PODCAST: Yeshua in Context – Mitzvah and Mercy

It all started with a cab ride and dinner with some friends, Boaz Michael and Aaron Eby of First Fruits of Zion. As we ate at a kosher vegetarian restaurant in Miami, I was quizzing Aaron ruthlessly about his perspective on how to observe Torah. To put it simply, he is much more like the Orthodox than I am. It was a great conversation. He challenged me and maybe it went both ways. Conversations like that are a great way to learn.

During our talk, he brought up a teaching of the Ramban (Nachmanides, 13th century Spanish commentator on the Torah). It intrigued me and led to this podcast on Miztvah and Mercy.

Mitzvah is commandment. Yeshua said we need more than mitzvah and to add mercy to our keeping the mitzvot. What was the original issue with Pharisees tithing on dill? What was Yeshua’s response to the tithing and what lack did he find in the religion of his time? What does Ramban have in common with Yeshua?

LISTEN ONE OF TWO WAYS:

(1) If you have iTunes, search Yeshua in the iTunes store and subscribe.

(2) If you don’t use iTunes, go to this link at derekleman.com.

Lamentations for Tisha B’Av

Tisha B’Av begins tonight. Lamentations (Eicha in Hebrew) is read tonight in a synagogue strewn with upended chairs following a meal of lentils eaten alone. These comments on Lamentations are designed to make your reading more profitable.

David Clines, writing in the Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible says of Eicha:

Its theological position is quite subtle: it does not take just one perspective, and it does not recommend a single solution. It begins with the reality of disaster, and it concludes neither with cheap grace nor easy hope but with the bitter possibility that the people of God have now become the ex-people of God, that this time God may indeed have finally rejected Israel (5:22).

Clines does not say the book offers no hope. The hope comes primarily in the middle, in the longest of the five poems (chapter 3), the section emphasized by nature of its longer structure as well as in the synagogue by being canted the loudest. Lamentations is made up of five poems as follows:

1. An acrostic poem (each verse begins with a letter of the alphabet in sequence) of 22 verses.

2. An acrostic poem of 22 verses.

3. A triple acrostic poem of 66 verses, with a passage of hope in 3:22-33.

4. An acrostic poem of 22 verses.

5. An alphabetic but not acrostic poem of 22 verses (the number of verses is deliberate though they do not begin with the letters in sequence: deliberate movement toward chaos?).

The Setting and Authorship of Lamentations
Tradition says this poem was written by Jeremiah. This tradition is late and has some possibility, but no basis.

The poem is set in post-destruction Jerusalem, so it is from 586 B.C.E. or later (the Babylonians destroyed the Temple and the city in 586). Clines observes that the poem could have been written much later as Israel remained in a sort of exile (and still does today) waiting for God’s promises to be fulfilled. P.M. Joyce, writing in the Oxford Bible Commentary theorizes that Lamentations was written right after the disaster and used as liturgy by those who went daily to mourn on the Temple ruins.

We cannot know for sure who wrote Eicha or when. Its themes could have been liturgy for the community right after the destruction, but it could also have been a theological psalm from the centuries after, when the people were still wondering when God would appear. Its themes still ring true today as the wait has lengthened to millennia.

Theological Themes
As Clines observed, there is no singular answer in Eicha. It is a book reacting to disappointment and sorrow. People rarely have a structured or coordinated response to tragedy and Eicha is true to life as a bitter reflection.

There are three notions around which the themes of Lamentations revolve:

1. The supposed indestructability of Jerusalem, the city of God, which has turned out to be a lie.

2. The election of Israel by God and its ongoing relationship and covenantal promises, which are in question.

3. The curses of the covenant which explain the disaster but which are in tension with the ongoing covenant.

Has God chosen? Has he rejected? Have we earned these curses, as the warnings of Leviticus and Deuteronomy suggest? Or have we hope because the covenant is never-ending and larger than the retribution for failure?

Clines suggests in particular five lessons for mourners from Eicha:

1. Grief and self-reflection are legitimate and expression of bitterness is valuable and necessary. This contrasts with the well-meaning but misguided religious notion than due to our knowledge of God, we should be restrained in grief and expression of suffering.

2. God can be held responsible for tragedies. Though Jerusalem’s guilt is evident, still God had a choice of how exacting to be in vengeance.

3. Memories of God’s past kindnesses provide hope for the future, though God is not guaranteed to act favorably in the near term.

4. Repentance is not a tool for persuading God to relent as God is free to act as he chooses.

5. God is ultimately free to reject consolation and return. At least in our timing and according to our desire, God’s covenants do not obligate him. While he will be true, we do not know when or how.

Outline Adapted from Clines

Chapter 1: The Widowed Jerusalem
–The Scene (1-11)
–An Appeal (12-22)

Chapter 2: Adonai’s Anger and the Impossibility of Comfort
–The Anger (1-10)
–The Poet’s Inability to Comfort (11-17)
–A Cry for Mercy (18-22)

Chapter 3: When the Mood Changes
–A Man Who Has Seen Affliction (1-21)
–Adonai’s Mercies Never Cease (22-33)
–What of Repentance? (34-66)

Chapter 4: Casting Blame
–Jerusalem’s Inhabitants (1-11)
–Jerusalem’s Priests and Prophets (12-16)
–Jerusalem’s King (17-20)
–Jerusalem’s Enemies (21-22)

Chapter 5: Expectations of God
–A prayer to God by the community coming to a crescendo in 5:21 and sounding a dire note in 5:22. The end leaves no answer, only grief and longing.

