Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 6

Thus far in this series, we’ve addressed evidence in the Torah that not all Torah commands apply directly to non-Jews. This is the official position of Judaism and the emerging position of Messianic Judaism.

As has been observed in comments in this thread, One Law and Torah Revival folks do an end-run around the Torah’s distinction between Jew and Gentile by making claims like the following: “Faith in Yeshua makes a non-Jew part of Israel.”

This is an interesting twist. It is a theology born of desire to justify a confused identity. It is a theology of folks who have fallen in love with Torah and a Jewish lifestyle and wish to make it theologically true. As I have argued, there are good reasons for some non-Jews to convert, to join with Israel. But conversion should be about joining a people, not merely love for commands and customs.

This is also an interesting twist because it compares to the common Christian misunderstanding that “faith in Jesus makes Jewish identity of lesser importance and perhaps of no importance at all.”

Compare A and B:
A. Faith in Yeshua makes a non-Jew part of Israel.
B. Faith in Jesus makes Jewish identity of little or no importance.

Notice what they have in common: they erode the meaning of Jewish identity, of the special peoplehood of the descendants of Jacob. The One Law folks have a strange companionship with supersessionist Christianity.

Now, one of the most important ways to discredit the One Law position is with sound exegesis of Acts 15.

Rather than addressing Acts 15 in detail, I am going to assume that my readers have some familiarity with it already. If you don’t, stop and go read Acts 15 before continuing.

If you want to spend a bit more time on the subject, I recommend you go back and read some earlier posts with rather detailed notes on Acts 15:
http://derek4messiah.wordpress.com/2007/08/15/some-notes-on-acts-15/
http://derek4messiah.wordpress.com/2007/08/17/some-notes-on-acts-15-pt-2/
http://derek4messiah.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/some-notes-on-acts-15-pt-3/

In this article, I want to succinctly get to the logic of Acts 15. I want to consider three basic positions on the chapter. There are two at the extremes and one at the center. Let’s call them SUPERSESSIONIST, ONE-LAW, and, well . . . THE RIGHT INTERPRETATION.

I know, it’s arrogant. But even so, I might be right. Hear me out.

Supersessionism, for new readers to this blog, is the traditional Christian understanding that Christian identity replaces or renders insignificant Jewish identity. It is also called Replacement Theology. It is the notion that God intended the Church to replace Israel as his people. Supersessionism can be blatant or subtle. It is always anti-Biblical and wrong.

The SUPERSESSIONIST view of Acts 15 involves a simple, unproven assumption: when the apostles declared that Torah is not placed on the non-Jew, it is also an indication that Torah is no longer an expectation on a Jewish believer.

To some degree, we can cut the SUPERSESSIONIST position a little slack when we realize that the New Testament largely assumes rather than spells out a continuing Jewish obligation to Torah. Of course, the New Testament has strong, pro-Torah parts, like Matthew 5:17-20 and Acts 21:17-24. Yet the New Testament is largely Paul’s letters to non-Jewish congregations and often makes the point that the Torah is not a system of salvation or a way of life for non-Jews.

The problem with interpreting Acts 15 in this SUPERSESSIONIST manner is simple: Acts 15 says Torah and circumcision should not be laid on non-Jews. To go beyond that message and assume the same is true for Jews is just that, an unfounded assumption. In fact, if the message of Acts 15 is “we should lay no further burden on the Gentiles,” it is a nonsensical step to assume they meant, “on the Jews” also. If they had meant that, they would have said it.

The ONE-LAW interpretation of Acts 15 is equally strange and untenable. It hangs on Acts 15:21, “For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.” The ONE-LAW position goes something like this:
1. Some Pharisees wanted to make conversion to Judaism a requirement for salvation and joining the Yeshua-movement.
2. Paul, Peter, and James opposed this move, knowing that no one can take on Torah suddenly from a pagan background and also knowing that Torah, not Jewish identity, was God’s way for his people.
3. Thus, James advocated weaning non-Jews slowly into Torah, starting with the four requirements listed and then allowing them to learn and adopt the rest in the synagogues.

Let me rephrase this in a simpler fashion. The ONE-LAW position is that Acts 15 is not separating Gentiles from a Torah requirement at all. It is simply indicating that they must take on Torah slowly through synagogue education.

The response to the ONE-LAW interpretation is simple. It is a move of desperation and I can hardly believe anyone truly believes it without some hint of self-doubt. It is the kind of move a person makes when they do not accept the teaching of a passage and are looking for a way out. Acts 15:21 is seen as a way out of an unpleasant reality. Here are reasons why the ONE-LAW interpretation lacks credibility:
1. If 15:21 were not allowed to trump the meaning of 15:1-20, then we would have to say the clear message of the chapter is TORAH IS NOT REQUIRED FOR NON-JEWS.
2. This message is consistent with the Torah, which indicates that identity markers like Sabbath, circumcision, and dietary law are strictly for Israel. It’s good when the Bible is consistent.
3. The ONE-LAW interpretation of Acts 15:21 completely ignores the sense of the verse.

The point of Acts 15:21 is something from the past, not about the future. That is, James did not say “for the Torah WILL BE taught” but “for Moses HAS BEEN preached.” James is not looking for a solution to the problem of moving Gentiles out of paganism and into a Torah lifestyle. He is saying something about how the current situation has come about.

Now, the reason Acts 15:21 is confusing is that it is a subtle point. James was a man of great Torah learning. He held his own with the sages of the day. If you study rabbinic sayings, you will find they are often subtle.

James’ point can be understood as follows, and this interpretation is consistent with Acts 15:1-20 and with Torah. That makes it a good bet. James’ point was this:
1. Some think the way we are going to bring the nations into Yeshua is by converting them to Judaism.
2. Yeshua commanded us to bring the nations in.
3. Yet, Moses HAS BEEN preached for a long time and the results have not been revolutionary. Look how few have converted.
4. This cannot be what Yeshua meant us to do. He meant that non-Jews would be accepted as non-Jews, just as verses like Amos 9:12 foretold.

Acts 15 is not about slowly weaning Gentiles into a life of circumcision, Sabbath observance, and dietary law. Acts 15 is not about Gentiles living like Jews. Neither is it about Jews living like Gentiles. It is about distinction and mutual blessing, Jew and Gentile living in unity but with differing communal obligations. It is about the Jewish mission of Peter and the Gentile mission of Paul and the fact that they have different parameters.

50,000 Views in 10 1/2 Months!

Theology blogs just aren’t the most popular. Theology blogs by writers who are lesser known are even less popular. Many thanks to those of you out there who care enough about theology and Messianic Judaism to check in regularly.

On a personal note, I’d like to share with you a few of my writing projects. Coming in early 2008, I will have two books coming out:

1. The World to Come, which will be published by Lederer (a.k.a. Messianic Jewish Publications, www.messianicjewish.net). It will be about coming events and coming ages, with a solid Hebrew Bible and Jewish foundation. Also, I’m not just writing an informative book here but an inspirational one. I am so excited about this book and I think the subject matter is going to be well-received.

