Balance between Messianic Judaism?

[David Ben Yosef]

Unless it is somehow the case that believing in Replacement Theology changes the fact that Yeshua is God Incarnate/the one who died to atone for sins of mankind when it comes to the simplicity of the Gospel (I Corinthians 15), I'd be cautious to assume who is or isn't a saint when it comes to people living out what Christ noted.

What Christ noted??? You use the word "noted" so often and under so many different applications I have no idea how you actually define it. That makes many of your replies confusing. The Gospel of the Kingdom has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Yeshua was G-d incarnated in the flesh. You have just validated why I said one should be cautious as to how they define what the Gospel actually is. Sadly, many students of the NT have not a clue.

Dying for the Kingdom is sacred throughout the history of God's Kingdom - even more so when one does so for love for the Lord (I Corinthians 13) - and the blood of the saints in His name (Psalm 116:15-16) will always be sacred to Him wherever.

Muslim suicide bombers claim they love the L-rd too, does that also make them martyred Saints?

For no one knows the full hearts/intents of others but the Lord and only He is the Final Judge.

To this we can agree.

Wherever Christ is preached - His Death, Life and Resurrection - that is what we rejoice. And the Apostles of the Church noted this many times - just as much as they noted how it'll always be an issue whenever others claim Yeshua was NOT God or simply a man (which is a matter of a false Gospel - most of the early deadly heresies of the Church addressing it just as it is in addition to noting where Jew/Gentile together were Israel ...neither group devalued in Christ).

Definition please?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

What Christ noted??? You use the word "noted" so often and under so many different applications I have no idea how you actually define it?

Seriously- there have already been dozens of discussions on the issue we've had and there's no acting as if it was not discussed or needs to be repeated, Bruh. A basic search-engine on the matter is easy enough when using the key words "Yeshua" and "Gospel" ...differing applications of the central message are still connected to the same message that's preached every time, which others have easily done before if they really wanted to know since it's not hard to take it all together...

For starters, one can go here or here ..here...or here in The Great Gospel Deception -free

Or, for that matter, one can go with what other Messianic Jews have noted on the Gospel whom I've spoken on before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcFuxXLT29k&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4v8yssXnIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mxpHLJZfek

What Christ noted when it comes to what He taught throughout the Gospels of Himself is not something unclear except to people wanting to make it as such - be it Matthew 25 or Luke 10:25-39 or Luke 15 or John 3:16-19 as basics.

The Gospel of the Kingdom has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Yeshua was G-d incarnated in the flesh. You have just validated why I said one should be cautious as to how they define what the Gospel actually is. Sadly, many students of the NT have not a clue.

None of that has anything to do remotely with showing where the Gospel of the Kingdom was not connected with the fact that Yeshua was not God incarnate and that others had to look to Him for salvation - and arguing past that in assertion (begging the question) validates why it's the case many don't deal with the issues as they are.

Of course, as you have already said before you don't believe Yeshua is God Incarnate (or God at all - per #25/ #31/ #34 #43 and several other places ), it's not really a new issue to be covered - for it's not the Gospel. And to debate the issue isn't something allowed anyhow

Muslim suicide bombers claim they love the L-rd too, does that also make them martyred Saints?

Seeing that Muslim Suicide Bombers go counter to Christ in the Gospel when it comes to love for one's enemies (Luke 6), the caricature/false scenario doesn't fly - but of course, as the Gospel was already noted (I Corinthians 15 and I Corinthians 13), one needs to deal with how the Apostles defined it before arguing that anyone saying they're for Christ is automatically in since no one was saying that at any point - and you know better than to even try that style of argument

To this we can agree.

Oh well..

Definition please

As said before, it was already been discussed before /mentioned inb #12(some threads closed on the issue..one being here for example )- and in light of the OP, not on topic since the focus is on seeing what the Church has done where we can be thankful for. You want to discuss another topic, make another thread on it so as to not take away from this one.

Peace

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Jews are Jews.

Yep..

 

[David Ben Yosef]

Please - there have already been dozens of discussions on the issue we've had and there's no acting as if it was not discussed or needs to be repeated, Bruh.

I'm talking about how you use the word "noted" and nothing more. It is confusing to me. Can you just please define how you use the word so I can understand your replies better? It's not a hard question. Jeesh.

A basic search-engine on the matter is easy enough when using the key words "Yeshua" and "Gospel" ...differing applications of the central message are still connected to the same message that's preached every time, which others have easily done before if they really wanted to know. For startters, one can go here or here ..here...