Observing Tisha B’Av

How lonely sits the city that was full of people! How like a widow has she become, she that was great among the nations! . . . She weeps bitterly in the night, tears on her cheeks; among all her lovers she has none to comfort her; all her friends have dealt treacherously with her, they have become her enemies.
-Lamentations 1:1-2

Because I remember, I despair. Because I remember, I have the duty to reject despair.
-Elie Wiesel

Tisha B’Av (the ninth of Av) begins at sundown Wednesday (July 29). According to a Talmudic passage (Taanit 26a), five things happened in history on this date:

(1) The Exodus generation was told they would die in the desert.

(2) The first Temple was destroyed by the Babylonians (586 B.C.E.).

(3) The second Temple was destroyed by the Romans (70 C.E.).

(4) Bar Kochba’s fortress was destroyed by the Romans, ending the second Jewish revolt (136 C.E.).

(5) The city of Jerusalem was plowed under.

Tradition has it that practically every tragedy in Jewish history is connected to this day. According to George Robinson (Essential Judaism) there is literal historical truth to that fact. The ninth of Av is the date when the Romans began destroying the Temple in 70 C.E. (they finished on the tenth). He says that it was truly on Tisha B’Av in 1190 when the Jewish population of York, England was massacred and in 1290 when Edward banished all Jews from England and Tisha B’Av was the deadline for Jews to leave Spain the expulsion of 1492. The Nazis deliberately chose this date in 1942 to send Jews from the ghetto at Warsaw into Treblinka for extermination.

A Disturbing Day, a Mournful Day
Walking into synagogue on the eve of Tisha B’Av, you find the chairs either removed or turned upside down. People sit on low stools or on the floor, as did Job in his distress. Curtains and coverings are removed, making the synagogue look bare.

The last meal before sundown is traditionally lentils and eggs. Their round shape is said to speak of mourning, since life is a circle of mourning.

The texts for reading are sad ones: Lamentations, Jeremiah (but not the consolation passages), Job, Deuteronomy 4:25-40, Jeremiah 8:13 – 9:23, and also Kinot, sad poems of mourning composed through the ages for reading on Tisha B’Av.

Lamentations is read in whole at the evening service. The cant gets louder through the first three chapters, silent on the fourth, and then loud again on the next to last verse:

Hashivenu, Adonai, eleikha v’nashuvah! Chadesh, chadesh yameinu, chadesh yameinu k’kedem!
Restore us to thyself, O Lord, that we may be restored! Renew our days as of old!
-Lamentations 5:21

Tisha B’Av as Spiritual Discipline
It is better to go to the house of mourning, than to go to the house of feasting: for that is the end of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart.
-Ecclesiastes (Kohelet) 7:2

As long as we live in the age of death and futility, we ought to set times to meditate and reflect on these things. Our prayer and worship is heavily populated with verses of hope and consolation. May Messiah come speedily. Rebuild the Temple. May our own eyes see your return to Zion.

Such hope is vital and rightly emphasized. But in this age we will deal with death and we ought to deal with it purposefully and thoughtfully.

Tisha B’Av is a spiritual discipline. We eat our lentils alone and not in the joy of a communal table. Fasting on Tisha B’Av is a way of experiencing the pangs of suffering to remind ourselves, even in good times, that this is the lot of humankind. We pray silently and alone, even in synagogue, because death separates loved ones and harms community.

We need Tisha B’Av to remember how great the hope and consolation of Messiah truly is.

A Few Conversations from UMJC 2009

Who knows how many stories, conversations, and connections were made at the 2009 UMJC Conference? UMJC stands for the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations (umjc.net) and we just met in Miami.

This was an eventful UMJC for me. I passed my last remaining exam for smicha (ordination as a rabbi) and received smicha on Saturday night in the havdalah service. I taught two classes and manned a table for MJTI (Messianic Jewish Theological Institute). And I enjoyed conversation with some learned and devoted friends.

These are the stories of a few conversations.

Learning to Sing the Torah
I met with Jeff Feinberg, from Chicago, whose Sing the Sidra turned out to be the most valuable tool out of many I tried in learning the trope melodies for chanting the Torah this past year. He had to examine me to see if my knowledge of the trope melodies was sufficient, a qualification for rabbinic ordination I put off for last. As we worked through a few passages of Torah, Rabbi Feinberg reminded me that singing the Torah changes the way you read the details and helps you see relationships in the words of Torah.

Discusssing Rabbinic Literature, Modern Media, and Halakha
I spent hours talking with Carl Kinbar, my rabbinics mentor and also the Provost of MJTI. We often manned the table together for MJTI. The conversation turned to his specialty, rabbinics, and also his great interest in changes in media due to the dynamics of the internet. He reminded me that the greatest revolution since the Gutenberg printing press is underway right now. He expressed some thoughts about the challenges for the future of Messianic Judaism and I enjoyed the chance to pick his brain for an hour or two at a time. The challenges to the future of Messianic Judaism are nearly overwhelming and I see the need for more interaction between younger leaders and our predecessors.

