The MJAA as a standard of Messianic Judaism

[Avodat]

I thought debates relating to the Law had their own forum now? These debates might more usefully be directed there!

 

[mishkan]

I thought debates relating to the Law had their own forum now? These debates might more usefully be directed there!

You know... that's a tricky question. I realize this looks like a "Law" debate, but it is really a debate on identifying the MJ community--who can be in it, according to what standard, and what role members will have.

This is a much bigger topic than simply, "Law, or no Law?".

 

[mishkan]

Ok, if you believe that the Gentile branches are grafted into Israel, and most of the Israel branches are cut off from the tree, does that mean Gentiles are grafted into cut off branches?

Gentiles are grafted into the Messianic Community, which, by definition, is Jewish. They become participating members in a Jewish community, under the rule of a Jewish King.

That's the problem with dispensationalism--it pushes every metaphor so hard that it loses sight of the original point.

The whole context of the chapter is the role of Gentiles coming in to Israel. The entire context repudiates replacement concepts, so your question is invalid.

 

[Qnts2]

Gentiles are grafted into the Messianic Community, which, by definition, is Jewish. They become participating members in a Jewish community, under the rule of a Jewish King.

That's the problem with dispensationalism--it pushes every metaphor so hard that it loses sight of the original point.

The whole context of the chapter is the role of Gentiles coming in to Israel. The entire context repudiates replacement concepts, so your question is invalid.

My question and objection is to your line, 'the role of the Gentiles coming into Israel'.

The Messianic community and the "Rabbinic Jewish community" separated. This separation and final split off occurred after the expullsion from Jerusalem around 130 ce, after the Bar Kokba revolution. Israel as a nation rejected the Messiah, while some Jewish individuals did not reject Jesus.

I believe God was and is in control. I believe that the break occurred to preserve Israel. The Gentiles who came to believe on Jesus far outnumbered the Jewish people. Had Messianic Judaism remained a part of Judaism, the Jewish people would have been outnumbered and the Gentiles would have 'taken over Judaism'. With that, Israel would no longer exist as a unique chosen people, preserved by God for future salvation. In otherwords, God planned this out, did not lose control, and did preserve the children of Israel, so that all prophesy concerning Israel will be fulfilled.

 

[anisavta]

The whole context of the chapter is the role of Gentiles coming in to Israel. The entire context repudiates replacement concepts, so your question is invalid.

That's what I was thinking.

The Gentiles who came to believe on Jesus far outnumbered the Jewish people. Had Messianic Judaism remained a part of Judaism, the Jewish people would have been outnumbered and the Gentiles would have 'taken over Judaism'. With that, Israel would no longer exist as a unique chosen people, preserved by God for future salvation. In otherwords, God planned this out, did not lose control, and did preserve the children of Israel, so that all prophesy concerning Israel will be fulfilled.

When the book of Romans was written, Gentiles did not outnumber Jewish believers.
Israel would always exist as a unique people because G~d's promises and gifts are irrevocable. And because of His covenant with Abraham, Israel always has and always be His chosen people. Gentiles coming into the Kingdom does not change that fact.

 

[Lulav]

You said '

MJAA as well as other organizations are made up of all kinds of Jews. From those who are very frum (who would get an apartment to prepare their own foods while at conference) to those who you couldn't tell apart from Gentile Christians. So the beliefs are there, its just like it was in the beginning, nothing much has changed, it's all about who will win out. '

You are actually making my point. Messianic Judaism has Jewish believers who are all levels of practice. That is why Messianic Judaism starts with those who celebrate the High Holy Days and identify with the Jewish community. It is all levels of practice based on calling. One thing Messianic Judaism opposes is One Law.

