:15-17 , Acts 11:25-27 Acts 26:27-29 - ) - and the terms of discussion focused on wasn't on whether or not one was a "Christian" when it came to Jewish culture - but rather, what TYPE of Christianity one had been practicing (i.e. Jewish Christianity vs. Gentile Christianity). Other non-believing Jews have long noted this.

There are many excellent works on the issue - one of them being Nazarene Jewish Christianity: from the end of the New Testament Until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century (Studia Post-Biblica)... by Ray Pritz .....a comprehensive study of the heirs of the earliest Jerusalem church, their history and doctrines, their relations with both synagogue and the growing Gentile church...with the author analyzing all sources, Jewish, Christian, and pagan, which can throw light on the sect and its ultimate mysterious disappearance. Additionally, another excellent resource is Jewish Christianity in apostolic times: A native Jewish Church andFather Bernstein Finds the Jews | The Groom's Family - as it concerns Jewish believers in the Church showing their heritage and what it means to live Messianic Jewish within Christendom - and often feel like they live in dual worlds....

As there have always been various forms of Judaism, there are various forms of Messianic Jews.[/COLOR][/COLOR], so it is with the Church - but we are all ONE Body, One Church.[/QUOTE]

A very good read. And so true it is.
Thanks G, and thanks for posting Contra.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Yes that thread. Just making a comment that I quoted you that Messianic Judaism can be evangelicalism.

Got ya - understand and agree 100%...

And I'd go even further to say that many parts of Messianic Judaism are not even reflections of the Protestant camp of Evangelicalism - but have morphed into eflections of Radical Reformation/Radical Protestant movement when seeing exactly what they're opposed to and how much of the language (especially in trying to return fully to what the Early Church lost) was used by other groups in that era as well. In many ways, as people carry baggage with them into camps, this seems to be the case with many in the Messianic world - paticularly if being against anything Catholic within the history of the Church (i.e. Eucharist, addressing Church Traditions with the Cannons of Scripture, Church Councils, etc.).

Many say the Messianic Judaism movement is growing - although within the U.S, it seems it is dying off and not as big as others make it out to be. I think people mistake a big or growing internet presence with spiritual or church growth. They're not the same. With MJism abroad from a global perspective (especially as it concerns what occurs in Europe or Israel or even in the West Indies), I've noticed things can seem much more balanced/thriving than what often occurs in the U.S...

There are many parts of the Messianic Movement which seemed to have died out - due to the reality of placing more emphasis on Jewish living or studying the OT (as if that makes one more obedient to the Lord/valuable) than on the Gospel of Yeshua and reaching the nations for the Lord. For churches/synagogues that cease to be evangelistic and become more insular tend to die off in time - and when they lose connection with what occurs in the real world, the door becomes open for a host of issues.....be it a cult of personality where focus is solely on one individual leading or where the focus becomes on comparing themselves to one another to see who is or isn't as "observant" as they are.

Many gather together in the name of not wanting to be like mainstream Christianity (or, in their view, "church with a kippah") and yet they have no idea how they end up fulfilling their own judgement against other believers since they do not act like the early church in the time of the Apostles when it came to the Gospel - and only have symbolism rather than substance that comes with real relationship with the Messiah.

Also,for many it's an identity issue - they come into MJism to reconcile who they are - and for many, it feels good to say they're doing something no one else (in their claim) is doing ....even when their claims may not be 100% accurate. Many come out of parts of Christianity due to bitterness at the Church for a myriad of issues (often feeling that they were "lied" to in the Church when seeing things taught in MJish circles which were not taught to them previously) - and yet in that bitterness, they end up doing things in the name of God's Law being honored or Jews being valuable that have zero to do with what other Jewish believers have done for centuries.

Although not all Messianic Jewish groups are like that, many sadly have become just that - claiming the "church in a kippah" nonsense whenever they see anything associated with the Church or Christianity and yet having zero connection with Biblical Judaism in outlook and more connection with what occurs in the craziness of much of the Hebrew Roots movement. ....

And as said earlier, a lot of their actions more similar to what happens in the realm of Radical Protestant culture/"Primitive Christianity" (i.e. trying to find that ideal "original" body that was never as pristine as others make it out to be).