2. Feast, a small group study by Threads (threadsmedia.com) a division of LifeWay. This small group study is designed for 20’s, though I think it will get play in other age groups as well. This is a major production by a big company with a DVD with a short segment for each session (Passover, Shavuot, Rosh HaShanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, and Hanukkah). Even if you already know about the holy days of Israel, this small group study may still be for you. There is a lot of application and inspiration in it.

Later in 2008 it looks like I will be writing two more books. I will go back to the subject of Yeshua, which I explored in Jesus Didn’t Have Blue Eyes, and go more in depth. I will then, by the end of 2008 or early 2009 go back to the subject of Paul, which I explored in Paul Didn’t Eat Pork, and expand in other ways. I am close to a contract with a publisher on these two books and feel certain they will go through.

Meanwhile, if you like what you read here and you don’t have my books that are still available (one has gone out of print), why not? My books are short and interesting. I don’t like long and boring. Here is a list of my available books:
–Proverbial Wisdom and Common Sense
–Jesus Didn’t Have Blue Eyes
–Paul Didn’t Eat Pork
–A New Look at the Old Testament

You can get them all at http://www.messianicjewish.net (but you will have to search for each by title as the website currently doesn’t have everything properly filed under my name as author) or you can order all but Proverbial Wisdom at hopeofdavid.com

Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 5

In this continuing series, we are examining evidences that God never intended for non-Jews to keep all of Torah.

I respect the heartfelt longing for Torah that many in the One Law or Torah revival movements feel (these are movements which do not distinguish between the duty of Jews and non-Jews with regard to Torah).

What I cannot respect is sloppy exegesis, repeating “one law for the native and the sojourner” like a mantra, and using arguments from logic as if they trump the revealed text of the Torah, prophets, and apostles.

I would rather know what HaShem thinks about non-Jews and Torah rather than hearing the very logical arguments from human reason (such as, “It is not God’s way to give differing sets of commandments to different groups.”).

I have already made some substantial arguments. No one has argued against me using sound textual interpretation to the contrary on these points:
1. God told Noah, and through him all the nations of the world, that the eating of all animals is permissible (see Part 2).
2. In the same place God said there is one law for the native and the sojourner, he also said that sojourners need not be circumcised and may not eat of the Passover sacrifice unless they are circumcised (see Part 3).
3. God specifically denies that Sabbath is for the non-Jews, but says it is a sign between Israel and himself (see Part 4, the exception is non-Jews living within Israel’s borders who must keep the Sabbath with the nation).

Next, we turn to the dietary laws. Are the dietary laws for non-Jews? Remember, God already told non-Jews in Genesis 9 that all meats are permissible. That ruling seems to be reflected later in Deuteronomy 14:21.

Treifah. That is the Hebrew noun (could be an adjective, perhaps) for meat that is found torn or dead. The word treifah, or treif, is common language in Jewish talk for all unclean meat, even meat unclean for other reasons.

The Torah has three things to say about treifah:

You shall be consecrated to me. Therefore you shall not eat any flesh that is torn by beasts in the field; you shall throw it to the dogs. Exodus 22:30 (31 in Christian Bibles).

And every person who eats what dies of itself or what is torn by beasts, whether he is a native or a sojourner, shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and be unclean until the evening; then he shall be clean. Leviticus 17:15

You shall not eat anything that has died naturally. You may give it to the sojourner who is within your towns, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner. For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 14:21

The rabbis deduce from Exodus 22:30 that any animal with a defect that would have led to death within 12 months is unclean. Thus, a kosher butcher inspects a carcass looking for perforated organs and various ailments that would have caused an animal to die. Any carcass found to have such a defect is sold to a non-kosher slaughtering house at a great discount (and a loss to the slaughterer).

What are we to make of these three statements in Torah about meat found dead?

Exodus absolutely forbids eating it. There is no mention in Exodus of selling it to a foreigner or a sojourner (resident alien). It is food for dogs.

Leviticus neither forbids nor permits it. It is possible to interpret Leviticus as permitting meat found dead since it merely states that eating such meat will result in impurity (and those who study Torah know it is no sin to contract impurity). Nonetheless, Leviticus is ambiguous about whether eating meat found dead is permitted.

Finally, Deuteronomy does not permit an Israelite to eat such meat. An Israelite may either donate the meat to a sojourner or sell it to a foreigner.

Let’s remember who the sojourner is: a non-Jew who has come to dwell in Israel and who takes on many of Israel’s obligations, though not all.

Now, I am out of my league and no authority whatsoever on establishing Messianic halakhah, but I will, as a sort of student in the process of learning halakhic matters, make an argument:

1. A sojourner in Israel had a status that would have to be considered greater toward the Torah than a non-Jew in the Messianic Jewish movement today. That is, the position of a sojourner was not at all ambiguous. Such a person lived within Israel’s borders and was obligated by Israel’s law to observe the Sabbath and holy days along with Israel. Circumcision and full participation (today it is called conversion) was optional, but a certain set of standards was not optional.

2. The converse of that realization, is that non-Jews in Messianic Judaism cannot be said to have a greater obligation to Torah than the ancient sojourner. The status of a non-Jew in Messianic Judaism is ambiguous. Such a person has not moved within the borders of Israel. The laws of the sojourner do not necessarily apply. Such a person may be, in fact, a foreigner and not a sojourner. I believe that such a person may choose the life of a diaspora sojourner, a person who dwells with Jews outside the land and identifies with the Jewish people without converting.

3. The sojourner, whose Torah status is greater than a non-Jew in the Messianic movement may eat treifah. Therefore, so may a non-Jew in Messianic Judaism.

What does this teach us about the application of the dietary laws of Torah to non-Jews? It affirms what Genesis 9 had already said: all meat is permissible to non-Jews. (Meat sacrificed to idols is a separate issue and deals with idolatry more so than dietary law).

Some will argue, “God merely permitted the meat to be given to sojourners or sold to foreigners. He did not say the sojourner and foreigner were permitted to eat it.”

This is a spurious argument. If eating treifah would lead to judgment for sin in the case of a foreigner, then God would not permit an Israelite to cause a foreigner to sin. Can you imagine God saying, “You shall not smoke crack, but you may sell it to someone who is a junkie”?

When we in the UMJC argue that Jews and non-Jews have a differing relationship to Torah, we are not making this argument merely from the New Testament. It is not as though Torah gave one set of rules to all mankind and that the New Testament somehow changed this. The distinction is within the Torah.

Thus, my challenge to the One Law/Torah Revival/Hebrew Roots type movements is to follow Torah accurately, making the proper distinction.

Thus, my challenge to non-Jews in the Messianic movement is to realize your different relationship to Torah. Do not assume the place of Israel. Your obligation with regard to Torah is not inherent as it is with the descendants of Jacob. Do not look down upon Christians who follow God’s Torah by exercising their freedom to enjoy babyback ribs (be honest, if you were not Messianic Jewish, you would seriously enjoy them yourself!).

As a non-Jew in Messianic Judaism, I believe you may decide to follow the dietary law for various reasons. You may do so as part of identifying with the Jews in your community. You should do so if you are married to a Jewish person. You may do so because you feel called to join with Israel. Just please, interpret Torah accurately. That is all I am asking.

Coming Later Today

I know many of you check here daily or several times a week for new content. Thanks for faithfully reading.