How to Live Out Torah and Be Practical
I had dinner and a cab ride with Boaz Michael and Aaron Eby of First Fruits of Zion. I talk often with Boaz, so this was a rare chance to talk more with Aaron Eby. I learned a lot as we dialogued intensely about the more Orthodox end of the observance spectrum versus my more lenient ideas. He was very challenging. He also introduced me to a concept that may show up this week in my Yeshua in Context podcast (about going beyond the legal requirements of the commandments). Boaz challenged me regarding the importance of materials instructing people in keeping mitzvot and other practical, rather than academic, topics.

Feeding Elderly Jews in Israel
I had coffee at Starbucks with Michael Schiffman of Chevra (chevrahumanitarian.org) and we made plans for me (and my synagogue as well) to be more involved in helping Chevra provide food and help for elderly and needy Jews in Israel. Our synagogue already supports Chevra, but as Rabbi Schiffman and I talked, we could see that there are ways I can immediately be of help. I think our synagogue will be excited about hosting an event in Atlanta. This is a tikkun olam (repairing the world) undertaking we truly believe in.

Reemerging as a Movement and Seeking Unity
The Shabbat message by Rabbi Seth Klayman (Sha’arei Shalom in Raliegh, North Carolina) was challenging to say the least. The Torah portion was the beginning of Deuteronomy: Moses explaining some history to the new generation about the enter the land. Rabbi Klayman challenged us, like them, to reemerge as a movement. Messianic Judaism needs to reemerge, he said, to get out of the place we have been stuck. We need a divine dissatisfaction, just as God said to Israel, “You have stayed long enough at this mountain.”

One of Rabbi Klayman’s main points for moving ahead and reemerging as a movement, is that we need a much deeper sense of unity and working together — with groups whom have different emphases and with whom we sadly overlook our common vision.

Shortly after that, I was in a Torah study led by Julie David and mostly populated with 20’s and 30’s. Their voice was refreshing. I heard them saying, in response to Rabbi Klayman’s message, “We need to learn from the wisdom of our predecessors in Messianic Judaism, but not carry their burdens.” They spoke of that unity, of reconciling divided groups of Jewish Yeshua-followers. Several are involved in prayer and friendship events with 20’s and 30’s in the MJAA. One, a son of a prominent UMJC leader, said we need to reach out to those in the Jews for Jesus movement.

The younger generation is more likely to overlook differences, something the older generation has polarized over. I am in the middle, a young 40-something. have focused on differences. I have neglected to emphasize the fact that a large part of our vision is in common.

My heart was strangely warmed by this talk of a greater unity. What will happen to Messianic Judaism if we seek this greater unity? How can we do this and avoid assenting to things that harm what we most care about? I am not for unity at the expense of vital issues (I’m not ready to sing Kum Ba Yah with Christian missionaries to the Jewish people just yet), but I also want to believe that through repentance and divine empowerment, diverse groups could gather more around what we share in common: a vision of final redemption through Israel to the nations by the work of Messiah.

Is greater unity between various groups of Jewish Yeshua-followers possible? What about movements that are largely non-Jewish but also share the passion for final redemption through Israel to the nations by the work of Messiah?

What would change look like: on my blog, in my relationships, in the size and power of what Messianic Judaism could do if factions worked together?

PODCAST: Yeshua in Context – Actions and Discipleship

Catching the life and message of Yeshua the Messiah is not only about hearing his words. How did Yeshua teach us by his actions? What are some categories of actions and what are ways we should think about them? In this episode, we briefly consider what Yeshua did and why it matters.

TO LISTEN: Either use iTunes (search Yeshua and the Podcast will come up at the top) or click here.

I recorded this podcast in Miami at the UMJC Conference (umjc.net). Sound quality? Not so good. I tried the lobby at 5:30 in the morning and I tried outside by Biscayne Bay. Finally I recorded later in my hotel room after the family was awake and out for sessions.

What do you think about Yeshua’s actions, modeled and symbolic? Which ones speak loudest to you?

Last night I heard a retelling of the anointing of Yeshua’s feet in the home of Simon the Pharisee (by Russ Resnik). That is the fresh story in my mind right now. How about you?

What is the-Point-of-It-All?

I am still enjoying vacation in Cocoa Beach with my wife and eight kids. This will perhaps be our last vacation with everyone together since my oldest is a sophomore in college. I am sitting on the eight floor balcony listening to surf and laughing people and seagulls as I write.

Recent conversations have me thinking about the-point-of-it-all. With my friends in a Saturday night home group, we recently were talking about the Parable of the Sower. The conversation drifted around to the fruitfulness God is looking for as Yeshua evokes the image of fruitful agriculture in his word picture. What fruit is God looking for from his community of servants and friends?

Ordination, the UMJC, and My Story

I am vacationing in Cocoa Beach, an interim stop along the way to Miami and the UMJC annual conference (Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, umjc.net). If I pass an exam — not a comprehensive, but an exam in my final area for qualification — I will be ordained on Saturday (July 25). As far as I know, I will be only the fourth of fifth person to receive smicha under the new system of credentials. We are going to need to see those numbers increase greatly in coming years if Messianic Judaism is to have a healthy future.

My path to Judaism is not orthodox (pun intended, but in all seriousness, my story is not normative). As I find we all need stories and to see the stories of others, I mean this little autobiographical sketch only as a means of sharing a story, and not as though I am suggesting my story is more important than anyone else’s.