You see the same dynamic with what occurred before when seeing Protestant Reformation vs Primitive Restoration dynamics, although it does seem that much of the Restoration movement has been losing a lot of appeal and steam over the years due to people doing research on the things claimed to be "restored" to the church by the Restoration camp (typically among people within the Simple/Organic church movement)---and for the people who actually did the research when it came to comparing the claims of "Biblical restoration" made with seeing what was lost, then seem to end up in the Traditional Christianity camp more and more...except the people in the "Traditional Christianity" camp have to note that others feeling that what the Restorationist people were reacting against was valid to a point since alot of things deemed to be "Traditional" were more akin to what the Protestant movement justified even though they disconnected from what was early/traditional Christianity as well....and thus, people find themselves in Ancient lands very quickly...

Many in time realize this - and walk out of it........and many Jewish believers got tired of seeing Gentiles claiming to be for Judaic practice and yet ignoring where much of it was already present within Christianity. One of the reasons there is an influx of Jewish believers into many parts of Christendom (especially Liturgical circles such as Orthodoxy and Catholicism or Lutheranism).

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Paul hearts desire was that his brethren in the flesh could be saved. So being Jewish didn't matter for salvation.

True..

I guess if you follow this view with a Messianic significance like you posted you might say it's Christian doctrine in modern times. So in this camp you have Jewish people as Jews who follow evangelicalism with a Messianic significance.

Anything wrong with that?

I think you gave a very good description of the situation - and in all realness, it adds to the dynamic of Jews around the world living out their Jewishness and faith in the Messiah within a myriad of ways - some going for the more modern expressions that have developed out of Evangelicalism and within the Protestant world (be it UMJC or MJAA ...or AMC or CTOMC and many others) or others that tend to go toward more Ancient Christianity/Apostolic Christianity with their Jewish expression....and of course, those outside both of those camps like those very much similar to how Berbers in the Middle East or Native Americans did things living by the land, communing in nature and being nomadic. The list goes on....

 

[Gxg (G²)]

A very good read. And so true it is.
Thanks G, and thanks for posting Contra.

Glad to know you were blessed - thanks for the kind words and ditto on what you noted with Brother Contra

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

True..

I think you gave a very good description of the situation - and in all realness, it adds to the dynamic of Jews around the world living out their Jewishness and faith in the Messiah within a myriad of ways - some going for the more modern expressions that have developed out of Evangelicalism and within the Protestant world (be it UMJC or MJAA ...or AMC or CTOMC and many others) or others that tend to go toward more Ancient Christianity/Apostolic Christianity with their Jewish expression....and of course, those outside both of those camps like those very much similar to how Berbers in the Middle East or Native Americans did things living by the land, communing in nature and being nomadic. The list goes on....

The Modern Messianic Jewish movement roots are from evangelicalism Christianity to look at it at another way.

 

[mishkan]

The Modern Messianic Jewish movement roots are from evangelicalism Christianity to look at it at another way.

Precisely. And most "Messianic" congregations and missions organizations still reflect that origin. I advocate for the conscious development of an Israel-centric theology, as per the texts of Scripture.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The Modern Messianic Jewish movement roots are from evangelicalism Christianity to look at it at another way.

I agree - the very history of the movement itself bears that out - and within the history of the movement, seeing Israel as central has always been present despite some of the protests coming from some groups for decades, although some of the groups are within the vein of Neo-Ebionitism in assuming that Israel is not central because of the centrality of Yeshua, His Divinity, His Incarnation/Death and Resurrection. For the Israel that Christ preached/proclaimed is not the same which the rest of the Jewish nation died/fought to establish in the many revolts leading to it's destruction - and the Israel He is bringing back is one not of this world, where both Gentiles ingrafted/included in and Jews (from the Root of Abraham per Romans 11) are going to help administer while the Lord is doing ground-work in our time gathering other Jews who were scattered all over the world and don't know of Him...showing them the Messiah in preparation for the coming kingdom.

This Kingdom was what Yeshua often noted when it came to him noting the Kingdom of God was WITHIN us rather than something others would say "Here it is or there it is" (as noted in Luke 17) - and the development of the Kingdom is Here and yet it is still to come. It is progressive.

