FOREWORD<\/p>\n
\u201cI am your friend!\u201d
\nThus began Dr. Dan Cohn-Sherbok\u2019s speech to the annual conference of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations in the summer of 2000. With a skeptic\u2019s ear, I sat back and listened to this gentle, Reform rabbi explain why he was a friend of Messianic Jews.
\nIn case you don\u2019t know this, as a rule, Jewish people who believe in Yeshua the Messiah are usually considered to be outside the Jewish world. Messianic Jews, as they are called, have been labeled as ignoramuses, traitors, self-hating, etc. But, here was a rabbi who claimed to be a friend of the movement.
\nActually, I already knew something about Dan Cohn-Sherbok, having read his excellent book, Messianic Judaism. In it, he included an illustration of menorah, which represented the seven branches of Judaism. One branch was labeled \u201cMessianic Judaism.\u201d He wrote that in a pluralistic model, there is no reason to exclude Messianic Jews. Although for centuries that\u2019s exactly what Messianic Jews have been saying, this is the first time a rabbi has been willing to take the position that it might be true.
\nBeing seen as M.O.T.s, (\u201cMembers of the Tribe\u201d\u2014Jews) by a respected spiritual leader of our people was a new experience for the thousand attendees and for me. He even predicted that we would be considered an accepted part of the Jewish people in this century\u2014reminding us that every branch of Judaism was at first rejected by the \u201cestablishment.\u201d
\nI had been looking forward to talking with this author of over thirty books. We were to meet to discuss the book you\u2019re holding in your hands. As he explains in his introduction, he was intrigued by this growing movement and wanted to understand it better. Unlike most \u201cprofessional\u201d Jews, Rabbi Cohn-Sherbok was willing to give Messianic Judaism a fair hearing. After all, as he quipped, he lives in the rolling hills of Wales, far away from the religious controversy in the U.S. and Israel. He had nothing to lose by telling the truth.
\nHe dedicated many months to researching and writing about what is surely the most misunderstood movement of Judaism. During this time, especially at conferences (Dan and his wife, Lavinia, also attended Messiah \u201999, the annual conference of the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, another other major Messianic group), he discovered something.
\nHe saw that the Messianic Jewish brand of Judaism had something other brands lacked. Setting aside the issue of whether Yeshua was the Messiah, he saw joy and celebration, dedication to the Bible and to the traditions of the Jewish people. He saw the fruit of the lives of people who had been transformed. He recognized, as he says in his introduction, \u201cthat the Messianic movement has become a significant force on the Jewish scene.\u201d It was fun to watch Dan and his wife, Lavinia, get up and do the hora (with only a little coaxing from my wife). They really enjoyed themselves.
\nWhen Dr. Cohn-Sherbok and I finally talked, he continued to develop the idea he had this book. As a friend of Messianic Judaism, he believed that it was important for the movement to grapple with some of its more thorny issues. Compiling a collection of articles by some of its best scholars and thinkers would contribute to the process.
\nI invited my friend, Dr. John Fischer (also a member of my Board of Advisors) to join us. Before lunch was over, we came up with a list of topics and prospective authors for each issue. When I got back to my office, I asked my editor, Janet Chaiet, to contact each of these writers to see if they\u2019d be willing to write on the subjects \u201cassigned\u201d to them.
\nSoon, amid her other duties, she got a group of disparate people with different perspectives and backgrounds, to contribute to this book. They conformed to our style-guide (pretty much), limited the amount they wrote (even though many wanted to write books on their topics), met deadlines (most of the time), and generated this book.
\nAs you read Voices of Messianic Judaism, keep in mind the old saying, \u201cWhen three Jews get together to discuss a matter, there are at least four opinions.\u201d In this book, you will encounter strong opinions on different sides of an issue. You may find yourself agreeing with one side, then find yourself agreeing with the other side after you read it. That\u2019s good. It means that each author, expressing his or her own thoughts and opinions, has argued effectively for their position. This kind of discussion and dialogue is a distinctive of Jewish theology called pilpul, a way to resolve apparent contradictions.