Revelation and Theology

The following is a rough draft for a short chapter in a book I am working on, Revelation Speaks. Though unfinished (I may add more to it), it seemed worth posting and inviting comments. What do you think about what I am saying? What thoughts about Revelation occur to you as you read this?
……………………..

Having made a study of Revelation several times all the way through and having taught the book on more than one occasion (three times through, if my memory is correct), I find that my understanding has changed from beginning to end. I should thank my congregation for allowing me to experiment on them, as in each case, by the time I arrived at the end of John’s apocalypse my opinions were slightly changed from the beginning. I am not saying, by any means, that I have arrived or that you should uncritically consider any of my ideas about Revelation, but there is no substitute for reading the works of other interpreters and occupying oneself with the sacred text again and again.

PODCAST: Yeshua in Context – Disputes and Yeshua

Yeshua was involved in a number of disputes. What were they about? Some see these a Yeshua turning from the old religion and pointing people to a new one. E.P. Sanders helps us understand some levels of dispute about laws. What was at issue for Yeshua in these disputes? What issue was more important than principles about how to keep the laws of Torah? The disputes of Yeshua give us another small window into his aims within the context of Israel in the first century.

LISTEN ON iTUNES (Yeshua in Context) OR GO HERE TO LISTEN.

Consider the dispute section in Mark 2:1 – 3:6.

2:1-12, The paralytic is healed and Yeshua says, “Your sins are forgiven.” Is he just saying, “I can tell that God has forgiven your sins”? When some want to dispute with him, Yeshua says, “In order that you make know that the son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins, I tell you, get up.” Yeshua defends his right to forgive sins.

2:13-17, Yeshua calls a tax collector and dines with some. When people dispute with him, Yeshua defends his right to call sinners to the kingdom of God.

2:18-22, Some dispute with Yeshua about why his disciples don’t fast like other disciples. Yeshua calls himself the Bridegroom (a provocative image which could be taken as a claim to deity, since Hashem is Israel’s bridegroom). He defends the right of his disciples not to fast.

2:23-28, As the walk through a grainfield on Shabbat, some of his disciples pick grain, roll it in their hands, and eat it. When some dispute this as a transgression of the law of Shabbat rest, Yeshua defends his disicples’ practice. He says he is the son of man, Lord of Shabbat.

3:1-6, Yeshua healed someone on Shabbat who was not in immediate danger of dying. When some dispute this, Yeshua lays down a principle on his own authority: it is lawful to do good and not harm on Shabbat.

How do these disputes give us a window on Yeshua’s aims within Israel and his own generation? If you have thoughts and ideas, please share them.

What is at Stake in the FFOZ / Tim Hegg Debate?

The people at First Fruits of Zion are friends of mine, so as I write this, I make no pretense to objectivity. I do think, however, that the arguments I will briefly lay out speak for themselves. I believe it is possible, if you know nothing of FFOZ or of Tim Hegg for a reader to see what is at stake and to fairly judge from this article. I invite Tim Hegg or any of his supporters to politely respond here.

There is a debate going on right now. It began when an individual, Tim Hegg at torahresource.com decided to publish a sharply critical letter warning the world of the dangers of FFOZ. What is at stake in the FFOZ/Tim Hegg debate? The answer is the legacy of pre-Messianic Jewish pioneers such as Paul Philip Levertoff is at stake.

In short, First Fruits of Zion, at great expense, and I know since I was consulted about the matter, at a great financial loss, has with integrity purchased rights to and begin to publish works from the great pioneers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries under the imprint Vine of David (vineofdavid.org). The first two volumes to be produced include an updated version of Paul Philip Levertoff’s Love and the Messianic Age and a commentary and study guide on the same work.

On June 26, Tim Hegg of Torah Resource issued a letter and an 11-page paper stating his reasons for distancing himself from FFOZ and inviting others to share his stance toward them. He listed as his reasons: (1) that FFOZ no longer teaches the One-Law doctrine, (2) that FFOZ values the tradition of normative Judaism, and (3) that FFOZ (allegedly) wishes to promote kabbalah, (4) and that FFOZ (allegedly) advocates a mystical hermeneutic for interpreting scripture.

As to the first two points I can say: hallelujah. As to the second two points, Mr. Hegg, solitary prophet that he presents himself to be, is guilty of two insidious and simplistic tricks of rhetoric:

(1) Using “guilt by association” to denounce his enemies.

(2) Using alarmism to promote himself.

The Guilt-by-Association Rhetorical Move
Levertoff was deeply moved by, though not without limits and caveats, the beauty of the Chasidic thought which was the background of his family. He sought to integrate some, mind you some, Chasidic concepts with the New Testament theology he taught and learned as an Anglican divine of Jewish descent.

He clearly did not bathe uncritically in the waters of kabbalah. He did not, for example, accept the ideas of Lurianic kabbalah about God requiring the help of Jews to restore the cracked vessels of creation by keeping mitzvot. He did not accept the idea that Gentiles have an animal-like soul and are incapable of true spiritual reflection. There is much evidence to the unbiased observer that Levertoff’s love for Chasidic thought had limits and balance.