 

[mishkan]

The Church of Jesus Christ is not something separate from Israel, but is the true Israel --the true manifestation of the Chosen People (see Gal 6:16, 1 Peter 2:9-10, etc.). It is because of this that the Eastern Church is correct to refer to the saints of the Old Testament as "St. Abraham" and "St. Moses," etc.

For, we are not a replacement for Israel of old,

Despite the disclaimer, this is Replacement Theology, or Supercessionism, in its most raw and basic exhibition.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Despite the disclaimer, this is Replacement Theology, or Supercessionism, in its most raw and basic exhibition.

Thanks for sharing.

Despite the disclaimer of dealing with a supposed disclaimer, none of what you said shows at any point where Replacement Theology was present - it is reflective of lacking awarness of what Jewish Christianity was (unless they are anti-Semitic in believing themselves replaced) in its most raw and basic demonstration. Thus, one needs better understanding of the terms since noting where Jew and Gentile are Israel and yet still seeing Israel as the 12 tribes who don't know Messiah was what the Apostles preached.

Jewish Ethnocentrism, of course, tends to assume that the Church was something the Apostles and Yeshua noted as seperate - but that is not the case, for it was upon the Apostles Yeshua noted He'd build His Church (Matthew 16). Replacement theology deals exclusively with the idea that the Jewish people as a WHOLE have no more importance to God - one of the many expressions of anti-Semitism.

That is not, of course, has nothing to do with noting where God has included the Gentiles as a part of His people Israel (Remant Israel) and has called them the Church - part of seeing Israel and the Church from the perspective of Remnant Theology.


Gentile believers are grafted into remnant Israel, whose holy root is the Messiah. And Gentile believers have taken the place of Jews who have not believed, but Gentiles as a whole have not replaced Jews as a whole. Only part of Israel has been hardened (Romans 11:25). And God is able to graft Jews back into remnant Israel/the Church when they believe (Romans 11:23). Thus, the proper understanding of Israel and the Church is not replacement theology... nor its cousin of separation theology. AND the Church has not replaced national Israel. For National Israel never was a spiritual body of people, but merely a nation of saved and unsaved, like others nations. And God has a future program of prophecy to fulfill for that nation. Neither has the Church replaced remnant Israel. Paul considered himself part of remnant Israel (Romans 11:1-5), part of Christ (Romans 9:3), and part of the Church (Ephesians 5:29-30)....showing that the the Church, the Body of Christ and remnant Israel are synonymous.

Gentiles were grafted into the Church, an olive tree natural to Jewish people but unnatural to Gentiles - and it is for this reason that Paul exhorts his Gentile readership not to be arrogant about their membership within the Church (Romans 11:20).

There are different aspectsd that came up with the development of the Church - for the Church is new regarding the New Covenant's promise of the indwelling Spirit (Ezekiel 36:24-26; Jeremiah 31:31-33) - as the mystery aspect of the Church was that non-Jews would also receive the Spirit and be placed within the same body (with believing Jews) through the Spirit (Acts 10:45, Acts 15:8; Ephesians 2:19-3:6) - a mystery because the New Covenant and the advent of the Spirit had been promised only for the house of Israel and the house of Judah (Jeremiah 31:31), not for Gentiles.

But it was a mystery hidden in the Old Testament, sparingly, such as in the covenant given to Abraham, whose seed (Messiah) would be a blessing to all nations.

So the Church has new aspects which have never before been experienced for the people of God - however, the Church is not new because it is simply remnant Israel. St. Paul's olive tree solves this when seeing it as remnant Israel. Paul's olive tree metaphor is similar to his human body metaphor (Romans 12:4-5; 1 Corinthians 12:12) and the fact that he uses the two metaphors so close to one another (Romans 11 and 12) shows he is speaking about the same group of people in both.

Practically, in the body metaphor, the Messiah is the head that gives direction to the rest of the body...and similarly, in the olive tree metaphor, the tree gets its sustenance and origin from the Messiah. In both metaphors, the membership is both Jew and Gentile - in one analogy, Jewish and Gentile body parts are the focus while in the other, Jewish branches and Gentile shoots are the focus.