I will have a new post later today about Deuteronomy 14:21 and its bearing on the Gentiles in Messianic Judaism question.

There are some interesting things I need to do a little research on. Exodus and Leviticus also have their own comments about meat found dead. I want to try and understand how these differing Torah’s fit together to better inform what I will write.

So stay tuned or check back later (or however a blogger would say it) . . .

What are Non-Jews to Do?

Lamar wrote and asked what someone like himself is to do in the light of the reality of distinction between Jew and Gentile. If Torah is not directly binding on non-Jews, what to do?

I am mindful that many non-Jews have a strong desire to be with Israel, to support and even join the Jewish community. I am one of those. I would not turn someone away who demonstrates true Jewish desire. I also recognize many Christians who want to appreciate Jewish heritage without becoming Jews or joining a Jewish community. I am thankful for them. I spend a great deal of time with pro-Israel Christians (criticize me for that if you like, or say that I should spend more time with Jews, but I know what I am called to do).

Anyway, I responded to Lamar’s comment and I thought it might be helpful for some readers. He specifically asked if he should join a church in keeping Christmas, Easter, All Saint’s, and Ash Wednesday. Here are my thoughts:
…………………………………

Lamar:

I don’t know enough about your situation to give you a firm answer about what you should do. If you love the Jewish people and love being in the Jewish community, then I think you should pursue it.

If you have fallen in love with Biblical customs, and not necessarily the Jewish people, then I think you need to understand them properly. If they are signs between Israel and God, then I think you should appreciate them without taking them improperly on yourself. Many Christians love biblical and Jewish customs without pretending to be Jews themselves.

If you do not have a strong calling to worship alongside Israel or join with Israel, then find a great church. In my opinion a great church will be small, community-oriented, serious about Bible study, serious about worship and prayer, and pro-Israel.

At Christmas you can enjoy sermons and songs about Messiah’s birth without caving in to pagan practices. At Resurrection time, you can celebrate the resurrection without fertility symbols. At All Saint’s day you can read church history and remember great leaders God has raised up. On Ash Wednesday you can begin reading the gospels and spiritually preparing for Resurrection.

There is nothing inherently wrong with non-Jews forming times and seasons as traditions. Make the best of them. If I were to return to Christianity, I think I would know far better now how to find depth, meaning, and passion there.

Derek

With All Due Respect to Simple Jew

Simple Jew is a friend. I appreciate his perspective. I get unique insights from his perspective. But I cannot agree with him in full. And now, I am going to briefly challenge some of his positions.

First, I need to address an unwarranted and harsh criticism of someone who did not deserve or merit this criticism. Simple Jew said:

I havent met “Rabbi Rich” and can only go by what I glean from the RC web site and from Nathan and Derek. However there sounds like something is wrong either at the knowledge level or the reasoning level. Or I just am not hearing right and need to shake the water out of my ears.

Simple Jew disagrees with the decision of the Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council to have a broad definition of Jewish identity, especially from the paternal side. This is fine as far as halakhic disagreement goes. Yet here are some erroneous concepts that Simple Jew is guilty of:

1. Rabbi Dr. Rich Nichol is not solely responsible for the decisions of the MJRC (ourrabbis.org). He is one of many rabbis on the council. Rabbi Dr. Stuart Dauermann, for whom Simple Jew has great respect, is equally responsible for the decisions of the council.

2. There is nothing wrong at the “knowledge level” with Rabbi Dr. Nichol. He is a brilliant, learned man. Simple Jew went too far in suggesting otherwise. If the two were to enter a debate over halakhic matters, I’ve no doubt Simple Jew would be humbled.

Second, Simple Jew has a strong desire for a Messianic Judaism that is Jewish. Since Messianic Judaism currently is mostly a movement of non-Jews, he has opted not to be a part of Messianic Judaism. Simple Jew attends a traditional synagogue and avoids Messianic Judaism.

I respect this choice, though it saddens me. Messianic Judaism needs people like Simple Jew. I do pray that someday it will be possible for him to fully participate in the community of Jewish followers of Yeshua. I believe Simple Jew is missing out on more than he realizes. There is power in community that is centered around Yeshua. There is a reason Yeshua came and formed a community and those who choose to exclude themselves from it suffer from their choice. Whatever the reasons, and many are good, no reason can make forsaking the assembly of Yeshua a good choice.

Third, Simple Jew is pessimistic about the future of Messianic Judaism. In his pessimism, he is discounting two of the few (only?) good forces for positive change: the UMJC and the MJRC (umjc.net and ourrabbis.org).

I understand the pessimism, but let’s consider a little history here:

1. Long ago Jewish Yeshua-followers had to assimilate into Christianity.

2. Hebrew Christianity, rising up in the late nineteenth century, at least brough some improvement and allowed Jewish Yeshua-followers to communicate and identify.

3. Early Messianic Judaism arose out of charismatic and dispensational Christianity. It was barely a Jewish movement, but it was still a step forward beginning in the 70’s.

4. Messianic Judaism has since had numerous spin-offs of Gentile groups who have a Torah focus but not a Jewish focus. These groups are, I believe, a dead end. I hope they will end up dissolving back into the church, but with a pro-Israel, biblically holistic focus.

5. Messianic Judaism has kept a core that is at least partially Jewish and that is where my optimism lies.

6. Just as earlier movements of change brought us Hebrew Christianity and incipient Messianic Judaism, I believe that we are on the edge of more change for the better. I believe a truly Jewish Messianic Judaism is arriving.

The UMJC’s definition of Messianic Judaism was and is a key step in this revolution of change. The formation and development of the Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council is a vital part of the change. The Messianic Jewish Theological Institute (mjti.org) is the first true seminary for Messianic Judaism (and not Hebrew Christianity).

Meanwhile, as Messianic Judaism comes into its own, I do not believe the non-Jews in the movement will be left behind. I believe there will a maturing. I believe some of the nonsense ideas and splinter groups promoting Torah while replacing Israel will leave MJ and fade into well-deserved obscurity.

Simple Jew, I have faith. I believe great things will happen in the Jewish remnant as Messiah’s coming draws near. I hope you can catch some of my optimism. I hope you can be part of making something great. Your critiques from the outside do have a positive effect, but your participation from the inside would do more.

Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 4

We’re in a series about non-Jews and Torah. At least one reader asks why I am not discussing Jews in MJ at the moment. Well, that is an important topic. As it happens, non-Jews in MJ is also an important topic. As I am not HaShem, I can only discuss a limited number of things at once. Ah, but someday, in the World to Come, maybe our Torah discussions will be more complex. Perhaps we will be able to simultaneously discuss dozens of topics.

Anyway, for the moment, since non-Jews in MJ is an issue affecting our movement with some urgency, I thought it might be good to spend a few weeks on the subject.

We are working through a list of ten scriptural considerations that I listed under “Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 1.”
……………………………………….

It is commonly held in the Torah-revival movement that the Sabbath is a “creation ordinance” and that all of God’s people, Jew or non-Jew, should be keeping it.

There are so many problems with this assertion and too many are willing to overlook the problems and eagerly plow ahead.