From reading Tim Hegg’s letter, you would think that Levertoff and FFOZ are ready to join Madonna and Yehuda Berg in bringing New Age philosophy to the unsuspecting minds of the Messianic Jewish movement. Hegg writes eleven pages warning us about how dangerous Chasidic thought and kabbalah can be, especially in the way scripture is subject to esoteric means of interpretation.

Is FFOZ in fact guilty of mystical redefinition of terms and an undisciplined hermeneutic of scripture which rejects the plain meaning? Of course not. Note for example the caveat in the introduction by Daniel Lancaster to Love and the Messianic Age, a caveat which I believe FFOZ has followed heartily in their presentation of Levertoff’s thought:

During the course of those six chapters, the reader will be exposed to a variety of mystical constructs, some of which are inspiring and insightful and some of which may seem dubious. It is not necessary to agree with or endorse the mystical concepts Levertoff advances in these chapters. . . . Levertoff’s method invites the reader to withhold judgment until the epilogue, when he takes us into the book of John.

Guilt by association is a simple but detestable practice of rhetoric. It consists of insinuating that someone you wish to denounce is guilty of the worst errors of any tradition or person from whom they have some association. For example, someone might say, Joe Messianic drives a Ford, and we all know that Henry Ford was a damnable anti-Semite. Is Joe Messianic turning against his own people?

PARODY: The Dangers of Calvinism and Does Tim Hegg Wish to Burn Hebraists at the Stake?
Let me apply a bit of Hegg’s own technique on him as nothing more than a parody.

Tim Hegg is an admitted Calvinist, a form of theology which we all know is insidious and which undermines the very authority of the Bible (see my accompanying twelve page monograph, “Are Calvinists Responsible for Some of the Missing and Murdered Children in America?”).

Calvinism, as is well-known, foists onto the Bible certain unscriptural and harmful ideas. God does not love you in any sense in which you would use the word love, according to Calvinists. He chose you randomly to be saved and also randomly chose others to be damned. Calvinists say if God found anything lovable about you, this would be a “good work” and render you unfit for salvation.

Calvin, as is well-known, called for the death of Michael Servetus, who perhaps represents an early attempt to bring Jewish thought into Christian doctrine. In other words, Calvin was in favor of burning Hebraists and Messianic Jews.

Is Tim Hegg planning to burn Messianic Jews as his mentor John Calvin taught as the true path to Jesus Christ? We would not want to see Torah Resource grow in power or strength lest this hidden agenda become a reality. The only course for us in the Messianic movement is to avoid purchasing Torah Resource materials and warn all our friends about this coming persecution.

Let’s work together to protect Messianic Judaism and the world from the dangers of Calvinist biblical interpretation and pursue instead the plain meaning of the text. Let’s work against the persecution of Messianics by the Geneva Illuminati and Tim Hegg.

**Note: I say again, the preceding words are a parody only.

Alarmism versus Balance
Tim Hegg warns all his readers about FFOZ, explains that he no longer associates with FFOZ, and urges readers not to be fooled by the writings of Levertoff.

Alarmism serves the interests of solitary prophets in need of attention and an audience. It is a shameful technique for self-promotion.

There is no crisis of hermeneutics or theology in the publishing work of FFOZ through Vine of David (vineofdavid.org). No nefarious theologies are being promoted. There is nothing more extra-biblical about Levertoff’s synthesis of Chasidic and New Testament theology than there is about the works of John Calvin.

But I can say that the tragedy is if people who trust Tim Hegg and do not investigate for themselves miss out on the blessing of reading Love and the Messianic Age and other great works in the history of Messianic Judaism.

Far from being literature to be banned or shunned, which if you read the book Hegg’s alarmism will likely make you laugh, this material is part of the heritage of modern Messianic Judaism. There have been many missteps in developing Messianic Jewish thought. Pioneers like Alfred Edersheim made a real contribution while, unfortunately, feeling that devotion to Messiah required them to criticize Judaism. Early leaders in Messianic Judaism too closely followed patterns in Charismatic Christianity which led to embarrassment and avoidance of Messianic Judaism by Jewish believers for years.

Is Levertoff’s work the be-all, end-all of theology? No one claimed it to be that. Yet it is a perspective to learn from and to understand. What Tim Hegg does not seem to understand is that mystical reading of scripture, properly done, is not about interpretation at all. It is about application. The heart of Love and the Messianic Age is a practical theology of loving God. It is not about doctrine or historical research, but about how to love God. Everyone in the Messianic Jewish movement should remember and practice what Messiah taught: there is no greater commandment. And to disparage a beautiful work of meditation on love for God does not serve God or the movement.

Ezekiel: Dedicated or Reluctant Prophet?

He was made mute, unable to speak except when God delivered a word through him (Ezek. 3:26). He was bound with cords, literal or a figure for the power of God confining him to his house (3:25). He was made to do arduous and torturous things, lying on his left side for 390 days, bound again with cords, eating rough bread cooked with cow dung (4:4-17).

Of all the terrible things Ezekiel endured, the worst came with a word, “I am about to take from you the delight of your eyes at a stroke, yet you shall not mourn or weep.” The prophet obeyed, carrying out the terrible command. “At evening my wife died. And on the next morning, I did as I was commanded” (24:15-18).

If there was a tragic prophet, one might argue it was Jeremiah, the weeping prophet. Yet did Jeremiah, in all his trials, endure quite as much suffering as Ezekiel?