The olive tree is a group of Jews and Gentiles made holy by the Messiah - fitting as an accurate description of the Church (Ephesians 3:6) - for with the olive tree metaphor, Paul was writing to Gentile believers (Romans 11:13), members of the Church....although the context of the olive tree metaphor was not the Church per se. In example, in Romans, Paul's first use of ekklesia comes in Romans 16 (Romans 16:1, Romans 16:5, Romans 16:23), where it refers to local assemblies, not the entire body of believers. Moreover, the context of the olive tree metaphor is remnant Israel (Romans 11:5, 7)--"their [Jewish people's] own olive tree" (Romans 11:24).
Logically, if Paul had confined his olive tree illustration to include Jewish people only, remnant Israel might have been something separate from the Church, or something placed within the Church. However, since Gentile believers are grafted into the olive tree, however, it is clear that remnant Israel is not confined to physical Jews only, but rather, contains the same redeemed peoples who are members of the Church.



It makes more than enough sense to see how the olive tree is remnant Israel and it is the Church, because the Church is remnant Israel. Further support for this comes from Peter's speech in Acts 3. While speaking to Jewish non-believers, he stated that Jesus was a fulfillment of Mosaic prophecy:

For Moses said, "The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people." (Acts 3:22-23)​

When a Jewish person believed in Jesus and was born of the Spirit, he became a member of the Church, the Body of Christ. But if a Jewish person did not believe in Jesus, he would be "cut off" (the same language used in Paul's olive tree illustration) from among the Jewish people....showing that not only Paul, but Peter also, saw the Church as being equivalent to remnant Israel.


And the early Jewish body saw that as time progressed and the expansion of the covenant to include Gentiles occurred - something that is necessary to be aware of when it comes to honoring what Yeshua said on Gentiles consider . The issue has been discussed before - (one place being where Brother pat34lee shared in-depth thoughts before on the issue, although he received a lot of hassle over it but others defended him on the issue...from the thread entitled Identity Chrisis: Slander..and other places being Who is a Jew? From our older son or here/elsewhere...in #141/#167.)
Others already addressed the way the Messiah reached out to Gentiles and NEVER expected them at any point to become one of the tribes of Israel - nor said that was a standard. This has been shared directly in #163 with you before - and the same thing goes for the ways the Levitical Priesthood evolved (which was already discussed with you before in #72 / #73 or here in #60 when speaking on priests - what Christ did by going outside of the Levitical priesthood to establish His own priesthood of which all Hebrews and Gentiles could be a part of....more shared in #258 )


Neo-Ebionites generally tend to be quick in assuming that Gentiles and Jews collectively are never called Israel - even though the 1st century Jewish believers noted Israel to be both Jews/Gentiles and the Church -. But that is a woeful understanding of what the concepts were even about. Messianic Jews have often noted this repeteadly when it comes to some of the understandings - for Israel includes BOTH believers (New Israel), and it's older brother in the faith of Abraham (Jewish people yet to accept Christ). That is why we can say there is still something special and relevant about Israel, our older brother in the faith, while also noting that the Church (Jews believing in the Gospel/spreading it and Gentiles who also recieved it from Jews and now spread it as well) are Israel.

​

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (Romans 2:28, 29)
​

Counter to Replacement Theology, it is Biblical to note that there is still something particularly special about the modern day Jewish people, although the characteristics of that "specialness" are still under discussion among theologians. And there's much merit for saying that the true Israel is not Israel "in the flesh" (i.e., ethnic Judaism) or even the Israeli State of today (as many Jews in Israel have noted for some time)...but rather Israel in the spirit....and thus, the Early Jewish Christians noted how they were the TRUE Israel while also noting that others who were only Ethnic Israel still needed the Lord in order to be a part of those who'd be saved.. and note the fact that the Jewish people have not been forsaken.

Other camps in Judaism did similar with seeing themselves as the only representation of Israel - namely the Essenes and others - so it's not a new concept.