Yes, I am well aware. But that is the problem. Most who became believers back in the 70's were not very religious at all. Sure Bat/Bar mitzvah'd but that is as far as they went. Like they call some Christians Easter and Christmas pew warmers it is the same thing, go to synagogue on Yom Kippur at least. However when you discover Messiah, you should want to follow his words and teachings. Not those of a misunderstanding Gentile church. This is where the problem lies. Yeshua came to call us back to Torah, to walk in G-ds ways not to abandon it because we believe in Him. MJ, as you have described is like putting Eastern Orthodox in with Roman Catholics and Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, Pentecostal etc, all in one congregation and expecting unity. But just as that scenario won't work, neither does it in MJ. That is why a standard must be made. Especially for the Gentiles. They look to us to see how to follow HaShem's ways, and they see some keeping Shabbat, some working on Shabbat, some keeping Kosher, others having Lobster. What picture does this present? nothing but confusion and our G-d is not the god of confusion. How can we be one with him, with Yeshua even if we aren't all on the same page?

Who are we to listen to? Shall we follow the school of Shammai? Or shall we follow Hillel? This gives us a choice, but the only choice I know that we were presented at the mountain and when Yeshua came was to choose Life.


Yeshua said he was the way, the truth and the Life, he was that way to follow.

If you can not accept Messianic Jews who are against One Law, or Messianic Jews who are not Frum, then the people on this forum are actually opposed to Messianic Jews and Messianic Judaism, as we have no issue with all levels of practice. Starting with those who celebrate the High Holy Days.

Are you using 'you' speaking to me or those on this forum? To me, it's not about accepting, I think in this day and age when we really are connected all around the world that the issue should not be the same. It is fine diversity in the ethnic part as we were scattered by provenance and for a reason though. But today we should, as believers at least, be on the same page.

I personally don't like the practice of Messianic Jews or Messianic Gentiles who wear a yarmulke and shop on Shabbat. If you want to shop on Shabbat, I do not believe the person should wear a yarmulke. I also do not believe Gentiles should be wearing a yarmulke. First of all, the yarmulke would be desceptive as Jewish people view that as traditional Jewish clothing. Secondly, it is a tradition which is not a biblical requirement.

All true and I agree. However you do run into problems with mixed marriages.

People who were raised Jewish, are accustomed to all levels of Judaism, and have no problem recognizing others as fellow Jewish people.

I don't know why you wrote this, it sounds like an accusation or at the least a confrontational statement. Are you saying I have a problem recognizing Jewish people? Or are you just in some passive aggressive way showing your distaste for those raised as a Hebrew Christian? You don't have to be raised Jewish to understand all levels of Jews.

The Messianic Jews who object to certain practices object because in a Jewish environment, we do cater to the most observant among us. In our family gatherings, when there are Orthodox Jews, we provide Kosher food. At the Jewish community center, where Jewish people from all branches of Judaism attend, the community center has a Kosher kitchen, even though not all eat Kosher. The Jewish community center is closed on Saturday. But in the general Jewish community, there are other commercial establishments open on Shabbat, if owned by a Reform Jew. This is nothing new. It is standard Jewish practice in a general Jewish community.

You are preaching to the choir, I know all of this. But there should be a line between the ethnic and the religious, don't you agree?

To say that there was a debate or discussion only supports that there are Jewish people there.

I would think so since it was the MJAA. But it doesn't support what you said. If this is taken across the board as a given to 'bow to the frum among us' then there should not have been any debate about it.

Once again, Messianic Judaism starts with Jewish people who identify with the Jewish community, desire the Jewish people to hear about Yeshua, and Messianic Jews celebrate the High Holy days.

And the Gentiles are an afterthought?

 

[Lulav]

One thing Messianic Judaism opposes is One Law.

I just wanted to address this separately, to say this is to say that MJ opposes One Torah. But that is found in Torah to say the opposite. Therefore it can be concluded that MJ opposes Torah.

All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised , and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof. 49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you. Ex 12

The Hebrew here is 'One Torah'

Even the 'Ger' was to participate in the sentence for blasphemy or murder

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death , and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death...Lev 24

22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God

This shows that the ger was to judged by the Torah, they were held responsible for following the Torah, the law. If not they would also be subject to the punishment.