\nWe selected topics we think are most germane to Messianic Jews at this time, and the authors we believed could do them justice. There are other matters we could have addressed, and other writers who could have contributed to this book. However, we had to make some difficult choices. Perhaps there will be a sequel with a whole new set of discussions and authors. If there\u2019s interest, there will be.
\nWe deliberately chose only thirteen different topics. Discussion questions are included for twenty-seven chapters. Many congregations prefer materials that can be used over one quarter of a year. It is our hope that you and your group\u2014whether a Messianic congregation or a gathering of Christians who care about the Jewish people and Messianic Judaism\u2014will have your own discussion and dialogue, using these well thought-out articles as a starting point. Doing so will contribute to the maturing of Messianic Judaism.
\n\u2014Barry Rubin
\nPresident, Messianic Jewish Communications<\/p>\n
P.S. We\u2019ve included a glossary in the back of the book to help you with some unfamiliar terms and abbreviations.<\/p>\n
INTRODUCTION<\/p>\n
Growing up in the leafy suburbs of Denver, Colorado, it was my intention ever since I was a little boy to become a Reform rabbi. This desire amazed everyone. My father was a successful surgeon. Why, my parent\u2019s friends asked, did their son not want to follow in his footsteps? Being a rabbi, they said, was not a job for a nice Jewish boy. Undeterred, I went to Williams College in Williamstown, Massachusetts, and later studied for five years at the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. During this time, I served as a student rabbi in congregations in Jasper, Alabama; Galesburg, Illinois; Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; and Boulder, Colorado. After ordination, I was a Reform rabbi in Melbourne, Australia before beginning studies at Cambridge University for a doctorate. During my time at Cambridge, I served as a rabbi at the West London Synagogue, and later in Johannesburg, South Africa.
\nAlthough I had anticipated that congregants would listen in hushed silence to my sermons and attend study courses, it did not turn out that way. To my astonishment, I discovered that being a rabbi was not at all what I had expected. Services were sparsely attended; hardly anyone came to the courses I offered. In one of my congregations, the parking lot was packed on bingo night at the Temple, but only a few came to synagogue to pray. In another congregation, I was expected to dress up for a fashion show, or play tennis with women members at the Jewish country club. Eventually I decided I could take no more, and I became an academic, first at the University of Kent in Canterbury, England, and now at the University of Wales where I am a Professor of Judaism. During these years, I have written books on a wide variety of Jewish topics, many which deal with modern Jewish life.
\nSeveral years ago, my wife and I were writing a book, The American Jew, a study of the nature of American Judaism based on a single Jewish community. In the process of our research, we heard about the Messianic movement. One of those who spoke to us was an opponent of Messianic Judaism. At length, he recounted what he perceived as the iniquities of the movement. \u201cMessianic Jews,\u201d he declared, \u201care deceptive and deliberately attempt to hide their true intentions. Although they claim to be Jewish in their approach, in fact they are nothing more than Christians in disguise.\u201d
\nIntrigued, my wife and I contacted a local Messianic Jewish rabbi. His congregation was located in an industrial warehouse on the outskirts of the city. The sanctuary had an Ark, which contained a Torah scroll, and there was a purple curtain with an embroidered Star of David hanging in front of the Ark. The bookcases in the rabbi\u2019s office were full of Hebrew Texts, and a large photograph of the Walling Wall hung over his desk. The rabbi wore a skullcap, and was anxious to explain about the history and nature of Messianic Judaism.
\nIn the 19th century, he said, a small group of Jews proclaimed their faith in Jesus. Referred to as Hebrew Christians, they saw themselves as fulfilling their Jewish heritage by embracing the Messiah in their lives. Throughout the 20th century, Hebrew Christianity grew in strength, but it was only in the 1960s that notice was taken of these Jewish Christians. In recent decades, a new form of messianic faith has emerged out of these earlier subgroups within the Jewish community.
\nMessianic Judaism, he went on, is a movement of Jews who, like the Hebrew Christians, believe that Jesus, whom we call Yeshua, is the promised Messiah. In the view of Messianic Jews, Messianic Judaism differs from all other branches of Judaism in relying solely on the Hebrew Scriptures. Their faith is biblical Judaism; centered around the Messiah and the worldwide salvation he brings. Messianic Jews are convinced that they have access to God because of the atoning work of Messiah Yeshua, who has fulfilled them as Jews.