 

[Yoseft]

Despite the disclaimer of dealing with a supposed disclaimer, none of what you said shows at any point where Replacement Theology was present - thus, one needs better understanding of the terms since noting where Jew and Gentile are Israel and yet still seeing Israel as the 12 tribes who don't know Messiah was what the Apostles preached. Jewish Ethnocentrism, of course, tends to assume that the Church was something the Apostles and Yeshua noted as seperate - but that is not the case, for it was upon the Apostles Yeshua noted He'd build His Church (Matthew 16). And the early Jewish body saw that as time progressed and the expansion of the Gentiles occurred.

Neo-Ebionites generally tend to be quick in assuming that Gentiles and Jews collectively are never called Israel - even though the 1st century Jewish believers noted Israel to be both Jews/Gentiles and the Church -. But that is a woeful understanding of what the concepts were even about. Messianic Jews have often noted this repeteadly when it comes to some of the understandings - for Israel includes BOTH believers (New Israel), and it's older brother in the faith of Abraham (Jewish people yet to accept Christ). That is why we can say there is still something special and relevant about Israel, our older brother in the faith, while also noting that the Church (Jews believing in the Gospel/spreading it and Gentiles who also recieved it from Jews and now spread it as well) are Israel.

​

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (Romans 2:28, 29)
​

Counter to Replacement Theology, it is Biblical to note that there is still something particularly special about the modern day Jewish people, although the characteristics of that "specialness" are still under discussion among theologians. And there's much merit for saying that the true Israel is not Israel "in the flesh" (i.e., ethnic Judaism) or even the Israeli State of today (as many Jews in Israel have noted for some time)...but rather Israel in the spirit....and thus, the Early Jewish Christians noted how they were the TRUE Israel while also noting that others who were only Ethnic Israel still needed the Lord in order to be a part of those who'd be saved.. and note the fact that the Jewish people have not been forsaken.

Other camps in Judaism did similar with seeing themselves as the only representation of Israel - namely the Essenes and others - so it's not a new concept.

Great post!

 

[Avodat]

Despite the disclaimer, this is Replacement Theology, or Supercessionism, in its most raw and basic exhibition.

Thanks for sharing.

Just read the post you are referring to and can see your objection - it is RT in my opinion (most RT claims not to be).

 

[aniello]

Originally Posted by MWood

The Church of Jesus Christ is not something separate from Israel, but is the true Israel --the true manifestation of the Chosen People (see Gal 6:16, 1 Peter 2:9-10, etc.). It is because of this that the Eastern Church is correct to refer to the saints of the Old Testament as "St. Abraham" and "St. Moses," etc.

For, we are not a replacement for Israel of old,
​

Despite the disclaimer, this is Replacement Theology, or Supercessionism, in its most raw and basic exhibition.

Thanks for sharing.

Yep, mishkan, agreed.

Thanks MWood for manifesting precisely another iteration of Replacement Theology lies.

Would love to have you in court, sworn and in the dock.

Contempt for the RT notion is not an adequate word. Perhaps mendacity? Maybe willful intent to commit fraud.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Great post!

Miss ya, Brother Yoseft, and glad you're around - and glad you know where I'm coming from. Always a trip the moment people get quick to throw out the term "Replacement Theology" and yet don't even deal with where the Apostles and Yeshua noted both Jew/Gentile together to be Israel - as it seems akin to folks crying "Racism!!!" the moment you say Black people caught promoting gang violence don't represent what being black was about.

And the same dynamic occurred throughout the history of the Church - Jewish believers noting Gentiles to be a part of Remnant Israel/God's Body as they reached out to Ethnic Israel and then told "replacing!!" by Rabbinical Jews who didn't believe in the Messiah - or who sadly advocated Philio-Semitism ...Philio-Semitism being a form of "good will" anti-semitism since it makes the Jewish people beyond being human or better by default simply because they're Jewish, as if they are only capable of doing what's right......and that whereas others are in need of salvation via Christ, they Jewish people have no need of it in order to eternally recieve all the benefits God promised Remnant Israel/His people.