One manner of law is 'Mishpat' which is related to the judicial side for those not knowing this. This is the act of judging a case, a court, witnesses, etc.

When they went into the land, the offerings and sacrifices from the children of Israel and the Ger were to be the very same. So there were no differences in these practices.

It doesn't look like this was only for one time period.

14 And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the L-RD; as ye do , so he shall do . 15 One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD.

16 One law and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

 

[Jerushabelle]

When the book of Romans was written, Gentiles did not outnumber Jewish believers.

Can you show me your source for this statement? I'm assuming you are referring to Messianic/Christian (both Jew and Gentile) believers, right? Have you also researched the edict of Emperor Claudius, the reason for its issuance and the effect it had on Messianic/Christian believers both Jew and Gentile in relation to the timeline and content of the book of Romans? It's extremely interesting reading. Actually, it blew me away when I read it and answered a lot of questions about the changes that occurred in Christianity. I can't help but wonder how often things like that happened?

 

[Qnts2]

Can you show me your source for this statement? I'm assuming you are referring to Messianic/Christian (both Jew and Gentile) believers, right? Have you also researched the edict of Emperor Claudius, the reason for its issuance and the effect it had on Messianic/Christian believers both Jew and Gentile in relation to the timeline and content of the book of Romans? It's extremely interesting reading. Actually, it blew me away when I read it and answered a lot of questions about the changes that occurred in Christianity. I can't help but wonder how often things like that happened?

You are right.

The Jewish community in Rome was rather large. The assembly in Rome had many Jewish believers who were the leadership.

When the book of Romans was written it was after that edict. All Jewish people had been expelled from Rome. Without the Jewish leadership, the believing Gentiles stepped up into leadership. The church grew and when the Jewish people were allowed back into Rome, the Gentile church was resistant to the returning Jewish believers. The book of Romans was written to the two groups, to bring them back together. In Rome, the Gentiles had become the majority.

 

[etZion]

I just wanted to address this separately, to say this is to say that MJ opposes One Torah. But that is found in Torah to say the opposite. Therefore it can be concluded that MJ opposes Torah.

Exactly, that would not be a very wise claim to be making.

 

[Yahudim]

You know... that's a tricky question. I realize this looks like a "Law" debate, but it is really a debate on identifying the MJ community--who can be in it, according to what standard, and what role members will have.

This is a much bigger topic than simply, "Law, or no Law?".

Hi Mishkan,

I would go even further. We should offer some background. This is a topic started by an individual of Jewish descent, who was a convert to Christianity by the wholly Christian evangelical outreach called Messianic Judaism, some 30 years ago. Needless to say, times have changed. The Messianic community has engaged in a more thorough historical and contextual investigation of scripture since that time. Most among us have accepted that mainstream Christian theology has not completely come to grips with it's cultural and political past. The same can be said of Rabbinic Judaism of the same period.

The OP's primary position is straight-out-of-the-can Christianity with an side of Jewish cultural prejudice. Her doctrinal stance on this topic is that Gentiles were never grafted into Israel; that Gentiles are not to follow Torah; that Gentiles and Jews are not the 'one man' Paul spoke of in Ephesians. Her opinion is that they are still Gentile and still completely separate from Israel.

While I accept that from a strictly racial and cultural standpoint she is correct; it is not correct from a doctrinal view and is in fact, unscriptural. And while I believe that this is completely understandable as a knee-jerk reaction to the fear of Gentile assimilation and the persecutions and oppression of the Jewish community by Gentiles as a whole and especially the Gentile 'church', I still view this doctrine as divisive and inaccurate.

It is her stated purpose to hold the 'peace' of this forum hostage until she can get us to cause the Gentiles in this forum to quit observing the instruction of Torah and quit advocating the same. Failing that, she demands a forum name change to either 'Hebrew Christian' or 'One Law'. So while on the face of it, it may seem like a 'Law or no Law' debate, it is really a debate based on racist and cultural bias.