In the first place, what does it mean to observe the Sabbath. Many think it has something to do with attending worship. Not true. Israel did not have a weekly worship service. (Leviticus 23:3 does not contradict what I am saying. The translations that render it “holy convocation” or something similar are missing it. The Sabbath is a sacred proclamation, referring to the priests declaring the time of the Sabbath’s beginning and ending. I suggest reading Jewish commentaries or the work of Jacob Milgrom in the Anchor Series.)

So what does it mean to observe the Sabbath? It means rest. Literally, the word Sabbath (Shabbat) is the Hebrew for rest.

But how will you observe the Sabbath in a non-Jewish way, those who say the Sabbath is a creation ordinance. What time does Sabbath begin? When does it end? How do you sanctify it?

Those answers come from Jewish tradition (rabbinic tradition). And when you consult the rabbis, what do you find? Sabbath is not for non-Jews.

Now, before you engage in a tirade against those “stuffy rabbis,” consider what God has to say about it:

You are to speak to the people of Israel and say, ‘Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths, for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the Lord, sanctify you. Exodus 31:13.

I direct your attention to several phrases in this verse:
1. Between me and you.
2. throughout your generations.
3. I, the Lord, sanctify you.

Many could easily dismiss these phrases and engage in sloppy hermeneutics. We are so used to people not believing the God actually means Israel when he says Israel, it is easy for those with a Christian background to make the same mistake as thousands of Christian interpreters have in the past. What mistake do I refer to? The mistake of assuming that everything in the Bible is addressed to you. The mistake of failing to realize God does not always speak to everyone.

The Sabbath is between God and Israel. It is intimate. It is like something between a man and wife.

The Sabbath is for all Israel’s generations. Israel is still here. The Sabbath is still vital and still for Israel.

Yet the clincher would have to be the last phrase. The Sabbath is to sanctify Israel, to set Israel apart. From whom? The nations.

Besides all this, it turns out the Sabbath is not a creation ordinance at all. The text usually cited to prove this is:

And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. Genesis 2:2

Many have observed that “rested” is from the same root as Sabbath. Thus, it is argued, the Sabbath comes from creation. No it doesn’t. The noun Sabbath is from a verb that means to rest. God rested on the seventh day, but he did not establish the Sabbath or command it to Adam or Noah.

Others will cite Exodus 20:11:

For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day.

God used this example from creation to give a foundation for the Sabbath command. How should we take this fact? Was God saying in Exodus that the Sabbath was a creation ordinance, binding upon the whole world, and thus Israel should keep it?

That is understanding God’s reasoning backwards. God wasn’t saying Israel should rest because God established the Sabbath at creation. He was saying he rested on the seventh day to anticipate and reveal to Israel how vital the Sabbath is to him. Think about it. I mean really. God had Israel in mind from the beginning.

Sometimes people will argue that Israel, in Exodus 16, where the manna instructions are given and Sabbath is first mentioned, already seemed to know what it meant. Thus, people will sometimes say, Israel must have been keeping the Sabbath all along. Again, not true. They knew what God meant when he said the seventh day was to be a Sabbath because the word Sabbath means rest. Let’s do an experiment. If I said to you, “The seventh day is to be a rest for you,” do you think you would understand what I meant? I thought so.

Later, we will consider Romans 14 and its purpose in the flow of Romans. We will find that Paul was referring directly to the fact that Sabbath is not God’s requirement for non-Jews when he said, “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.”

Responding to Dan

I’ve no idea who Dan is, since he’s not using his full name. His comments are strong, you might even say rude. Well, a little shock value is good for blogging numbers anyway, so it’s not that I mind exactly.

First, Dan proposed that my theology of Torah and non-Jews should lead to a ridiculous scenario in which Gentiles at my congregation are eating ham while the Jews eat only . . . latkes? You can see the full text of Dan’s comment below.

Dan seems to miss the entire point of my blog. Yet I wonder, since I am using a lot of space on the blog to deal with issues on non-Jews in MJ if others might not be similarly confused. Let me clarify: I see Messianic Judaism as a Jewish movement, which means a movement for people born Jewish. At the same time I see non-Jews coming into Messianic Judaism as something expected and which should not be a threat to the Jewish identity of the movement. The fact that non-Jews in MJ have been a threat to the Jewish identity of the movement is an ill I am trying to address.

Here’s the irony: people like Dan, who apparently believe Torah was not given exclusively to Israel, are a large part of the reason MJ is so non-Jewish and confused.

Non-Jews in Messianic Judaism should be here either to support this Jewish movement or join it via conversion. Otherwise, there are plenty of great churches for non-Jews to attend.

So, no, there are not two tables at our congregation, one with ham and the other with latkes (does Dan think that Jews only eat latkes? What a strange choice to represent Jewish food!). We are a Jewish congregation and we all observe Torah communally though some do not keep Jewish identity markers in their homes. We do not have a bookstore and we do not sell on Shabbat.

Then, Dan suggested that because I am in the process of conversion I must be confused or feel that my non-Jewish status is inferior. Nothing of the sort is true. I plan to write more about conversion on here someday. Meanwhile, I commend the article by Rabbi Dr. Rich Nichol at ourrabbis.org.

Let me close with one last thought for Dan: if you’re arguments are good, you don’t have to be rude to make them. But weak arguments will not persuade even if shouted rudely.

DAN’S FIRST COMMENT:

Here is the farce of Leheman’s position.
Take a MJ congregation. What do you do at oneg? You have one table only for Gentiles with ham sandviches, and another tabel with latkas only for Jews? Should your Judaica store be open On Shabbat Only for Gentiles, Jews not allowed? Logisticaslly it is all falling apart. Most congregation are comprised from 80% Gentiles and 20% Jews, then why do you read from the Torah every Shabbat if you say the Torah is not for them?

Blessings

Dan

DAN’S SECOND COMMENT

Derek;

What is the “conversion process” you are going through will do for you? will it make you Jewish? Does circumcision makes someone Jewish? If yes, then go tell it to the Millions of Muslems who undergo circumcision at age 13.

Are you another “Jew wannabe?” You are waffling on the issue and all you convey is confusion, but then again being a disciple of the Hashivenu bunch will do it to you.

Blessings

Dan

On Long Comments

Note to everybody:

Please keep comments shorter. If you write them on a word processor first, consider 700 words to be max.

The thing is, if your comments are too long, people might not read them. My blog might get a reputation as a place where the comments are just too long and who has time to read all that anyway.

There is some great stuff on here, especially between Nathan and Simple Jew, about differing ideas about the future of MJ. It’s just that, being so long, perhaps few will read what they have to say.

Anyway, don’t feel guilty if you don’t have time to read the recent crop of comments. I will try to encourage shorter ones in the future.

Derek

Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 3

Well, the dialogue is growing. I can tell from the number of readers I am getting that the relationship of Torah to non-Jews is a subject of interest. So much fuzzy thinking has been propagated on this topic, I don’t blame people for being confused.

When people have a pet doctrine, a common mode for defending that doctrine is to cite only a few verses, the ones in favor of the theory. People repeat certain affirmations like mantras. On this topic, Acts 15:21 gets thrown around a lot as a defense for a Torah-revival amongst non-Jews. I hear lines like, “We are grafted in,” or “we must be imitators of Yeshua,” or “one law for the native and the stranger,” and so on.