The reason the Apostles noted the Church (Jew predominately in the beginning ) to be God's Israel was because of the promise of the Messiah being fulfilled in Christ - and it's why they noted that salvation could only be found in Christ.....and dared to point out that ALL who chose not to turn to Him would be cut off. This may be uncomfortable for many - but we have to honor what the Apostles and Christ set forth when it came to how they defined being a part of God's People and what it meant to follow Him as it concerns the Gospel. The idea that all who are Hebrew/Jewish descent are automatically destined to be saved and can do no wrong - whereas all Gentiles are different - was always a false teaching in the same vein as John Hagee does in the notion of the Church and Israel seperate at all points when it comes to his advocay of the false teaching of Dual Covenant Theology and using Philio-Semitism as a basis for it (more shared in #48/ #133 )

I'm thankful for Jewish believers in the Messiah in our times (as well as throughout the centuries) who noted the ways that Israel and the Church often overlapped - and yet also took time to point out how much others felt they were trying to defend the Jewish people from RT and yet didn't even realize they were doing just as much damage by not acknowleding the nature of what Israel was about.

For as they noted, Most people advocating Philio-Semitism tend not to even realize it even as they go about doing it when forgetting how Yeshua and the Apostles made plain that physical descent alone was not enough to enter into the Kingdom of God - the Lord, as St. John the Baptist noted, could raise out descendants from the stones (Luke 3 ) and we'd be foolish to think otherwise (#191/#192 )


But it happens nonetheless...even for people working within the world of MJism.

Thankful for what Brother Marc said best when noting the following:

Originally Posted by Messianic Jewboy

Romans 4:9-12
10 but what state was he in when it was so credited — circumcision or uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision! 11 In fact, he received circumcision as a sign, as a seal of the righteousness he had been credited with on the ground of the trust he had while he was still uncircumcised. This happened so that he could be the father of every uncircumcised person who trusts and thus has righteousness credited to him, 12 and at the same time be the father of every circumcised person who not only has had a b’rit-milah, but also follows in the footsteps of the trust which Avraham avinu had when he was still uncircumcised.

1-Abraham is the father of every uncircumcised person who trusts(non Jews)
2-Abraham is also the father of every circumcised person who has had a Brit Milah AND also follows in the footsteps of Abraham(when he was still uncircumcised.
3-Therefore both from above are equally recipients and partakers of he Promise

What unites ALL equally 110% is Abraham. Paul says to the non Jews if you follow the footsteps of Abraham then you're Abraham's seed.
​

Originally Posted by Messianic Jewboy

.......Here is an article by Mark Nanos that explains that non Jewish Christ and the sons of Abraham venue...

http://www.marknanos.com/allegory-web-temp-5-2-04.pdf

The conclusion(unquote) with Nanos exergesis of Paul's allegory is that non Jewish Christ believers are regarded as children of the free woman, representing the promise that in Abraham's seed all nations will be blessed. Also non Jewish Christ believers are representatives bearing witness by receiving the Spirit to their claim to be children of Abraham. According to Paul this promise is beginning to be fulfilled when all the nations will join with Israel to worship the God of Israel of all human kind.
​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Great post!

My bad for not getting back with you on your Messianic light thread that you made - will try to get to it later if I have the chance hopefully

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

Precisely. And most "Messianic" congregations and missions organizations still reflect that origin. I advocate for the conscious development of an Israel-centric theology, as per the texts of Scripture.

You're NOT understanding. Just because Messianic Judaism is evangelicism doesn't mean it's completely evangelicalism. You can be evangelicalism and still have an Israel-centric theology.

 

[mercy1061]

Despite the disclaimer of dealing with a supposed disclaimer, none of what you said shows at any point where Replacement Theology was present - it is reflective of lacking awarness of what Jewish Christianity was (unless they are anti-Semitic in believing themselves replaced) in its most raw and basic demonstration. Thus, one needs better understanding of the terms since noting where Jew and Gentile are Israel and yet still seeing Israel as the 12 tribes who don't know Messiah was what the Apostles preached.

Jewish Ethnocentrism, of course, tends to assume that the Church was something the Apostles and Yeshua noted as seperate - but that is not the case, for it was upon the Apostles Yeshua noted He'd build His Church (Matthew 16). Replacement theology deals exclusively with the idea that the Jewish people as a WHOLE have no more importance to God - one of the many expressions of anti-Semitism.