What Christ noted when it comes to what He taught throughout the Gospels of Himself is not something unclear except to people wanting to make it as such - be it Matthew 25 or Luke 10:25-39 or Luke 15 or John 3:16-19 as basics.

None of that has anything to do remotely with showing where the Gospel of the Kingdom was not connected with the fact that Yeshua was not God incarnate and that others had to look to Him for salvation - and arguing past that in assertion (begging the question) validates why it's the case many don't deal with the issues as they are.

Of course, as you have already said before you don't believe Yeshua is God Incarnate (or God at all - per #25/ #31/ #34 #43 and several other places ), it's not really a new issue to be covered - for it's not the Gospel. And to debate the issue isn't something allowed anyhow Seeing that Muslim Suicide Bombers go counter to Christ in the Gospel when it comes to love for one's enemies (Luke 6), the caricature/false scenario doesn't fly - but of course, as the Gospel was already noted (I Corinthians 15 and I Corinthians 13), one needs to deal with how the Apostles defined it before arguing that anyone saying they're for Christ is automatically in since no one was saying that at any point - and you know better than to even try that style of argument Oh well..
As said before, it was already been discussed before /mentioned inb #12(some threads closed on the issue..one being here for example )- and in light of the OP, not on topic since the focus is on seeing what the Church has done where we can be thankful for. You want to discuss another topic, make another thread on it so as to not take away from this one.

Peace

Thank you for not actually answering my questions, and side stepping the issue.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I'm talking about how you use the word "noted" and nothing more. It is confusing to me. Can you just please define how you use the word so I can understand your replies better? It's not a hard question. Jeesh.

As said before, it was already noted on what "noted" was about - anyone taking a bit of time (not much) to use a basic search engine (if they really want to know rather than be spoon-fed) can do so. Otherwise, it comes off as pretense since basics weren't able to be done. ...and really aren't anymore difficult than it'd be for me to see exactly what you mean with claiming who Yeshua is by a basic use of the Search Engine and Key Words.

It's not complicated, Bruh - and no, I don't plan on doing your homework for something others have already understood easy enough, as you don't warrant being taken seriously based on what you have already noted before - be it here or elsewhere (on rep notes). Simple as that.

If wondering what was meant when it came to what Christ noted, one can go here for more on the issue.. or here in regards to laying out presentation of the Gospel. It has been simple enough for the lurkers noting it, and thus it's what you get as well. Moreover, for reference on the issue of what "noted" means, as noted already, for starters, one can go here or here ..here...or here and here in The Great Gospel Deception -free...

Or, for that matter, one can go with what other Messianic Jews have noted on the Gospel whom I've spoken on before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcFux...e_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4v8yssXnIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mxpHLJZfek

Thank you for not actually answering my questions, and side stepping the issue.

Not really a matter of not answering questions as much as a matter of you not dealing with the answers you don't like - as the discussion has zero to do with answering the OP (which you've yet to do anyhow) and staying on topic instead of derailling. But of course, as said before, when one claims to not believe Yeshua was God ( per #25/ #31/ #34 #43 and several other places ), they already enough issues to deal with when it comes to addressing the central question of who the Lord is.


But thankfully, God takes his time with many Shalom.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I know there are some here that won't associate with the Church for their reasons. Instead of looking at the bad in the Church, is there any good? If so what are they?

Did you have any specific reasons you felt were noteworthy, Bruh?

 

[MadMaxData]

As said before, it was already noted on what "noted" was about - anyone taking a bit of time (not much) to use a basic search engine (if they really want to know rather than be spoon-fed) can do so.

Really??? A search engine is going to tell me how YOU use the word? And I should do all that instead of you simply telling me? Why do you have to be so difficult? No wait, forget it. Note this, I don't care anymore.

 

[ContraMundum]

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

What's more is this:

1Co 12:11-27 "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.

If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?

But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."

On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it."

It seems to me that being anti-Church is being anti-Christ's body.

So, I'm pro-Church because I'm pro-the Body of Christ. You have to love your neighbour.

When I see people rail against the Church for being "not Jewish enough", I am more than reminded of a famous Jew in history who did the same.

Act 9:1-5 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."

 

[David Ben Yosef]

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

Hey Contra, glad to see you back, Bro!

I have to agree with the above quote, since there is no real significant difference between Christianity and the modern Messianic Judaism movement.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

What's more is this:

1Co 12:11-27 "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.

If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?

But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."

On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it."

It seems to me that being anti-Church is being anti-Christ's body.