Well, knowing what God is teaching is not as simple as throwing out a few affirmations. In many areas, and Torah is especially tricky, the truth is more complex than sound bites.

Getting past assumptions is important to hear God’s voice. “God wouldn’t have different standards for different groups of people,” is just that, an assumption.

After shedding false assumptions, the next crucial step is hearing all sides of God’s truth on a matter. Citing a verse here or there is problematic for that reason. I could do as Christendom has for centuries and quote lines of Paul out of context and make a very convincing case that Torah is obsolete. Let’s not follow that example in defending Torah. Let’s honestly hear what God has to say.

Today’s installment may be the most important in this series. It concerns the Stranger, a.k.a. the Sojourner or Ger.
………………………………………………………………………………..

Exodus 12 is an important chapter for understanding Torah and its relationship to non-Jews. This is the Exodus-from-Egypt chapter. This is the one in which a mixed multitude fled Egypt with Israel.

The mixed multitude, mentioned in Exodus 12:38, is an important topic in and of itself. I have heard many in the Torah-revival movement cite this text as a basis for urging full Torah observance on non-Jews. The argument goes something like this: (1) non-Jews were with Israel at the Exodus, (2) they were with Israel at Sinai, (3) they received the commands along with Israel, (4) thus, Q.E.D., non-Jews are recipients of the Torah along with Jews.

There is a reluctance in the Torah-revival movement to acknowledge a certain truth. It is the truth that best explains what happened to the mixed multitude. I have heard it called THE SEMI-PERMEABLE BOUNDARY OF ISRAEL. That is, Israel is not strictly a genetic family. You can join the family from the outside. The unfortunate word used for this today is CONVERSION. This is unfortunate because it gives the wrong impression that conversion is about changing religions. It is not. It is about a non-Jew becoming a Jew. It is about joining Israel.

This is what Caleb the Kenizzite (an Edomite tribe) did. This is what the mixed multitude did.

How can I say that the mixed multitude joined Israel?
1. Their number are included with Israel in Exodus 12.
2. Later, in the tribal censuses, the numbers match, yet all the people are accounted for and members of Israelite tribes.
3. How did those mixed multitude people get lost in the tribes of Israel? They were considered as native-born and assimilated into the tribes.

There were no non-Jews at Sinai (note: I am using the term Jew in its modern sense for all Jacob’s line–no need to write me as though I am ignorant of the history of the word).

Now we come to the issue of the Sojourner (a.k.a. the Stranger). The Torah recognizes two kinds of non-Jews that Israel will deal with: the Foreigner and the Sojourner (Ger). The foreigner is simply a non-Jew. The Sojourner is a non-Jew who lives with Israel.

As will become apparent in the ensuing discussion, there were two kinds of Sojourner. I think this distinction lies behind the rabbinical categories of the Ger Toshav and the Ger Tzaddik, the Sojourner at the Gate and the Righteous Sojourner.

One kind of Sojourner lived as a citizen of the land. He observed the Sabbath laws and holy days. He worshipped Israel’s God. He did not get circumcised or fully participate. In fact, some holy things were off limits to him. Yet he was a non-Jew living with Jews and partially keeping Torah.

Does this sound familiar? This is the position, I believe, of many non-Jews who are in the MJ movement. They are non-Jews worshipping alongside Israel without becoming Israel. They may not keep dietary law at home. They do not wear a tallis. Yet they fully participate with the community.

The other kind of Sojourner is circumcised. This Sojourner takes on himself and his family the entire Torah. This Sojourner joins with Israel. He may be known his whole life as a Sojourner and not as a Jew. Yet his children marry into Israel and become Jews, full members of the tribes of Israel.

There are many non-Jews like this in MJ also. I am one of them. This is a decision that needs to be made through the accountability of a Beit Din (court of judgment). This is not something that can be an individual decision. There must be witnesses of a circumcision. There must be oversight. I am going through the process with a Messianic Beit Din (see ourrabbis.org).

Yet many arrogate this position for themselves, some unwittingly and others with disdain for the idea that Israel is unique in any way. Many, who have not even had a halakhically correct circumcision (I haven’t as yet) consider themselves full recipients of Torah.

I have sympathy for people caught in this position. It is largely the fault of MJ. We should have had conversion and a respectable Rabbinical Council years ago. Many non-Jews in MJ are caught in the void of a system that has been afraid to be Jewish for fear of distancing itself from Christian supporters. Well, we’ve come into our own. It is time for MJ to be Jewish.

Yet I am also pointing the finger at those in the Torah-revival movement, the ones who arrogate Torah-status for themselves and call other Yeshua-followers incomplete if they do not do the same. Exodus 12 is not your friend. Exodus 12 is your enemy. It speaks against you. It is time for you to admit it and throw in the towel. Torah is given to Israel, not the nations. God will not be pleased that: (a) you presumed to take holy things upon yourself and (b) that you made others who were following God according to his will feel inadequate.

I guess now I have to make my point from Exodus 12. If you’re not seeing too much red to read the rest, consider how Exodus 12:43-49 distinguishes Jews and non-Jews in their relation to Torah:

And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the statute of the Passover: no foreigner shall eat of it, 44 but every slave that is bought for money may eat of it after you have circumcised him. 45 No foreigner or hired servant may eat of it. 46 It shall be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house, and you shall not break any of its bones. 47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. 49 There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”

1. No foreigner may eat of the Passover. Wait a minute, you say, do you mean non-Jews can’t have a Passover Seder? No, that is not what “eat of the Passover” means. The Passover means the sacred meat of a Passover lamb whose blood has been dashed against God’s altar. The meat is holy. It is for Israel alone to eat.

2. Slaves in Israelite households may eat of it if, and only if, they are circumcised (which means they have joined Israel, a.k.a. converted).

3. A Sojourner, meaning a non-Jew living in the land and worshipping Israel’s God, may not eat of the Passover unless they are circumcised. A Sojourner is not a pagan. A Sojourner is not out of God’s will. A Sojourner may choose to remain uncircumcised and not eat the Passover. God accepts non-Jews as non-Jews and does not put them under the full yoke of Torah.

4. When a Sojourner is circumcised he will be regarded as a native of the land, that is, he joins Israel. He is no longer a non-Jew. His children will be counted among the tribes. They will no longer be called Sojourners.

5. No uncircumcised person may eat of the Passover. Yet many who had medical circumcision and not covenant circumcision arrogate full Torah-status to themselves in MJ.

6. The one law for the native and the stranger/Sojourner DOES NOT mean EQUIVALENCE. It means the laws of justice and holiness apply equally to Jews and non-Jews in God’s holy land. Yet there are distinctions and some Sojourners will not choose to be circumcised or take on the yoke of Torah.

We need to fix some things in MJ. We need for those in the Torah-revival movement to progress into a Torah-based theology and leave their Ephraimite and Hebrew Roots backgrounds. I doubt my words will have much effect, but maybe there will be a few out there willing to question assumptions and take Torah at face value. If you are in a movement that promotes a false view of Torah, perhaps you can advocate change or you can move to a mature Messianic Jewish congregation that practices ACTUAL JUDAISM. I hope you are blessed to have one in your town.