That is not, of course, has nothing to do with noting where God has included the Gentiles as a part of His people Israel (Remant Israel) and has called them the Church - part of seeing Israel and the Church from the perspective of Remnant Theology.


Gentile believers are grafted into remnant Israel, whose holy root is the Messiah. And Gentile believers have taken the place of Jews who have not believed, but Gentiles as a whole have not replaced Jews as a whole. Only part of Israel has been hardened (Romans 11:25). And God is able to graft Jews back into remnant Israel/the Church when they believe (Romans 11:23). Thus, the proper understanding of Israel and the Church is not replacement theology... nor its cousin of separation theology. AND the Church has not replaced national Israel. For National Israel never was a spiritual body of people, but merely a nation of saved and unsaved, like others nations. And God has a future program of prophecy to fulfill for that nation. Neither has the Church replaced remnant Israel. Paul considered himself part of remnant Israel (Romans 11:1-5), part of Christ (Romans 9:3), and part of the Church (Ephesians 5:29-30)....showing that the the Church, the Body of Christ and remnant Israel are synonymous.

Gentiles were grafted into the Church, an olive tree natural to Jewish people but unnatural to Gentiles - and it is for this reason that Paul exhorts his Gentile readership not to be arrogant about their membership within the Church (Romans 11:20).

There are different aspectsd that came up with the development of the Church - for the Church is new regarding the New Covenant's promise of the indwelling Spirit (Ezekiel 36:24-26; Jeremiah 31:31-33) - as the mystery aspect of the Church was that non-Jews would also receive the Spirit and be placed within the same body (with believing Jews) through the Spirit (Acts 10:45, Acts 15:8; Ephesians 2:19-3:6) - a mystery because the New Covenant and the advent of the Spirit had been promised only for the house of Israel and the house of Judah (Jeremiah 31:31), not for Gentiles.

But it was a mystery hidden in the Old Testament, sparingly, such as in the covenant given to Abraham, whose seed (Messiah) would be a blessing to all nations.

So the Church has new aspects which have never before been experienced for the people of God - however, the Church is not new because it is simply remnant Israel. St. Paul's olive tree solves this when seeing it as remnant Israel. Paul's olive tree metaphor is similar to his human body metaphor (Romans 12:4-5; 1 Corinthians 12:12) and the fact that he uses the two metaphors so close to one another (Romans 11 and 12) shows he is speaking about the same group of people in both.

Practically, in the body metaphor, the Messiah is the head that gives direction to the rest of the body...and similarly, in the olive tree metaphor, the tree gets its sustenance and origin from the Messiah. In both metaphors, the membership is both Jew and Gentile - in one analogy, Jewish and Gentile body parts are the focus while in the other, Jewish branches and Gentile shoots are the focus.

The olive tree is a group of Jews and Gentiles made holy by the Messiah - fitting as an accurate description of the Church (Ephesians 3:6) - for with the olive tree metaphor, Paul was writing to Gentile believers (Romans 11:13), members of the Church....although the context of the olive tree metaphor was not the Church per se. In example, in Romans, Paul's first use of ekklesia comes in Romans 16 (Romans 16:1, Romans 16:5, Romans 16:23), where it refers to local assemblies, not the entire body of believers. Moreover, the context of the olive tree metaphor is remnant Israel (Romans 11:5, 7)--"their [Jewish people's] own olive tree" (Romans 11:24).
Logically, if Paul had confined his olive tree illustration to include Jewish people only, remnant Israel might have been something separate from the Church, or something placed within the Church. However, since Gentile believers are grafted into the olive tree, however, it is clear that remnant Israel is not confined to physical Jews only, but rather, contains the same redeemed peoples who are members of the Church.



It makes more than enough sense to see how the olive tree is remnant Israel and it is the Church, because the Church is remnant Israel. Further support for this comes from Peter's speech in Acts 3. While speaking to Jewish non-believers, he stated that Jesus was a fulfillment of Mosaic prophecy:

For Moses said, "The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from among his people." (Acts 3:22-23)​

When a Jewish person believed in Jesus and was born of the Spirit, he became a member of the Church, the Body of Christ. But if a Jewish person did not believe in Jesus, he would be "cut off" (the same language used in Paul's olive tree illustration) from among the Jewish people....showing that not only Paul, but Peter also, saw the Church as being equivalent to remnant Israel.