So, I'm pro-Church because I'm pro-the Body of Christ. You have to love your neighbour.

When I see people rail against the Church for being "not Jewish enough", I am more than reminded of a famous Jew in history who did the same.

Act 9:1-5 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."

Thanks for sharing the euridite commentary, Bruh - for when you're anti-Church, you're anti-Christ and against His Bride. Doesn't mean you can't address other things infiltrating the Church to mess it up - but being against Church is another issue all together and Messianics are way to indebted to the Body for that.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

On another note related. I have heard some people say that some Messianic Jewish synagogues that are associated with Messianic Judaism are 'church with a kippah' and/or even Hebrew Christian. That it's not Jewish enough.

This is another balance. The centrality of Yeshua. Not that a Messianic Jewish synagogue will lose Yeshua's centrality if it's more traditional.

However my stance is the centrality of Yeshua and loving God and neighbor, which includes Torah such as caring for the sick and hungry, comforting people who have had loved ones pass away to name a few...the rest is commentary. The crucified and risen Messiah is what really matters.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This is another balance. The centrality of Yeshua. Not that a Messianic Jewish synagogue will lose Yeshua's centrality if it's more traditional.

However my stance is the centrality of Yeshua and loving God and neighbor, which includes Torah such as caring for the sick and hungry, comforting people who have had loved ones pass away to name a few...the rest is commentary. The crucified and risen Messiah is what really matters.

Indeed - and this also goes for keeping things central to who Yeshua is if daring to even speak or claim to be Messianic, such as keeping central His Divinity - and the focus he had with the lifestyle he advocated when it came to how we treat others.

One could also talk on the role of the Holy Spirit as well being a central Messianic dynamic that needs to be kept in balance

 

[etZion]

I know there are some here that won't associate with the Church for their reasons. Instead of looking at the bad in the Church, is there any good? If so what are they?

When you say "Church", do you mean Christianity or do you mean the Body of Messiah? Just want to make sure the terms are being used correctly.

What about a Church that also supports the redemption of Israel because they know Israel's redemption means life from the dead?

I am assuming this question, you are speaking of a particular denomination of Christianity... and not the body of Messiah in a generalized way.

Supporting the redemption of Israel, is a great thing, but in what way is it being supported? Some have very contrasting views as to what this looks like. Some support Israel being redeemed in a way that they are no longer Israel, they become Christians, abandoning the Torah and their identity is lost.

Thus you need to be more clear with your points, your questions assume we are all on the same understanding.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

When you say "Church", do you mean Christianity or do you mean the Body of Messiah? Just want to make sure the terms are being used correctly.

Certain churches
or specific denominations.

I am assuming this question, you are speaking of a particular denomination of Christianity... and not the body of Messiah in a generalized way.

Yes

Supporting the redemption of Israel, is a great thing, but in what way is it being supported? Some have very contrasting views as to what this looks like. Some support Israel being redeemed in a way that they are no longer Israel, they become Christians, abandoning the Torah and their identity is lost.

I'm referring to those churches or denominations or Christian individuals that support the redemption of Israel without identity being lost.

 

[etZion]

Certain churches or specific denominations.

I think everyone who trust in Messiah, must be treated as a brother and sister as we are instructed, we are One Body, not two, despite disagreements. People take disagreements as hate of someone else. I disagree with many doctrines of Christianity, and hope for Christianity to change, but in no way are Christians any less of a brother or sister because I disagree, and I do not hate Christianity at all. As someone stated earlier, much honor must be given to Christianity throughout the centuries for bringing forth the message of the Messiah to the world, and if they did not, no one else was going to, none of us in the most practical sense, would know the Messiah today, if it was not for Christianity... but balance must also be sought, Christianity is also historically, a religion full of murders, anti-semitism and replacement theology, and this simply cannot go ignored. We must take it all into account..., look at our rights and wrongs..., and seek for something better, moving forward.

I'm referring to those churches or denominations or Christian individuals that support the redemption of Israel without identity being lost.

Of course, that is a step in the right direction! Who would be against that?

 

[mishkan]

Shalom Contra! Nice to see my favorite Jewish Christian Pastor, again. I do appreciate your contribution to these discussions, even when I may disagree with your views. I know you are a man of integrity, and trying to bring Messiah's salt and light to the world.

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

I cannot disagree that the production of scholarly resources and the maintenance of a community are, in fact, crucial contributions to keeping the name of Messiah relevant through the ages.