We need to fix the aversion to conversion that lingers in MJ. We have many Sojourners right now who want to join Israel. We need to get caught up with what God is doing.

Most of all, we need to quit thinking that MJ is a movement of non-Jews keeping Torah. MJ is about what God is doing in Israel in these last days. It is not a club for people who think shofars and matzah are cool.

Yes, I know that it is hard to go back to a non-Torah life after you have lived a Torah life. Once you have appreciated such a rich tradition as Messianic Judaism, I know that plain evangelicalism can seem flat (no offense to evangelicals, many of whom might not be drawn to Israel in the way we are).

You, as a non-Jew in the MJ movement, have two choices as I see it:

1. Be a Sojourner in the gates, a God-fearing Gentile, one who worships alongside Israel without joining. We need a blog series someday about what this means practically.

2. Be a Sojourner-Proselyte, one who joins with Israel, through a proper Beit Din. This option is difficult as choices are limited right now. The movement is young and cannot fully staff this venture. But we can hope for someday. In the meantime, you can be in process, learning about Jewish history and life and considering yourself a candidate for conversion.

The best way to be Torah-observant is the believe what Torah says.

Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 2

This is a series investigating the relationship of Torah to Israel and to non-Jews. I am defending the unpopular view of Judaism, that Torah was given to Israel and certain commands in Torah are Jewish identity markers, not for non-Jews to take over. I am also a proponent of non-Jews coming alongside or joining with Israel in worship. I advocate both distinction and inclusion in MJ.

I expect many to disagree. Growth in theology will never happen, however, if we do not think. Let my people think, I say. Have you held to a certain position for years? Are you convinced that non-Jews in Messiah become “spiritual Jews” and Torah is given now to you as well as to Israel? I want to persuade you otherwise.
……………………………………………………………….

Beginning our investigation of the Torah and non-Jews, we turn to God’s command to the father of all the nations, including Israel: Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless. R. Yokhanan said, “Noah was blameless only in his age.” In other words, Noah was only righteous by comparison with his wicked generation. Resh Lakish said, “He was righteous even in his age; how much more would he have been righteous in other ages.” In other words, in a wicked generation it is harder to be righteous, not easier. Ezekiel seemed to take Noah’s righteousness as fact (Ezek. 14:14).

The issue of Noah’s righteousness is important to what I am going to say. God told Noah something was permissible that many in MJ and various Hebrew Roots groups are saying is not permissible.

God said:

Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. (Genesis 9:3-4).

Consider the simple facts:
1. Noah is the father of the nations.
2. God told Noah it was permissible to eat any animal.
3. Any animal includes pigs, shrimp, lobsters, and hippopotamuses.

Later, God told Israel:

You shall not make yourselves detestable with any swarming thing that swarms, and you shall not defile yourselves with them, and become unclean through them. For I am the Lord your God. Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. (Leviticus 11:43-44).

Many people assume that:
1. God was changing what he had said in Genesis 9.
2. That pigs, once fine for a righteous man to eat, are now bad for a righteous man to eat.
3. The Torah is a standard of holiness that all followers of Yeshua should attain to, Jew and non-Jew.

Could we possibly consider the idea that God gave Torah to Israel and called for Israel to be unique and different? Could we assume from the context of Torah itself that pig is great for a non-Jew but forbidden for a Jew?

Here are some of the arguments I have heard against this interpretation and my responses:

ARGUMENT: God gave the dietary laws for health reasons.
REBUTTAL: This is the view of people who have not thought carefully. Beef is often unhealthy. Carp, which is kosher, is no cleaner an animal than catfish, which is not kosher. The view of Judaism is that the dietary laws are not primarily about health, but about a command for Israel to be different. I commend the study of Jewish sources on this.

ARGUMENT: Noah only had one pair of each unclean animal on the ark. If he ate them, that animal would be extinct. He must have understood God to mean he could only eat clean animals.
REBUTTAL: God was giving a principle for the future, not necessarily for right at that moment. “All moving things” cannot mean “all moving things except 95% of the animal world which is forbidden to you.”

ARGUMENT: Noah already knew the clean-unclean distinction, as evidenced in the text, so he understood God to mean he would only eat clean animals.
REBUTTAL: The clean-unclean distinction at that point had only to do with sacrificing, not with eating. Again, “all moving things” cannot mean “all moving things except 95% of the animal world which is forbidden to you.”

ARGUMENT: Some animals are inedible, therefore God could not have meant it is acceptable to eat all things.
REBUTTAL: Common sense should rule here. Pigs are edible.

ARGUMENT: Once Yeshua came, it became incumbent on the followers of Yeshua to imitate him in lifestyle. Thus, while pagans may be permitted to eat pig, Yeshua’s followers, Jewish or not, must follow him in abstaining.
REBUTTAL: This argument sounds good. It sounds just like the people who said, in Acts 15, that it is necessary for non-Jews to be circumcised and keep the Torah of Moses. The apostles pointed to Amos 9:12, which says God accepts Gentiles as Gentiles. They ruled that circumcision and Torah-observance (meaning the Jewish identity markers of Torah) are not required for non-Jews. We will dissect Acts 15 later in this series.

ARGUMENT: Eating animals like pigs may have been permissible but not for a person following God.
REBUTTAL: Noah was a righteous man, blameless. God had not problem with a righteous man eating pig or rattlesnake.

Genesis 9:3 is a strong challenge to the Torah-revival movement that would seek to turn non-Jews into Torah-keepers. It will not do to conveniently change phrases in the Bible in order to maintain a failing theology. “All moving things” cannot simply be read as “all moving things that are clean according to Leviticus 11.” There are many moving things but only a few permitted for Israel. The small number of species that are kosher cannot in any sense be deemed all moving things.

Noah, a righteous man, was told eating pig, shrimp, and oyster stew was fine. If some non-Jews want to worship alongside Israel or, like me, join with Israel through conversion, then keeping the dietary law is a fine choice. Let’s not keep it for the wrong reasons or look down on our brothers and sisters from the nations who, in righteousness, enjoy God’s full bounty from the earth.

Torah, Israel, and the Nations: Part 1

I frequently find myself losing popularity rapidly whenever I broach the subject of non-Jews and their relation to Torah. I will not try to delineate here or summarize the many pseudo-Messianic movements out there that love Torah but think Israel is nothing special. I just know that many people, who are not Jews, come into Messianic Judaism assuming that all of Torah is a requirement for them.

When I tell them this is not true, I am a bad guy, a wet blanket, a loser.

I am starting this series of blog articles to deal with the issues. I will try to be thorough enough not to leave holes. I invite dialogue and debate, BUT I set these conditions:

1. Do not write comments that are too long. Say it in 700 words or less (use a word processor to write and count your words before commenting).
2. Do not try to discuss the entire issue all at once. If we are talking about Genesis 9, non-Jews, and Torah, don’t send me your exegesis of Acts 15.

So, let’s get this thing started.
………………………………………………………………

What role does Torah have in the life of non-Jews in Messianic Judaism today? Are all followers of Jesus obligated to keep the Torah in its entirety? What does God have to say about this?