And the early Jewish body saw that as time progressed and the expansion of the covenant to include Gentiles occurred - something that is necessary to be aware of when it comes to honoring what Yeshua said on Gentiles consider . The issue has been discussed before - (one place being where Brother pat34lee shared in-depth thoughts before on the issue, although he received a lot of hassle over it but others defended him on the issue...from the thread entitled Identity Chrisis: Slander..and other places being Who is a Jew? From our older son or here/elsewhere...in #141/#167.)
Others already addressed the way the Messiah reached out to Gentiles and NEVER expected them at any point to become one of the tribes of Israel - nor said that was a standard. This has been shared directly in #163 with you before - and the same thing goes for the ways the Levitical Priesthood evolved (which was already discussed with you before in #72 / #73 or here in #60 when speaking on priests - what Christ did by going outside of the Levitical priesthood to establish His own priesthood of which all Hebrews and Gentiles could be a part of....more shared in #258 )


Neo-Ebionites generally tend to be quick in assuming that Gentiles and Jews collectively are never called Israel - even though the 1st century Jewish believers noted Israel to be both Jews/Gentiles and the Church -. But that is a woeful understanding of what the concepts were even about. Messianic Jews have often noted this repeteadly when it comes to some of the understandings - for Israel includes BOTH believers (New Israel), and it's older brother in the faith of Abraham (Jewish people yet to accept Christ). That is why we can say there is still something special and relevant about Israel, our older brother in the faith, while also noting that the Church (Jews believing in the Gospel/spreading it and Gentiles who also recieved it from Jews and now spread it as well) are Israel.

​

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. (Romans 2:28, 29)
​

Counter to Replacement Theology, it is Biblical to note that there is still something particularly special about the modern day Jewish people, although the characteristics of that "specialness" are still under discussion among theologians. And there's much merit for saying that the true Israel is not Israel "in the flesh" (i.e., ethnic Judaism) or even the Israeli State of today (as many Jews in Israel have noted for some time)...but rather Israel in the spirit....and thus, the Early Jewish Christians noted how they were the TRUE Israel while also noting that others who were only Ethnic Israel still needed the Lord in order to be a part of those who'd be saved.. and note the fact that the Jewish people have not been forsaken.

Other camps in Judaism did similar with seeing themselves as the only representation of Israel - namely the Essenes and others - so it's not a new concept.

What if I was able to prove to you that Abraham saw Messiah?

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

I think we have to be careful. Was Paul careful? I mean he had the chutzpah in Romans 10 to say that the unbelieving Jews, his brethren in the flesh and testifies that they have a zeal for God. And he also says that his hearts desire is Israel's salvation. See the contrast? Paul is a testimony of unbelieving Israel's zeal for God. So we have to be very careful here. I mean do want to conclude that since there is NO DOUBT that Israel has a zeal for God it replaces salvation per se? Again we have to be careful. Is God in the synagogue? NO DOUBT. Has God forsaken His people(Israel)? God forbid!!!

Hope others see where I'm going here. We have to be careful. Maybe this is a balance thing within Messianic Judaism not just the balance between Messianic Judaism and the Church.

What is the balance in this case? Should evangelicalism(the part of believer versus non believer) be more central or less central? This between Messianic Judaism and Judaism.

What should be emphasized? We are just like you traditionally and we believe in Yeshua. Or we believe in Yeshua which makes us different and we still maintain our Jewish identity.

 

[Avodat]

You're NOT understanding. Just because Messianic Judaism is evangelicism doesn't mean it's completely evangelicalism. You can be evangelicalism and still have an Israel-centric theology.

There are some strange uses of the word evangelicalism in this. You cannot 'be' evangelicalism, and you cannot be partly evangelicalism!

Are you saying: "Just because MJ is evangelical [it] doesn't mean it's completely evangelical. You can be evangelical and still have an Israel-centric theology".

You can be AN evangelical but you cannot be AN evangelicalism! Different words.

Having said that, I agree if your post is as I have re-produced it, in red, above.