She has made such statements as, "From a Diaspora Judaism view, the covenant which was given to all people was the Noachide covenant, so Gentiles are obligated to this covenant given to all who are descended from Noah. The Mosaic covenant was given to the children of Israel/Jewish people, so the Jewish people are obligated to the Mosaic covenant."

From what I understand, the covenant with Noah was the the Creator would never again destroy the world by flood. But what do I know? Her insistence on this fictional account is held by her and the Jewish community, despite the fact that the writings of the ancient Jewish sages clearly shows that the rabbinate had no consensus on what the Noachide laws were, even as late as 300 c.e. as demonstrated here:"Do the Seven, Go to Heave?" An investigation into the history of the Noahide laws (torahresource.com)

And she is quoted as saying,

"I personally do not believe that Gentiles have been grafted into Israel. The cultivated Olive tree is not Israel. Israel is the Natural branches, most which have been cut off. Branches are grafted into the root. The root is the Messianic promises / Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah."

And

"If you can not accept Messianic Jews who are against One Law, or Messianic Jews who are not Frum, then the people on this forum are actually opposed to Messianic Jews and Messianic Judaism"

From what I have read, her position has nothing to do with us not accepting the Jewish people, Messianic or otherwise. Quite the opposite. It is her position that they don't accept Gentiles. For instance if we don't accept the Jewish opposition to 'One Law', then we are somehow opposed to 'Messianic Jews and Messianic Judaism'. What nonsense. It wasn't me that said that there is one law for the native born and the stranger. Elohim made no 'racial' divisions among His children. He made provision for all His children to be joined to Him through Israel. So if she and her 'community' doesn't like the concept, perhaps she should address her comments to the Author of the Law, and not us.

This is about the same old cultural and racial bias that has divided the Messianic congregation since the 1st century. So please understand; I believe that Christians and Messianics of all races should be received in all humility and love. But this message, not so much.

My position is simple. Messiah taught strictly from Torah. It was the basis of the teachings of every single one of His talmidim (disciples). Torah is the foundation of all scripture. The changes that were effected by the advent of Messiah cannot be properly understood unless they are examined from the context of Torah. The Bereans didn't run home and pull out a copy of the 'New Testament' to evaluate Paul's teachings. They compared his teachings to Torah and the Prophets. Should we do any less?

Messiah taught of the ones who would call on His name, saying they did great works in His name, that He would tell them to depart because they were workers of lawlessness. Since those who call on His name are Christians, it is reasonable to understand that this warning was for Christians. Since Christian doctrine is based on the false assumption that the law (read:Torah) has been done away with, it is also reasonable that this was the basis for His warning.

We have not freedom from the law. The law is freedom. What we have is freedom from condemnation that comes from working lawlessness. So I don't care what any opponent to the observation of the law has to say. And I certainly don't care if keeping His commandments is in the minority view.

Blessings,

 

[GuardianShua]

My question and objection is to your line, 'the role of the Gentiles coming into Israel'.

The Messianic community and the "Rabbinic Jewish community" separated. This separation and final split off occurred after the expullsion from Jerusalem around 130 ce, after the Bar Kokba revolution. Israel as a nation rejected the Messiah, while some Jewish individuals did not reject Jesus.

I believe God was and is in control. I believe that the break occurred to preserve Israel. The Gentiles who came to believe on Jesus far outnumbered the Jewish people. Had Messianic Judaism remained a part of Judaism, the Jewish people would have been outnumbered and the Gentiles would have 'taken over Judaism'. With that, Israel would no longer exist as a unique chosen people, preserved by God for future salvation. In otherwords, God planned this out, did not lose control, and did preserve the children of Israel, so that all prophesy concerning Israel will be fulfilled.

The nation of Israel was created for all the faithful followers from all over the world. It was not created for the Hebrew people, but for the Hebrews who are the Elect of God; along with the other people of the world.