I begin with the idea that Torah is God’s gift to Israel. Paul said as much: “the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Rom. 3:2).

God is doing something remarkable through Israel that is very obvious at this stage of history. The Great Commission to the nations is winding down. Let me use a term I learned from Rabbi Stuart Dauermann: the Greater Commission to Israel is coming into play more than ever before.

Why does Rabbi Dauermann call it the Greater Commission? Because Paul says in Romans 11:12 that the fulness of Israel is greater. That is, when Israel did not believe, the good news went to the nations. When Israel does believe, the dead will live (Rom. 11:15). The good news to the nations is good news, but the good news to Israel is better news.

Many non-Jews have been attracted to Torah. Some have been attracted to Jewish customs (or even Fiddler on the Roof).

This attraction in many cases is due to a poor reading of the Bible. It is an assumption that God’s commands are the same for everyone: for Israel and non-Israel, for male and female, priest and non-priest, leader and member, etc.

I, as a non-Jew involved in Messianic Judaism, do not want to discourage non-Jews from being part of Messianic Judaism. I want to encourage you to be involved for the right reasons and with the right roles. Be in MJ because you want to join in what God is doing with Israel in these last days. Partner with Israel. Worship alongside the Jewish people, or if you feel called, join with Israel. Do not, however, usurp Israel’s place. A non-Jew’s place in MJ is alongside the Jewish people, not in some sort of becoming or replacing Israel.

In this series, I will try to persuade of the Jewish view of Torah: it is God’s covenant with Israel. Much in the Torah applies universally, but not all. Some of Torah commands are Jewish identity markers, God’s signs of Israel’s unique place. The Torah itself teaches this.

If you are a non-Jew and you claim to keep Torah, do you keep the parts of Torah that distinguish the nations from Israel?

In this series I will consider the following (and perhaps more as well):

1. Genesis 9 says that the nations may eat all moving things (yes, even bacon!).
2. Exodus 12:48 says that circumcision is optional for even a Sojourner living in Israel (much less a non-Jew living in Roswell).
3. Exodus 31:13 says the Sabbath is a sign between Israel and God (not a universal command).
4. Deuteronomy 14:21 says that a Jew may sell unclean meat to a Sojourner living in Israel. Thus, the dietary law is not God’s requirement for non-Jews.
5. The one law for native and sojourner cannot mean the same relationship to Torah because Torah specifically says it does not.
6. In the Age to Come non-Jews will keep Torah with Israel (cf. Isa. 56), but that is not yet a requirement.
7. Acts 15 declares that non-Jews do not need to live as Jews. It specifically says circumcision and Torah-observance are not laid on the nations.
8. Acts 15:21 does not overturn the message of the rest of the chapter.
9. Romans 14 distinguishes between Jews and non-Jews, warning non-Jews not to belittle Jews for keeping God’s commands.
10. Galatians severely rebukes anyone who tries to compel non-Jews to live as Jews.

The Truth About the Sacrifices

I spoke last night at a Christian Ladies’ Bible Study. I love speaking to Ladies’ Bible Study groups. I get to speak in about 50 churches a year, which I also enjoy. But the commitment level of women who attend a Bible Study group blows the average church attender out of the water.

Let me give you an example. I bring books with me to sell, books about Jewish insight into the Bible. At a typical church of 200 people I sell only twice as many books as I do to a Ladies’ Bible Study group of 15 women! Do the math. That means a woman who attends a Ladies’ Bible Study is 1200% as likely to buy a book than your average church member.

Anyway, I digress. These ladies had been studying Leviticus, but with little direction. They needed some help. I think the most important topic I clarified for them are the sacrifices of Israel, myth and fact. So, here is a quick lesson (don’t assume you know what I am going to say) on that subject. You may be surprised and I do hope some will challenge what I say. This is not the standard Christian understanding, though the main principle here I’ve found to be taught in some synagogue courses.
………………………………

MYTH: Every time you sin, you have to offer a sacrifice.
REALITY: Sacrifices for the sins of the entire nation were offered twice a day. Individuals mostly brought sacrifices only at the three annual pilgrim festivals.

MYTH: Women and non-Jews could not directly bring their sacrifices to God, but were restricted to areas outside the tabernacle.
REALITY: Women and non-Jews were not restricted, but brought their sacrifices just like Israelite men (Levit. 12:6; Num. 15:27-29). It was the leadership of the Second Temple, not God, who began keeping women and non-Jews out.

MYTH: The priest slaughtered your animal, cut it up, and offered the blood on the altar.
REALITY: You slaughtered your own animal and cut it up. The priests caught the blood and dashed it against the altar.

MYTH: The sacrifices were cruel and bloodthirsty.
REALITY: Unless you are a vegetarian, your meat-eating leads to the same kind of animal slaughtering. Modern animal slaughtering is actually more cruel, with mass production outweighing consideration of the animals.

MYTH: The sacrifices were a primitive way to worship God.
REALITY: The sacrifices were an awe-inspiring way to worship God, bringing you closer to God than any other activity.

MYTH: The sacrifices are a thing of the past, never to return. They have been replaced and surpassed by the sacrifice of Yeshua.
REALITY: The sacrifices are part of our future. Paul offered sacrifices in his day (Acts 21:26). The temple will be rebuilt and sacrifices will again be offered in the days of Yeshua’s kingdom (Ezek. 40:39). The sacrifices at the temple served a different purpose than the cross.

MYTH: The sacrifices brought forgiveness to the offerer.
REALITY: The sacrifices kept the sanctuary clean so God could dwell there.

VERY IMPORTANT: This last point is the most important of all. The temple sacrifices did not make the worshipper clean or forgiven. I learned this from Jacob Milgrom’s epic commentary on Leviticus (yes, epic!). The sacrifices made an atonement “on your behalf.” Many translations miss the subtlety. Many interpreters assume that the sacrifices were for forgiveness.

The essential theology of the temple sacrifices can be seen in two verses from the Torah:

Thus you shall keep the people of Israel separate from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness by defiling my tabernacle that is in their midst. Leviticus 15:31

Thus he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleannesses of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. Leviticus 16:16

We learn from these verses two important things:
1. The sins of the people in the land pollute the temple and altar. That is, all the sins and uncleannesses travel like pollution through the air and stain God’s sanctuary in Jerusalem.
2. The sacrifices cleanse the sanctuary (temple and altar). By regularly cleansing them, the people avoided defiling the sanctuary so badly that God would leave.

From this, we learn that the temple sacrifices were not like the sacrifice of Messiah (see Hebrews 10:4). If the sanctuary needed to be kept clean just so God could dwell with man, how will man ever dwell with God? That will take something different than the temple sacrifices. It will have to clean us, not just the sanctuary. That’s what Yeshua did.

Meanwhile, when Yeshua returns, the temple will stand again. There will be sin on the earth. The temple sacrifices will resume. The temple will need to be kept clean until that day when all sin is put away forever.

The sacrifices are misunderstood. The truth is far better than the misunderstanding.

Torah and Tradition, Answering Criticism Pt. 5

Finally, we reach our last installment of answering the critical comments offered by Charles. It has been a lot of fun and, most of all, I hope it has helped people question cherished assumptions. Assumptions can be the greatest enemy of truth.