However, we are being less than diligent if we accept without question the current definitions and mindset that come to us from a Gentile community with a vested interest in setting itself and its theologies over and apart from Israel. All Christian theology starts and ends with self-perpetuation, with Israel set to the side. All Christian theology is rooted in "pie in the sky in the sweet by-and-by", with little to no regard for the regathering of Israel. All Christian theology is based on gnostic dualism--that this material world is the source and home of everything evil, while there exists an invisible home above where all is right and good. That is nothing more than platonic theosophy wrapped in piously Biblical terminology.

While the Church has perpetuated and preserved the WORDS of the Biblical text, it has simultaneously infused those words with MEANINGS right out of Plato's handbook, making all Christian theology inherently anti-Israel and anti-Torah.

No matter how one may protest that this is not the case, all we have to do is allow the protester to speak for ten minutes, and he will demonstrate the validity of this statement.

I also find this statement particularly concerning...

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church.

Everything? No tip of the hat to Moses? No recognition of Isaiah? No admission that the Babylonian sages compiled the Torah and the Prophets, and defended the integrity of the prophetic message against all manner of naysayers? Your statement seems a bit rash to me.

What's more is this:

1Co 12:11-27 "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills. For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.

If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?

But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."

Of course, I have no problem with the words of Paul. But I do have a problem with placing the center of the Pauline community in a Gentile-based setting and worldview. When he was talking about unity, he was referring to admitting Gentiles into a Jewish sect, as per Ephesians 2. He was not talking about Gentiles re-writing the Bible according to dualist Greek philosophy, then demanding Jews to come join the theosophy club after school.

It seems to me that being anti-Church is being anti-Christ's body. So, I'm pro-Church because I'm pro-the Body of Christ. You have to love your neighbour.

I understand your perspective. But I have to disagree. I am not so willing to give a pass to people who use the same words as the Bible, while superimposing different meanings upon those words. Not that I am anti-Gentile--after all, I "are" one. I am not even contrary to Christians who are open to learning about Israel and the original meaning of the Bible. I am only against those who teach a core theology that replaces Israel with a Gentile "Body", and teaches that the ultimate goal of Scripture is "Some glad morning, I'll fly away", rather than the restoration of the planet via the regathering of Israel.

When I see people rail against the Church for being "not Jewish enough", I am more than reminded of a famous Jew in history who did the same.

Act 9:1-5 But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting."

Who did the same? The same what? Sha'ul believed the early Messianics were propping a dead man as a candidate for the throne of Israel, bringing the wrath of the Empire upon their heads as a result. He was not merely attacking those Jewish believers because they were playing games with private pietism. Their beliefs and their actions brought a very real threat with them. The issues were completely different from today.

Today, we have a Church (and I include most "Messianics" in that label) that holds to a completely different "gospel", and follows a completely different "messiah", with a completely different "hope" for how things will end up. The need for a restoration of the "Jewishness of the Gospel" is not merely a matter of playing games of socio-ethnic one-upsmanship. It is the beginning of a return to the original meaning of the texts, as they were written by Moshe, David, Isaiah, Ezekiel, et al. There is a crying need for a recognition of how the message has been distorted, and a matching need for restoration to the original message.

The "Good News of the Kingdom of God" is that the restoration of Israel is coming, and with it, the restoration of the planet.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

I am not even contrary to Christians who are open to learning about Israel and the original meaning of the Bible. I am only against those who teach a core theology that replaces Israel with a Gentile "Body", and teaches that the ultimate goal of Scripture is "Some glad morning, I'll fly away", rather than the restoration of the planet via the regathering of Israel.

So you admit that all Christians who are open to learn about Israel and the original meaning of the bible?

So what's the problem? It's the same thing as saying that Messianic Judaism says Torah isn't for non Jews.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

What's more is this:

1Co 12:11-27 "All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.
For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. For the body does not consist of one member but of many.

If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body.
And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell?

But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you," nor again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."

On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it."

It seems to me that being anti-Church is being anti-Christ's body.

Going over your post again and procesisng on it, I do think that part of the main reason why others assume that it's okay to be against the Church (and thus, by default, setting themselves against Christ whether they wish to acknowledge it or not) is due to the issue of having false views on what the Church and Christianity ever came to - some of this fleshed out more in threads such as Messianic Heliocentrism

The Church and Israel - as the Apostles saw it - was never meant to be seen divorced from one another, even though it was intricate. Ethnic Israel (i.e. all Jews and those in the nation of Israel) weren't the same as God's Israel (i.e. Jews of the Remnant as well as Gentiles grafted in) - and although God had a plan to save Ethnic Israel, you needed to be a part of Remnant Israel to truly be secure....otherwise, folks would perish. Romans 11 and Romans 15 bear this out more in-depth.