What can we say of the man, Ezekiel? Was he dedicated, a man of steel able to bear mortifying strain? Or was he a reluctant prophet, perhaps even a “member of the priestly class . . . infected with the same spiritual malady that plagued the group as a whole” (Daniel Block).

Psychiatrists have written about him, this mute who did crazy things such as digging holes in walls, describing hallucinations he claimed were divine, fascinated with feces and blood, and perhaps paranoid. In his commentary on Ezekiel, Daniel Block summarizes several psychological studies published about Ezekiel, including a monograph by Karl Jaspers (Vol. 1, Chapters 1-24: New International Commentary on the Old Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997], 10-11).

Rejecting the notion of a delusional Ezekiel, we are still left with two main choices to explain his condition. Was he impelled against his will, a reluctant and resistant prophet constrained by the hand of Hashem? Or was he dedicated beyond the usual limits of the human will, a man of iron will?

Moshe Eisemann says of Ezekiel:

How could Yechezkel teach the people of Jerusalem that their Temple would be taken from them? . . . How could they be made to believe that man’s most beloved prize would be snatched away because of his sin? That too Yechezkel had to demonstrate through the loss of the one that was most beloved to him — his wife. She would die in a plague, God told him. . . . Yechezkel’s tragedy would be a sign for them that they, like he, would be bereaved. And for this too Yechezkel was ready — because they were his people.

How could a mortal man be so dedicated? Such dedication was the very essence of Yechezkel’s mission (Yechezkel [Brooklyn: Mesorah Publications, 1977] xxix).

In a completely different theory, Daniel Block presents Ezekiel the apathetic priest, the typical Jerusalemite made by the power of God to endure and demonstrate prophetic messages against his will.

Why, asks Block, do we constantly have reminders that the Spirit takes Ezekiel places, that the hand of Hashem moves him? Why, after being commanded to stand does it say that the Spirit brought him up to his feet (2:1-2)? Why is he warned not once, but repeatedly and in some stern sermons, not to be rebellious like Israel and not to refrain from delivering God’s messages (2:8; 3:16-21)? Why, after commanding him to eat the scroll, do we read that God fed it to Ezekiel (2:8 – 3:3)? Why was Ezekiel enraged in his spirit (3:14) and why did he sit silent for a week in a state of shock (3:15)?

Block presents us with Ezekiel the spiritually mediocre, the unremarkable man, chosen much as the judges in the days of the Judges in Israel. By this theory, Ezekiel was what God had to work with in an age of no spiritual giants.

And as we read, we have to wonder: which is true, which do we want to believe? Can a man steel himself so thoroughly to so hard a mission or would a man under the pressure of such a mission, be merely a reluctant puppet impelled by the hand of Hashem?

I do not feel comfortable as yet deciding which version to believe. Perhaps I will never know, even in the limited sense of knowing through interpretation of a text. Yet I will wonder about these things as I read and reread.

What Sort of Judaism Did Yeshua Support? Part 1

I found an extremely interesting metaphor in N.T. Wright’s Jesus and the Victory of God. Getting a handle on the aims and views of Yeshua in relation to his own context of first century Judaism is like “climbing from one moving boat into another” (p. 93).

Judaism in the time of Yeshua is a moving boat for several reasons. Our sources are limited. The Mishnah is later and isolating the strands that represent actual first century views is complicated. The apocalyptic and pseudepigraphic writings are notoriously difficult to judge: whose views do they represent and what time periods do they represent? What of the pictures we get from Josephus and Philo? What of the sectarian documents from the Dead Sea Scrolls? How much of a window do they give us on Judaism in Yeshua’s time?

What sorts of things did common people believe and expect, people like Peter and John and James? How diverse were various groups on basic questions like the end of the age, the nature of God’s kingdom, and so on?

Consider how difficult it is to describe “Judaism” in our age. Even with thousands of books, numerous blogs, journals, lectures, seminaries, media sources, and so on, getting a handle on what Judaism or Jews believe about a certain question is complicated.

Understanding Judaism in Yeshua’s time is a moving boat. Just look at how many books with how many contradictory opinions there are.

By the same token, Yeshua is a moving boat. Many of his teachings, especially parables, are ambiguous enough to allow for widely different readings. True, certain presuppositions about history and Judaism narrow down the range of options, but how narrowly?

Perhaps the widest and shallowest reading of Yeshua is that he came to tell people how to get to heaven. The list of presuppositions behind this for many readers is simple: the teachings of Yeshua are in the Bible; the Bible is simply a book for all Christians; therefore, I should read the words of Yeshua in ways that directly address the concerns of my Christian faith. Wright admirably points out that when Yeshua spoke of the kingdom of heaven, this phrase meant kingdom of God or God’s rule on the earth, not the afterlife. Looking for immediate and direct answers to questions formulated by a religious tradition causes people to ignore the intended meaning of texts. The “how-to-get-to-heaven Jesus” is a subtle distortion of the true prophet and Messiah who lived among us.

Most readers of Messianic Jewish Musings accept as a presupposition that Yeshua came for Israel with a message, something that agreed with parts of the Judaisms surrounding him and parts in tension with the Judaisms surrounding him. No prophet comes to simply affirm that the people have it all right.