\nShowing us around his synagogue, he explained that Messianic Jews are one in spirit with Gentile followers of Jesus. Yet, Messianic Jews have their own expression of faith in the Messiah. Messianic Judaism asserts that it is Jewish to believe in Yeshua\u2014this, they contend, is a return to the Jewish roots of the faith. As a result Messianic Jews observe the biblical feasts and holidays while maintaining that the only route to salvation is through the atoning work of Yeshua.
\nAdherents of this new movement insist they are not Christians. In our view, he continued, the term Christian originally meant \u201cfollower of Christ.\u201d Yet, over time, the connotations of the term have changed. Unlike Gentile believers in Christ, Messianic Jews do not wish to separate themselves from their Jewish roots. They believe that they have found the Jewish Messiah and are now completed Jews in that Yeshua is the fulfillment of biblical Judaism. Yeshua never intended to start a new religion. Rather, he came to correctly explain the law and the prophets.
\nAfter introducing us to several members of the congregation who were wearing skullcaps as well as tzitziyot, he continued his description of the movement. From an institutional perspective, he stated, Messianic synagogues constitute the heart of the movement: they serve as the place where those who believe in Yeshua as the Messiah can live a Jewish life, raise their children as Jews and worship the God of Israel in a Jewish fashion. Like other Jews, Messianic believers celebrate all the biblical festivals\u2014Rosh HaShanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, Hanukkah, Purim, and Passover\u2014in a Messianic fashion believing that Yeshua is the fulfillment of all these holy days. The pattern frequently followed involves Davidic worship and praise using musical instruments, singing, Hebraic music, psalms, lifting up of hands, chanting, clapping, and processions. In addition, Messianic Jews incorporate dance into the worship.
\nAlthough Messianic Jews are guided in their practice by Scripture, he noted, there is a degree of ambivalence about Torah. As Messianic Jews, they believe that it is not possible to be \u201csaved\u201d through religious observance. Yet, while the law does not provide salvation, it is not dead. The moral precepts of the Ten Commandments, for example, are part of the New Covenant. The festivals are for all time. Hence, in varying degrees Messianic Jews seek to uphold the precepts found in Scripture, and often the details of observing the Torah.
\nBecause of the centrality of Israel in God\u2019s plan for all nations, he pointed out, Messianic Jews are ardent Zionists. They support Israel because the Jewish State is viewed as a direct fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Although Israel is far from perfect, Messianic Jews believe that God is active in the history of the nation and that the Jews will never be driven out of their land again. While God loves the Arabs, he gave the Holy Land to his chosen people.
\nConcerning the distinction between Messianic Jews and Gentile believers, Messianic Jews maintain that the rabbinic definition of who is a Jew is not correct. According to Scripture, they point out, Jews are preeminently a nation and a people. To be considered Jewish, one must be a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Further, biblical lineage is patriarchal, not matriarchal. Moreover, the Scriptures indicate that if either parent is Jewish, or if a grandparent is Jewish, one can identify himself or herself as Jewish. Therefore, some Messianic Jews have rejected the traditional doctrine that one is Jewish only if born of a Jewish mother. Instead, some maintain that a person is Jewish if he or she has at least one Jewish grandparent.
\nReturning to his office after a tour of the synagogue, we listened as he discussed his congregation. According to Messianic Judaism, he related, Jewish and Gentile believers are all one in Messiah Yeshua. Spiritually there are no barriers between Jews and Gentiles; they are all one in him. Gentile believers have entered the Jewish faith and have become spiritually circumcised and spiritually Jewish as they have accepted Yeshua into their lives. While Gentile believers cannot become physically Jewish, they are one with their Jewish brothers and sisters because the Spirit of God is within both Jewish and Gentile believers.
\nIn this light, Gentile believers are permitted to be members of Messianic synagogues. It is often the case, he indicated, that there are more Gentile members than Jews. Intermarriage is permitted, and parents are encouraged to live a Jewish lifestyle and raise their children as Jews. Having accepted Yeshua into their lives, Messianic Jews are to grow spiritually. The primary way whereby Jewish believers can continue to live their lives as Jews is by guarding against assimilation. They should become members of Messianic synagogues. Through participating in the life of the community they can continue to worship the Lord in a Jewish way, celebrate the Jewish festivals, raise children as Jews, and be a testimony to faith in Yeshua.