Because Early Jewish believers (as you know) did not see the physical state of Israel in their day to be the Kingdom of God or God's Israel, they didn't get involved in the Revolts to liberate it - they understood how Yeshua meant what he said when saying "My Kingdom is NOT of this world - for if it was, my followers would fight for it."..during his conversation with Pilate. They had a mindset that understood the Kingdom of God would be brought to Earth in the future when the Messiah would come and reign.

Unfortunately, many aspects of Jewish culture miss that - similar to others today in many parts of the modern Messianic movement when assuming a "Kingdom Now"/"Dominionist" focus with the concept of Israel and who the Messiah was. With the Bar Kokhba revolt when seeing the most reliable information on the fate of Jewish believers during the revolt ... "the leader of the revolt of the Jews, ordered Christians only to be subjected to terrible punishments, unless they denied Jesus/blasphemed him" (more discussed here for historical review). Some of this flowed out of the views others had even of Yeshua decades before..

For others wanted Yeshua to be political in taking a side against those they deemed to be the enemies of Israel - one of the reasons they felt physical action was necessary to honor the Lord. Historically, the First and Second Jewish Revolts were a disaster for God's people - as people often saw in Jesus a Davidic king, a military conqueror who would rescue them from the Romans (John 6:15; Acts 1:6)...but his kingdom was not the kingdom of the Zealot or the sword (Matt. 26:51-52), even though he had a Zealot disciple (Matt. 10:4). The Lord frequently commanded those he taught or healed not to tell anyone, possibly because they would misunderstand, given the political climate of the day (Mark 1:44, 7:36, 3:12, 5:43; Matt. 8:4, 9:30, 12:16; Luke 8:56). ...and when we remember how many messiahs proclaimed their message during this time, we can understand the uniqueness of Christ's message and the reticence of his audience.

... Jesus predicted the destruction that would result from the revolt (Matt. 24:1-2). ..and it led him to weep on one occasion as he described exactly what would happen (Luke 19:41-44) - noting for ALL Time that they would never see true security till they acknowledged/blessed Him. And it seems that Jesus was saddened because his fellow Jews looked for military solutions to their problems rather than spiritual ones....always looking to a political messiah rather than the Lamb of God. The Lord warned his followers not to take part in that method of bringing in God's kingdom, as the coming destruction was not God's judgment as much as it was the natural result of human beings seeking salvation through their own political and military might.

When seeing the ways that the views of Jewish believers in the Early Church led them to be involved but only so much in the affairs of the world, it's not a surprise that there were many bad things done - but that's consistent with the fact that they felt their faith required them to not be as involved as others would have liked them to be, in the same way others see Christianity today as when it comes to preaching the COMING Kingdom of God and preparing for it. Others say that this is "Escapist" - but the early Jewish believers felt that preaching the Gospel of SALVATION in Yeshua required noting that we're to always be ready for good works (Titus 3) while knowing that this world is passing away in preparation for another one.

The early believers had an apocalyptic faith inb multiple respects - and that's not new seeing that many Jewish sects (notably the Essenes) had something similar to a Preterist mindset while others had a combination of a Futurist/Preterist ideology ( more shared before here and here in #49/ #118 ). Rabbinic Judaism (often considered to be THE definition of Judaism) was in many ways a totally new synthesis which borrowed from at least three different streams of Judaism which had emerged during the Second Temple period - Zadokite (covenantal) Judaism, Enochic (apocalyptic) Judaism, and Sapiential (wisdom-based) Judaism. And The Essenes (possibly from ‘Ossim, meaning “Doers of Torah”), who wrote or collected the Dead Sea Scrolls, pioneered certain aspects of this “Way” (Acts 6, Acts 4, etc.) over 150 years before the birth of Jesus. They were a wilderness (out in the Arava, near the Dead Sea–based on Isaiah 40:3), baptizing (mikveh of repentance as entrance requirement into their fellowship), new covenant, messianic/apocalyptic group. They believed they were the final generation and would live to see the end and the coming of the Messiahs of Aaron and of Israel (priest and king). They saw themselves as the remnant core of God’s faithful people—preparing the Way for the return of YHVH’s Glory (Kavod) as set forth in Isaiah 40-66. They too referred to themselves as the Way, the Poor, the Saints, the New Covenanters, Children of Light, and so forth.