Charles said:

11) I think the chosen people, the Jews, were given a mission through Abraham and his descendents, to be a light to the world. Because they blew it and starting looking inward at details which were thought to be required to be a good Jew, they could not see beyond their navel, that the world was going to hell in a handbasket. So Jesus cut off some Jewish branches of the vine and grafted in the gentile Christian line. Now we in turn have also many times blown the mission. However if you look at the world today with daily Christian TV, hordes of Christian ministries, Bible translations in many languages, and missionaries giving their all to accomplish the great commission, progress is being made toward that mission.
12) I would find it very difficult to inform all those Christian missions that because they are not studying the Torah enough or eating kosher, they are blowing it. In fact I would not just find it difficult but also ridiculous.

I would welcome your comments Derek because you seem to have a sense of balance. I am not asking you to agree or disagree with ALL my statements but any comments you have would be welcome and considered.

Now, let me deal first with Point #12, that Charles would find it difficult to tell the denominations and missions of the church that they are blowing it because they are not living like Jews.

I hope by now it is obvious that I would not tell the denominations and missions any such thing. The Jewish identity markers of Torah (dietary law, Sabbath, circumcision, fringes, etc.) are not for non-Jews. They never were. God told humankind they could eat all the meats (Gen. 9:3). God told Israelites they could sell unclean meat to non-Jews (Deut. 14:21). God indicated that circumcision was not required even for non-Jews living in the land and enjoying the protection of Israel’s laws (Exod. 12:48).

Thus, it was no surprise when James and Paul agreed that non-Jews in Messiah need not live like Jews (Acts 15).

Still, I would say and do say to churches that there are some changes needed:

1. The church needs to let Jews be Jews and even encourage the Jews who are in churches to live their covenantal calling. That is, the church needs to quit calling the Torah legalism and quit teaching that Jewish followers of Yeshua are Gentiles. The church needs to promote Torah for Jewish believers and encourage Messianic Judaism as a complementary movement alongside the non-Jewish church.

2. The church needs to learn Passover and other Torah traditions that are central to the very identity of the church. Polycarp and Papias were still keeping Passover in the second century (this claim could be disputed, but I think the evidence is there). Certainly the Corinthians, mostly non-Jewish, were keeping Passover. This feast is so central to the church, I think it should be reclaimed. Other examples could emerge as we begin walking down this path.

Then, we come to Charles’ 11th point, that the Jewish people “blew it.” He admits that the church has blown it also, yet he would argue that the church has done far better than Israel ever did. His argument is full of flaws.

1. The church has not done better. I will be brief here, though I’d love to go on at length. First, the church has been confused about what the gospel is. The church would have to include Catholicism and Christian Orthodoxy, which have spread a syncretistic, idolatrous form of worship to the world. Protestants, in my judgment, have done better in some ways, but have proclaimed a very weak gospel. It is all faith and no works, according to the Protestants. Where is James’ emphasis on works? Where is Paul’s emphasis on good deeds? Protestant evangelicalism and the Charismatic wave sweeping the world right now have so diluted the message of Jesus, I can hardly congratulate them. So in what sense has the church done well? It has either spread idol-worship mixed with Jesus faith or a weak, insipid version of the gospel, and by and large has done little or nothing to change the world. It is exactly what you would expect of any human enterprise, so I do not claim I could do better.

2. While we are on to the failings of the church, have you ever considered that church history looks no better than the history of Israel in biblical times? Israel immediately made a Golden Calf. The church immediately started venerating Mary and dead saints. Israel failed to carry out God’s commands. The church slaughtered people, mostly Jews, in the name of Jesus, in a chain of horror leading through the Inquisitions, Crusades, Pogroms, Ghettos of Europe, Blood libels, and to the Holocaust itself, perpetrated in a “Christian” Europe with full theological support from the church. Again, we learn the lesson of history that human enterprises are doomed to terrible failure. I know there are also bright spots, but we are considering the negative right now because the church gets off too easy compared to Israel.

3. Finally, Charles, Israel did not blow it. Israel could not blow it. Israel’s mission to be the priests of the nations was a fool-proof mission. God made it fool-proof. God’s plan was by birth, not by religious assent. That is, a Jew is born into the family and carries on the Abrahamic covenant without regard to choice. God’s plan was to get the Bible and the Messiah into the world through the Jewish people. He did. Can the church point to any success like that? And God is not finished. Israel continues to be THE VENUE through which God works in this world. Messiah will return to Israel. The people are in the land. It will all come down to Jerusalem. And did Israel blow it? No, they couldn’t blow it. God’s plans for Israel do not depend on the human will at all and they are working just fine. The fact that we may long to see Israel following Yeshua is another matter. That too will happen someday, as Paul says in Romans 11:26.

Brief Interlude: Addressing Adam’s Critiques

In a recent comment, Adam said, “I beg to differ with you on this. The “very early tradition” was what we would call Saturday night worship, not Sunday worship. The Sunday morning worship services were from the influences of the worshippers of the Sun god (Sunday — Day of the Sun God).”

For those unfamiliar with this line of reasoning, there is a revisionist history in some circles that says:
1. Sunday worship was a late tradition.
2. Constantine worshipped the sun and made Sunday the day of worship.
3. Sunday worship is therefore pagan.

All I can say is check the historical sources and don’t believe something just because I, or Adam, says so. The Didache, written about 125 C.E, indicates that Sunday worship was already by that early date the norm in Asia Minor. The Didache calls it the Lord’s Day, the same term used in Revelation, published in Asia Minor also and only about 3o years prior. Constantine wasn’t until the 300’s. Also, the days of the week got their names considerably later, and most of our names for days of the week come from German mythology, not Roman.

Yes, Acts 20 does indicate that in some places meetings were held on Saturday night (havdallah). But one example does not make the rule.

Then Adam said:

I beg to differ with you again! Most people think the commandments for Shabbat are exclusively found in the Ten Commandments, and so miss:

Leviticus 23:3
‘For six days work may be done , but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, a ***holy convocation***. You shall not do any work; it is a sabbath to the LORD in all your dwellings.

The word translated as “convocation” is “miqra,” which means a sacred assembly for reading and worship.

This translation of MIQRA is terribly mistaken. I cite as my source Jacob Milgrom, the dean of Leviticus scholars. As a religious Jew, he would be quick to agree with Adam’s definition if there was any evidence. No, MIQRA means proclamation and Leviticus 23:3 speaks of the priests proclaiming the new moons and the festivals from the temple.

This is vital to know: there were no synagogues in ancient Israel. The synagogue began in Babylon when there was no more temple to worship at. People did not come each week to the temple. That would be impossible even in a small country like Israel. There was no weekly worship service until the Babylonian captivity and even then it did not become widespread until the second temple was destroyed in 70 C.E.

Therefore, Adam’s interpretation of Leviticus 23:3 is dead wrong.

To summarize then:
1. Early non-Jewish Yeshua-followers chose Sunday very early on as their day of worship and it is a beautiful tradition.
2. Saturday is a day of rest biblically and only in tradition is it a day of worship.