In this post, I simply want to consider a few of Yeshua’s statements and how they answer the question, “What sort of Judaism did Yeshua support?” I am sort of thinking out loud here, not submitting a polished theology or historical sketch. I plan to write more on this in part 2 and how these texts give us some clues about the aims of Yeshua and the nature of Judaism in his time.

Yeshua supported a challenge to the status quo in the leadership of his people.

Yeshua visibly opposed the leadership of his time, especially at the Temple. This is the clearest reason why he was killed. The Temple leadership of Yeshua’s time had a small army at their command (the Temple guard), nearly unchecked power, a widespread reputation for corruption, and the ability to call down the imperial power of Rome when there were mutual interests.

In his “cleansing” of the Temple, Yeshua opposed the manner in which the Temple leaders administrated the courtyards (Mark 11:15-18; Matt. 21:12-13; John 2:14-17). Interpretations have varied. A common reading is that Yeshua opposed buying and selling, as a general rule, on sacred ground. Another reading is that he opposed the buying and selling because they hindered people, perhaps specifically non-Jews, from having a fitting place to pray and worship God. Yeshua quoted Isaiah 56, with its ideal of the Temple as a place for non-Jews to worship.

Yeshua supported a Judaism which upheld the prophetic traditions of honoring God, of justice for the people, and rightfully ordained leadership following the Torah’s laws and not political deals with the Romans such as the chief priests and Sadducees made.

Yeshua supported a Judaism that helped people draw nearer to God, not one that made God impossible to approach.

Yeshua railed against the teachers of Torah for creating burdens (Luke 11:46; Matt. 23:4) and not making a halakhah (practice) of Torah that the people could follow.

Yeshua supported the concept of the authority of the priests and Torah teachers in general and told his disciples to do the same (Matt. 23:1-4). This principle is from Torah itself, in which God ordained the appointment of judges to regulate Torah for the people (Deut. 17:8-13). The Torah left most details to the leaders to regulate and only gave general directions.

Yeshua did not believe the regulations the Pharisees were coming up with regulated Torah for the people. There was something about the direction of their halakhah (rulings on practice) that he considered elitist, serving the egos of a group of men desiring to outdo others in sanctity instead of serving the people with a workable life of Torah. An analogy would be a religious denomination that required all people to pray three hours a day, knowing that only the well-to-do and religious professionals can afford such time without neglecting family and themselves.

Yeshua supported a Judaism that was humble and repentant, not one smug and assured.

Repeatedly Yeshua challenged all those who thought they were assured of a good standing with God and encouraged those who longed for God and yet felt far off. Examples are almost too numerous to refer to. Yeshua astounded onlookers by dining with Zacchaeus (Luke 19) and told a parable of a self-justifying Pharisee whose sins were not forgiven and a repentant tax collector whose sins were (Luke 18:9-14). The story was told to oppose “those who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others.”

This seems to have been one of Yeshua’s major tensions with some stream(s) of Judaism he saw forming. Of course then, as now, there must have been self-effacing, deferential strands of Jewish life as well. Those who know modern Judaism know that the majority of the tradition is contrite and graceful. As a critic from within, Yeshua opposed presumption of divine favor and disparaging of others before God.

He supported simple repentance, the prayer of the heart. This was not some opposition to the traditions of psalms and liturgy and beautiful prayers versus the alleged superiority of spontaneous or emotive prayer. Nonetheless, one would have to imagine Yeshua approving of a simple “have mercy” by an unlearned pray-er than an elaborate, but unfelt psalm uttered by a scholar. Love for God is not the kind that says, “I deserve a place in your inner council,” but which says, “your love for me astounds me as I see nothing in me to deserve such favor and affection.”

Yeshua supported a Judaism that adhered firmly to Torah and tradition, but which rightly prioritized love for people, justice, and kindness.

In spite of some characterizations of Yeshua as a law-free Messiah, he emphasized the need to adhere even to detailed regulations. He affirmed the decision that herbs from the garden should be tithed on (Matt. 23:23), a regulation not clearly required by a literal reading of Torah.

Yet he thought it obvious and the teachers of Torah scandalous for not understanding a sense of priority in the Torah. There are weighty and lighter matters of Torah. Attention to the light matters while neglecting the weighty ones is a plague of religion in every place and time. The fact is, it is easier to tithe on dill than to care for a neighbor who is ill and needs help. It is easier to say a prayer in the morning than to take part in healing and helping the people in our lives.

Yeshua opposed a Judaism that turned God’s commandments into burdens, especially for the poor.

This is how I take the saying about the Son of Man being Lord of the Sabbath. Yeshua, the Son of Man, declared his authority to give rulings on how the Sabbath laws were to be implemented.

In that story, some teachers of the Torah criticized Yeshua’s disciples for gathering and eating kernels of grain as they traveled through fields (Mark 2: 23-28; Matt. 12:1-8; Luke 6:1-5). Yeshua responded with a story about David’s men when they were in dire need of food and how they violated a holiness regulation (bread from the Temple was only for priests to eat in sanctity) to meet a need for life.

The implication, it seems to me, is that Sabbath laws can be construed in very confining ways. It could be illegal to breathe on Shabbat if you regulate work too far. Yeshua advocated Sabbath regulations that did not unduly cause hardship, especially for the poor–such as the disciples wandering the countryside and in need of food.