Although they may have been isolationist from the world, the concept of seeing the coming of Israel connected with disconnecting from the world isn't new - and thus, when others assume Christianity chose to have no regard for Israel being brought together again, they have an error in thinking in forgetting that many camps of Judaism already had the same mindset - more on the issue found in good works such as Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls,, Beyond the Veil of the Temple: The High Priestly Origin of the Apocalypses and Prophecy and Apocalypticism: The Postexilic Social Setting.....or in books such as the Apocalypse Against Empire: Theologies of Resistance in Early Judaism and Roots of Rabbinic Judaism and Beyond the Essene Hypothesis: The Parting of the Ways Between Qumran and Enochic Judaism by Gabriele Boccaccini (one of the best scholars around) - the later work being about building his case on what the ancient records tell us about the Essenes and on a systematic analysis of the documents found at Qumran and showing that the Essene community at Qumran was really the offspring of the Enochic party, which in turn contributed to the birth of parties led by John the Baptist and Jesus.

Early Chistianity truly did much to spread the Gospel by the suffering it endured for centuries at the hands of imperial rulers - with them hoping for Israel to be regathered even as they faithfully suffered for the faith as the Apostles/Christ noted and realized that God's Kingdom would not be brought forth by might alone....and this was kept in mind even into the era of Constantine when the followers of the Way were allowed to have freedom from persecution/develop more - leading to greater platforms to spread the Gospel around the world as it concerns salvation found in Yeshua and being a part of His Remnant.

They addressed many issues of their day in faithfulness to call of doing good works (Matthew 25, Luke 10:25-39, etc.) while also noting that the Messiah had yet to come and that his people should await him.

And thankfully, when it came to other issues harming the body of believers (such as dualism), Christianity was well positioned to address those issues as well as others plauging Greek culture. The dualism aspect was something that is highly fascinating seeing how those who were Hellenized Jews were amongst the first to address the issue - while also noting the ways dualistic thought could be altered in order to advance the faith. For the early Jewish Body of believers already held a dualism of two powers (Christ and the devil) established by God.

In "The Johannine Community as Jewish Christians? Some Problems in Current Scholarly Consensus," Raimo Hakola relates how mainstream scholarship at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century saw behind the Gospel of John a community that had drifted away from its Jewish roots. Johannine features such as its christology, determinism, and dualism were understood as being part of the generalizing rubric of "Hellenism" and John was viewed by some as reflecting a time when the earlier conflicts between Hellenistic Christians and Jewish Christians were left behind and the separation of Christianity from Judaism had been completed. But with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars reaffirmed the Jewishness of the fourth canonical Gospel and Certain features, such as John's dualism, could now be compared with the dualism of the sectarian Qumranites (e.g., the Community Rule).

Because Christian ideology was able to handle the dualism of the gnostics that claimed the physical world was of no consequenc and evil while the spirit was all that mattered, the Early Church was able to address the Gnostic heresies that occurred and damaged the message of the Gospel - especially those like Arianism or others claiming that Christ didn't really become a man or that He was only Spiritual/God and not tempted fully since (in their view) it was all an illusion. Ironically, some of those same views have infiltrated the Messianic Jewish world - under the guise of trying to combat Gnosticism even as they advocate a Gnostic worldview when claiming Christ wasn't divine..

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I think Messianics owe everything they have to the Church. The Bibles, concordances, dictionaries, the allegiance to Yeshua over the centuries even in times of persecution, the good works and charity, the faith of martyrs and saints who gave up everything to follow the Messiah. All this is the result of centuries of faithfulness and following when our Jewish forefathers were rejecting all of the above as a lie. The MJ movement is indebted forever to the faithfulness of the Gentiles.

They addressed many issues of their day in faithfulness to call of doing good works (Matthew 25, Luke 10:25-39, etc.) while also noting that the Messiah had yet to come and that his people should await him.

And thankfully, when it came to other issues harming the body of believers (such as dualism), Christianity was well positioned to address those issues as well as others plauging Greek culture. The dualism aspect was something that is highly fascinating seeing how those who were Hellenized Jews were amongst the first to address the issue - while also noting the ways dualistic thought could be altered in order to advance the faith. For the early Jewish Body of believers already held a dualism of two powers (Christ and the devil) established by God.

Continued from before...