 

[Henaynei]

I personally do not believe that Gentiles have been grafted into Israel. The cultivated Olive tree is not Israel. Israel is the Natural branches, most which have been cut off. Branches are grafted into the root. The root is the Messianic promises / Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah.

So right on - I have hesitated to bring this up but...

the Olive Tree and Root are not Israel. They are Faith and relationship with HaShem. Until Messiah almost exclusively the branches were Israel. Then some of those Natural branches were broken off and some Wild branches were grafted/adopted in.

A lot of misunderstanding of the relationship of Jews and Gentiles to HaShem comes from the misunderstanding of the Tree/Root passages.

Messiah Yeshua Himself stated, "I am the Vine; you are the branches."

 

[Yahudim]

So right on - I have hesitated to bring this up but...

the Olive Tree and Root are not Israel. They are Faith and relationship with HaShem. Until Messiah almost exclusively the branches were Israel. Then some of those Natural branches were broken off and some Wild branches were grafted/adopted in.

A lot of misunderstanding of the relationship of Jews and Gentiles to HaShem comes from the misunderstanding of the Tree/Root passages.

Messiah Yeshua Himself stated, "I am the Vine; you are the branches."

So the same is true of the misunderstanding, 'neither Jew not Gentile, but one new man in Messiah'? Does this mean that the Kingdom and King that I swore fealty to is not of Israel? What about the New Jerusalem, will I need a passport? Or does this mean that I can only worship and obey from afar? Gee, I thought we could go boldly before the Throne. I thought we were heirs. I thought that we were sons.

A lot of people I know are going to be soooo disappointed.

 

[mishkan]

My question and objection is to your line, 'the role of the Gentiles coming into Israel'.

Interesting.

The Messianic community and the "Rabbinic Jewish community" separated.

Sort of.

This separation and final split off occurred after the expullsion from Jerusalem around 130 ce, after the Bar Kokba revolution. Israel as a nation rejected the Messiah, while some Jewish individuals did not reject Jesus.

Indeed. A minority of Israel remained faithful to Yeshua. Are you trying to say this minority ceased to be "Israel"? Do you not consider yourself part of "Israel"?

I believe God was and is in control.

So do I. Just as there has always been a minority of faithful followers within the people, am Yisrael, so those who followed Yeshua should be expected to be a minority.

I believe that the break occurred to preserve Israel.

Possibly. That's one theory. I can see some merit to the idea, but I won't pretend to speak for Hashem where he has not given his own explanation.

The Gentiles who came to believe on Jesus far outnumbered the Jewish people. Had Messianic Judaism remained a part of Judaism, the Jewish people would have been outnumbered and the Gentiles would have 'taken over Judaism'.

I'm sure Hashem, the almighty, all-merciful, could have managed to preserve the faithful remnant either way. You seem to limit God to working within a framework of ethnic paranoia.

With that, Israel would no longer exist as a unique chosen people, preserved by God for future salvation.

Again, you are playing out one possible scenario, but there is no evidence that is the only possible outcome.

In otherwords, God planned this out, did not lose control, and did preserve the children of Israel, so that all prophesy concerning Israel will be fulfilled.

I don't think he lost control, either. But I don't think he necessarily does things for the reasons you suggest. And even if he did... Gentiles who now recognize the need to truly adhere to the Tree should be welcomed, not rebuffed. Acceptance would accomplish the vision of Daniel 2:35... the Messianic Kingdom growing to global proportions by absorption of the Gentile nations.

 

[Mr. Donut]

Constantine the Great was the Pontifex Maximus of Helios (the sun god). The Pontifex Maximus (Latin, literally: "greatest pontiff")

Constantine remained the Pagan high priest until the day he died.

I'll bet that looked really cool on his drivers license!