*****More coming in Part 2*******

Ezekiel, Some Rabbinic Stories

Ezekiel and rabbinic literature have something in common: they both have a reputation for being difficult. There is some truth to this perception. I don’t think Ezekiel makes the best reading material for beginners.

Ezekiel is also mentioned in a few rabbinic stories. There is the story about how Ezekiel was almost not accepted by Judaism as a holy book. There is a story about two rabbis walking, one began expounding on a mystical part of Ezekiel and the trees were singed with fire.

First, about Ezekiel almost not making it into the Jewish canon (which would likely have kept it out of Christian Bibles as well), the sages tell a wonderful story. It is a story that would inspire scholars everywhere.

R. Judah (c. 270) passed on a tradition from his teacher Rav (c. 230) concerning how Ezekiel was qualified and received by the rabbis as a genuine holy book. The tradition is that Hananiah ben Hezekiah (c. time of the New Testament) made a study of Ezekiel to reconcile it to Torah. To do this, he first gathered three hundred vessels of oil for his lamps and went into an upper chamber. He needed all three hundred vessels of oil (literally “burning the midnight oil”) while he was sequestered without interruption to reconcile the contradictions (Shabbat 13b, Babylonian Talmud).

Aside from the endearing image of a great scholar poring over the books in a lonely room by the light of tiny oil lamps, what is this all about? What contradictions does this refer to? There are a number of them. I have not compiled a complete list (though I will eventually), but Ezekiel has many changes from the Torah. A few examples should suffice.

In Ezekiel 45:18 mentions and holy day, for cleansing the sanctuary, unheard of in Torah. The same chapter’s rundown of the festivals does not mention many from the Torah, leading one to wonder if God will change the festivals in the Age to Come. In Ezekiel 44:15, the priesthood is limited to the line of Zadok, which is a narrower definition of the priestly line than in Torah where all Aaron’s descendants are priests. Ezekiel 46 suggests numerous regulations for a prince which are not found in Torah. The whole Temple in Ezekiel 40-48 is of a completely different plan than Solomon’s. And Ezekiel 43:7-8 gives a new law forbidding the prince to have a palace adjacent to the Temple.

Concerning these and others, Hananiah burned three hundred jars of midnight oil to show that Ezekiel is not a false prophet, but true.

Second, there is a story about the dangers and also the glories of Ezekiel’s chariot vision, a vision which inspired a tradition of mysticism. Much as the text of 2 Corinthians 12:1-8 inspired a whole tradition of Christian mysticism, so the vision of Ezekiel 1, which reappears throughout the book, is the basis of merkavah or “chariot” mysticism. It is called this because the vision of four living creatures and wheels within wheels is a chariot bearing the divine glory.

Concerning the chariot vision, there is a story about R. Yohanan ben Zakkai (c. time of the New Testament) riding with Eleazar ben Arakh driving the donkey for his master. Eleazar asked Yohanan to teach him about the Work of the Chariot (ma’aseh merkavah). Yohanan replied that only a fully qualified sage, able to render his own halakhic and midrashic opinions was fit to hear such teachings. Eleazar then replied that his master had already taught him some principles of the Chariot.

As Eleazar began to speak about the Work of the Chariot, Yohanan leapt off his donkey, wrapped his cloak about his head, and took shelter under an olive tree. When Eleazar inquired, Yohanan said the presence of angelic beings was sure to be with them. Eleazar then expounded and fire came from heaven and consumed all the trees, which sang verses from the Psalms as they were consumed by heavenly fire. An angelic being called out, “Surely this is the Work of the Chariot.”

Aftwerwards, Yohanan kissed his disciple on the head and blessed him as a rare one who had the gift of expounding on the Chariot, “Happy are you, O Abraham, our father, that R. Eleazar ben Arakh has come forth from your loins” (Hagigah 14b, Babylonian Talmud).

The moral of both stories, it would seem, is that Ezekiel is not child’s play. It is difficult book in some places to reconcile with Torah and it is full of mysteries that ascend to the heavens.

Promote Yeshua in iTunes

Do you use iTunes? Let me ask a favor. Search Yeshua in the iTunes store, find the Yeshua in Context Podcast, and give it a favorable rating.

PODCAST: Yeshua in Context – The Story of Yeshua

One of the hindrances to faith in Messiah in our day is the proliferation of cynical information casting doubt on the historical validity of his sayings and deeds.

It is trendy to suggest that the gospels as we have them are a product of later generations with many distortions of the true message of Yeshua the cynic philosopher or whatever depiction of him suits the documentary at hand.

I believe cynicism about Yeshua is going to get worse, the climate of tolerance for Yeshua followers is going to diminish, and the pressure, even amongst Yeshua followers, to doubt the life and message of Yeshua will increase. We cannot have our egos invested in being seen as reasonable or even sane. To choose to follow Yeshua against the surge of nihilism is a worthy choice and calls for strength of character.

In today’s podcast (available in iTunes if you search Yeshua or at the link below), I consider a model for understanding how the stories about Yeshua and the stories Yeshua told were preserved and passed down by the generation that wrote the gospels.

Here are some questions for discussion:

(1) How do we know or even have faith that stories about Yeshua and stories Yeshua told are genuine?

(2) What perception do you think people have of the historical validity of Yeshua’s sayings and deeds as recorded in the gospels?

Here is a direct link to the podcast on derekleman.com