Thankfully, because of what the Church was able to do, we are able to deal with it today - and we have substantial history of where others were able to address the matter of gnosticism in the world and the intricacies of Dualism. In the world of the Barbarians where the physical was very much exalted and the Spiritual neglected (or the other way around), Christianity was utilized to help them bridge the gap - and still is to this day. For many are not aware of the ways that Christ addresses Folk Religions - more seen in Defining an Animistic Worldview : The Missiology Homepage and Animism: The Default Religion of the World - Missions Mandate and Animism: - International Journal of Frontier Missions

Read a really amazing book on the issue recently called "Along the Silk Road" as it concerns the Silk Road - and it was amazing seeing the different religions that came together/interacted, as well as how they developed - from animism to theism. From Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan to Tajikistan ...to Kashgar, China, to Istanbul, Turkey and so many others pertaining to the peoples of Central Asia and their rich cultures. ...and religious experiences...
and yet it is interesting to see how Christianity addressed the the dualistic mindsets found in many Animists cultures.

In many respects...Animistic salvation is utilitarian, selfish, human-directed, and this-worldly....for an animist is chiefly concerned with self as he he seeks power to fulfill his own earthly needs (much as the people sought to appease the spirits in order to have them off their backs) - but conversely, Christian salvation is a response to grace, altruistic and self-giving, God-focused, and includes the immediate as well as the eternal. For a Christian, unlike the earthly focused animist, seeks to fulfill the purposes of God.

And this is something that the Early Church advocated and that others took even further - Having to do a research project on St. Patrick, I was recently amazed at the ways he went about handling it. For Christianity had a toe-hold in Ireland before Patrick, but the religion in Ireland before Patrick was animism IN ADDITION to belief in superstition, omens, soothsaying, magic, curses and the power of sacred places. The Irish also believed many unpredictable supernatural forces – including shape shifting hidden dangers. Patrick too believed in supernatural force but all coming from a good and loving God.

But St. Patrick - based on what he knew of the Early Church - was able to combat that and change the entire face of the nation. With St. Patrick, his evangelizing the pagans of Ireland has much to be commended for our day since they lived in Christian community while living in close proximity to those who worshipped many gods. By voice of their preaching and example of gospel living together in good works, Celtic Christianity spread rapidly over Ireland. Their faith was alive to creation with God the Trinity as the great creator. Their theology was very practical and suited to a simple farming people and they did not deal in some of the abstract theologizing that lead to debate throughout the empire. They were faithful to the truth but contextualized it for the agrarian Celts whose historical ties were deep with creation. This is seen powerfully in the Irish prayer known as “Saint Patrick’s Breastplate” (mentioned earlier) dating to perhaps a century or so after Patrick. Though the form that survives most likely is not from the pen of Patrick, yet it certainly encapsulates the Christian faith he established amongst this once barbarous people. It is a prayer dancing with both God and the natural world and ends with a phrase familiar to many who have heard of Patrick.

Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ in me, Christ below me, Christ above me, Christ to the right of me, Christ to the left of me, Christ where I lie, Christ where I sit, Christ where I stand, Christ in the heart of everyone who thinks of me, Christ in the mouth of everyone who speaks of me, Christ in every eye which sees me, Christ in every ear which hears me.
​

More can be found in the book entitled "How the Irish Saved Civilization " by Thomas Cahill ...excellent study. As he noted:

The difference between Patrick’s magic and the magic of the druids is that in Patrick’s world all beings and events come from the hand of a good God, who loves human beings and wishes them success.....

This magical world, though full of adventure and surprise, is no longer full of dread. Rather, Christ has trodden all pathways before us, and at every crossroads and by every tree the Word of God speaks out. We have only to be quiet and listen, as Patrick learned to do during the silence of his “novitiate” as a shepherd on the slopes of Sliabh Mis. | This sense of the world as holy, as the Book of God — as a healing mystery, fraught with divine messages — could never have risen out of Greco-Roman civilization, threaded with the profound pessimism of the ancients and their Platonic suspicion of the body as unholy and the world as devoid of meaning....

“It seems that as some point in the development of every culture, human sacrifice becomes unthinkable, and animals are from then on substituted for human victims…At all events, the Irish had not reached this point and were still sacrificing human beings to their gods when Patrick began his mission…Patrick declared that such sacrifices were no longer needed. Christ has died once for all…Yes, the Irish would have said, here is a story that answers our deepest needs – and answers them in a way so good that we could never even have dared dream of it. We can put away our knives and abandon our altars. These are no longer required. The God of the Three Faces has given us his own Son, and we are washed clean in the blood of this lamb. God does not hate us; he loves us. Greater love than this no man has than that he should lay down his life for his friends. That is what God’s Word, made flesh, did for us. From now on, we are all sacrifices – but without the shedding of blood. It is our lives, not our deaths that this God wants. But we are to be sacrifices, for Paul adds to the hymn this advice to all: ‘Let this [same] mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.’ .