 

[Gxg (G²)]

So right on - I have hesitated to bring this up but...

the Olive Tree and Root are not Israel. They are Faith and relationship with HaShem. Until Messiah almost exclusively the branches were Israel. Then some of those Natural branches were broken off and some Wild branches were grafted/adopted in.

A lot of misunderstanding of the relationship of Jews and Gentiles to HaShem comes from the misunderstanding of the Tree/Root passages.

Messiah Yeshua Himself stated, "I am the Vine; you are the branches."

Messiah must always be the focus..and as it concerns the focus of who the patriarchs focused upon, it was always centered upon the Messiah. From Abraham to Issac to Jacob/Israel. There was actually an excellent discussion on the subject elsewhere that was started by a Messianic Jew, as seen in the thread entitled Romans Chapter Eleven shows that Yeshua/YHWH is The HOLY Root < (discussed here and here).

 

[ContraMundum]

So the same is true of the misunderstanding, 'neither Jew not Gentile, but one new man in Messiah'? Does this mean that the Kingdom and King that I swore fealty to is not of Israel? What about the New Jerusalem, will I need a passport? Or does this mean that I can only worship and obey from afar? Gee, I thought we could go boldly before the Throne. I thought we were heirs. I thought that we were sons.

A lot of people I know are going to be soooo disappointed.

If I can chip in:

" Does this mean that the Kingdom and King that I swore fealty to is not of Israel?" - He is King of all, not just Israel. We don't serve a mere worldly King with a Kingdom with earthly boundaries and nationalities.

"What about the New Jerusalem, will I need a passport?" - Yes you do. Faith and baptism is the passport to get into the New Jerusalem.

"Or does this mean that I can only worship and obey from afar? Gee, I thought we could go boldly before the Throne." - You can, but there is no earthly throne.

"I thought we were heirs." - we are, but not of this world.

"I thought that we were sons." - you are, but not of an earthly Father.

Back to lurk mode for me. Interesting conversation. Carry on.

 

[ContraMundum]

Gentiles are grafted into the Messianic Community, which, by definition, is Jewish. They become participating members in a Jewish community, under the rule of a Jewish King.

That's the problem with dispensationalism--it pushes every metaphor so hard that it loses sight of the original point.

The whole context of the chapter is the role of Gentiles coming in to Israel. The entire context repudiates replacement concepts, so your question is invalid.

I really think Henny and easyG are right about this. No scriptures tell us that Gentiles are grafted into the Jewish community. They are grafted into the community of the faithful, which has always had Jew and gentile, since even before the Cross.

I don't except that this is a result of dispensationalism, as any cursory analysis of the fundamentals of that system would quickly establish that such an indictment is warranted.

If you honestly believe that people come to the Cross to become Jewish, and as such that Jesus died to make all people Jewish, then I would challenge your authority to say that and ask you to convince me that you are not a member of a cult. I'm not literally saying that in your case, but surely you would agree that such a novel and exclusive position would cause that suspicion.

 

[ContraMundum]

You know... that's a tricky question. I realize this looks like a "Law" debate, but it is really a debate on identifying the MJ community--who can be in it, according to what standard, and what role members will have.

Isn't such a discussion better serviced by actual, real-life Messianic communities? I think it is a little naive if one thinks that there will ever be any real universal consensus on this. Messianic Judaism is now forming into organizations and denominations that will each decide their own membership criteria and the roles that such would entail. Just like every other faith community on the planet, adherents would have to figure out that which best suits them personally, join and adhere.

Everyone will see it differently. I see what you call MJism as just another American religious movement. If I'm right, it will have a shelf-life. I see real Messianic Jews as people born and raised Jewish who now follow Jesus and are born again. You disagree most likely or would qualify that with some caveat or two. Nothing wrong with that either. You are who you are, and I am who I am. The thing is: if it's not about Jesus ("Yeshua" is the trend now) it's complete rubbish and should be discarded. My question to you is this- does all this "let's start a new denomination" stuff really matter or really serve unity in the One New Man in Christ?