Becoming a Messianic Jew

[Velcro]

I should have written UMJC, but I left the "Union" part off. Sorry. I didn't think about how it could be confusing. UMJC: Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, with Russ Resnik as one of their leaders and main speaker.

"The MJC (whatever that is) does not have the authority to decide who is, or is not Jewish." Well, it is interesting!

I, too, love First Fruits of Zion and Torah Resource -- and their teaching materials. They are good people with a love for G-d and a desire to see people succeed in their love for Him as well.

 

[yod]

As a result of the MJC's two-house teaching, they have developed a way for people to convert, becoming Jews. I am not sure of their process, but many have used it and are now called "Jews" by the MJC.

are you quite sure about this statement? I've never heard anything like this and I know a lot of UMJC folks.

They seem to be strongly opposed to the 2 House stuff, too.

 

[Velcro]

Hi! Very sure, Yod. Yes, a lot of their people are opposed to it, but the leaders teach it. It is on their site, much of it written by Russ Resnik.

 

[shmuel]

The UMJC site has an article by Dan Juster that speaks against the Two House teaching:

http://www.umjc.org/main/docs/Is_the_church_ephraim.pdf

as well as the joint statement with the MJAA:

http://www.umjc.org/main/docs/ephrsumm.pdf

The majority position is against conversion

http://www.umjc.org/main/faq/conversion.aspx

and note the qualifications in the minority position

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Minority Position

1. A means whereby individual Gentile believers could convert to Messianic Judaism should be adopted by the UMJC.

2. Such conversions would in no way convey a higher level of spirituality of acceptance by God but would merely allow willing individuals to identify more closely with the Jewish people.

3. Reasons for adopting a positive procedure for such conversions are: a. Some Gentile believers have a deep longing to become Jews. There should be a commonly-accepted means of acknowledging and satisfying this need.

b. The Tenach made provision for such "conversion," allowing those sojourners within Israel's borders who wished to keep the Passover to become circumcised (Ex. 12:48-49, Deut. 21:10-14).

c. The issue in Acts 15 and the Book of Galatians is mandatory circumcision (conversion) of Gentiles. To allow an occasional Gentile to convert is different than demanding that all must do so.

d. In the first century, since receiving circumcision indicated one's obligation and intention to keep the Law of Moses, Rav Shaul's circumcision of Timothy may be regarded as the conversion of the non- Jew to Judaism. Thus, we have a precedent in the B'rit Hadasha for such a modern day practice.

e. Strict guidelines should be adopted to prevent a "band wagon effect" among immature believers who may be tempted to convert and "play Jewish" for awhile. Thus, following the pattern of traditional conversion, spiritual leaders can discourage casual inquirers by putting off all initial expressions of desire to convert by requiring circumcision and by initiating a rigorous educational program for the serious-minded. (my emphasis added)

S[/font]

 

[Sephania]

Oy! not circumcision again, can't wait until yod sees that.

 

[shmuel]

LOL

 

[yod]

ROFLOL


yes, you know what I think about it...


It's mishagas.

 

[Velcro]

Interesting. i don't have a lot of time to use at their site, but the times i have been on, and the papers that have been in my hands from them, are definitely for the two-house theory and against the one-law (their name for it) idea. They even named FFOZ and Tim Hegg (Torah Resource) in their papers against the "one-law" teachers of one salvation for all.

 

[Velcro]

I am feeling terrible about the turn this thread has taken. From what I have seen, in the short time I have been here, is that we are two-house and one-law people coming together, with a lot of additional differences as well, and enjoying one another regardless, without holding these things over one another's heads.

When I mentioned what was said by the UMJC, it never occurred to me that it would be disputed, because what they had written was on their site, and it was accredited to Daniel Juster and Russ Resnik. I cannot find it now, although it was there for quite a while, up to about two - three weeks ago, so I cannot give an address for it. I am trying to get a copy of it from another source. It was entitled "One Law Movements: A Challenge to the Messianic Community." Being somewhat computer-challenged, maybe I am just not looking in the right places.