​

But you would never had had the work of St. Patrick and other missionaries unless you had what was established in the early Church when it came to combatting dualism from the Gnostics and addressing the ways Christ was superior to the things in the world.

The original Hebrew context was polytheistic. The message to them was, Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one; love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength. (Deut 6.4-9). Torah relates all aspects of life to God – from the temple to what you do when your donkey falls into a pit.

And The early church proclaims ‘Jesus is Lord’ in the same way; the gods were different, but still many, as indeed they are today. They refused to keep the pantheon and the overlordship of Caesar...for Jesus is Lord. We have adopted Christocentric monotheism...so genuinely Messianic monotheism rejects separation of sacred from secular. Our task is to make all aspects of life sacred, and not to limit the presence of God to spooky religious zones. God is not only encountered in special places, requiring a priestly paraphernalia to mediate our experience of him. God, Church and World are three overlapping circles (not God and World separate with Church in the middle linking them!). Our task is to integrate all aspects of life under the lordship of Jesus – leave one out (eg apartheid, or work) and disaster follows. In Rwanda, ‘Christian’ served as a brand name, but not a commitment to a common Lord, which would have stopped Christians killing one another.

Anytime dualistic, while we may be confessing monotheists, we may end up practicing polytheists..for dualistic expressions of faith always lead to practical polytheism...but thankfully, the Early Church understood this and did their best to address the dynamics of how dualism could be corrupting if assuming that not addressing issues because they were physically related was "bad" and only that which is spiritual is good. The scriptures command that "whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God" ( 1 Corinthians 10:30-32 , Colossians 3:16-18, etc) ...and that goes for all aspects of life. For anytime someone references the Lord, it is an acknowledgment and offering.....just as we offer our lifestyles up to him in acknowledgement of who he is (Romans 1:18-24, Romans 12:1-5, etc) and honor him in daily activities.

Life is a dynamic of balance - and in fact, one of the Church Fathers noted the reality of how passions in/of themselves were not wrong - but rather, they needed to be channeled properly. Something that was good in one instance could become negative in the next - if not utilized by Christ and yielded to its proper purpose...like having a desire for laughter or fun become something that gets out of hand and it takes over - you don't condemn the desire for fun, but you do condemn where it becomes negative - more in In the Heart of the Desert: The Spirituality of the Desert . Biblical Christianity does not fully have a Yin Yang/Duality concept - although it does come closer to Dualism than many expect. And as C.S Lewis noted on pg. 45 of the book Mere Christianity (also noted in The Complete C. S. Lewis Signature Classics):

All the things which enable a bad man to be effectively bad are in themselves good things-resolution, cleverness, good looks, existence itself. That is why Dualism, in a strict sense, will not work.​

But I freely admit that real Christianity (as distinct from Christianity-and-water) goes much nearer to Dualism than people think. One of the things that surprised me when I first read the New Testament seriously was that it talked so much about a Dark Power in the universe–a mighty evil spirit who was held to be the Power behind death and disease, and sin. The difference is that Christianity thinks this Dark Power was created by God, and was good when he was created, and went wrong. Christianity agrees with Dualism that this universe is at war. But it does not think this is a war between independent powers. It thinks it is a civil war, a rebellion, and that we are living in a part of the universe occupied by the rebel. ​

​

Much of these basics in Church history are sadly ignored by many in the Messianic world today, who ignore where the Church not only preserved the Words of scripture (and by tradition, noted which ones were to be included) - but also end up giving radically different meanings to the words of the text and the culture that none of the Early Jewish believers ever advocated. And in the process, as much as they may say they don't wish to be against Israel or against God's Law, they end up doing that anyway in practice even as they claim only the Church is guilty.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

The Church and Israel - as the Apostles saw it - was never meant to be seen divorced from one another, even though it was intricate. Ethnic Israel (i.e. all Jews and those in the nation of Israel) weren't the same as God's Israel (i.e. Jews of the Remnant as well as Gentiles grafted in) - and although God had a plan to save Ethnic Israel, you needed to be a part of Remnant Israel to truly be secure....otherwise, folks would perish. Romans 11 and Romans 15 bear this out more in-depth.

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.