\nThis new movement fascinated both my wife and me, and on return to the United Kingdom, we attended the national conference of Messianic Jews. On our arrival, we were greeted by smiling, friendly people who directed us to the bookshop and market stall. Hebrew folk music played in the background as we looked at stalls loaded with various ritual objects including shofars, siddurs, prayer shawls, pictures of the Wailing Wall, mezuzahs, and menorahs. On other tables, there were stacks of books dealing with Messianic Judaism, as well as various aspects of Jewish belief and practice. Milling around were attendees to the conference\u2014many women wore Jewish stars around their necks and some of the men wore skullcaps and fringes.
\nAfter lunch, we attended a series of lectures dealing with various aspects of Messianic Judaism including Jewish music, theology, and liturgy. Later in the day, my wife and I attended the afternoon service. In the evening all the attendees gathered in a large hall. In the front, a band played loud music as members of the audience flooded to the stage. Joining hands, they sang and danced, praising the Lord. Others stood lifting their hands in thanksgiving. At the end of the service, members of the congregation lined up at the front to receive a blessing from the rabbis. Praying fervently, the rabbis prayed over the faithful, many of whom were overcome with emotion.
\nAnxious to learn more about the movement, my wife and I traveled to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania for the annual conference of the MJAA, which takes place at Messiah College every year. On the first day of the conference, we went to a session dealing with Messianic identity. The speaker was a bespectacled Messianic rabbi wearing a skullcap who told us that although he believes in Yeshua, he is emphatically not a Christian. Instead, he declared, he is a fulfilled Jew. At another session, one of the Messianic rabbis discussed the enemies of the movement. His message was filled with quotations from Scripture. The audience responded \u201cAmen\u201d and \u201cPraise the Lord.\u201d
\nIn the evening, we attended a large service for the entire conference. In the front, there was a splendid band; behind them was a replica of the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. When the music began, the entire congregation stood; raising their hands in praise, they sang uproariously. Then a mass of people came forward to dance. This was interspersed with a variety of speakers whose words were constantly interrupted with shouts of \u201cPraise the Lord\u201d and \u201cBarukh HaShem.\u201d Again, at the end of the service, the Messianic rabbis lined up in front as people stood in line to receive a blessing.
\nWhen we returned after this conference, I was convinced of the need for an objective account of this important development in modern Judaism. Despite the criticisms made of Messianic Judaism by its opponents, I could see that this new movement had captured the hearts and minds of thousands of pious individuals from the Jewish community, as well as Gentiles who have accepted Yeshua as Lord and Savior. The Messianic movement has become a significant force on the Jewish scene.
\nIn the years that followed, I completed a major study of the movement entitled Messianic Judaism, which was published by Cassell in 2000. Beginning with a discussion of the development of Messianic Judaism from ancient times to its transformation after World War II, I focus on the nature of Messianic Judaism, today. The volume then continues with a detailed examination of Messianic practices, including the celebration of the Sabbath, Passover, Shavu\u2019ot and Sukkot, festivals of joy, and life-cycle events. The book then goes on to consider the place of Messianic Judaism within the contemporary Jewish community. Messianic Jews, I point out, contend that they are fulfilled as Jews and that Messianic Judaism is a legitimate interpretation of the Jewish faith. Its critics, however, argue that Messianic Jews are dangerous and deceptive.
\nIn the final section of the book\u2014which is the most controversial\u2014I confront this contentious issue and outline three alternative models for understanding the relationship between Messianic Judaism and the modern Jewish world. The first model\u2014Orthodox exclusivism\u2014contends that there is only one legitimate form of Judaism: Orthodoxy. Thus, according to Orthodoxy, Messianic Judaism is viewed as totally unacceptable. Despite the claims of Jewish believers that by accepting Yeshua they have become fulfilled as Jews, Orthodox Judaism categorically rejects any form of Jewish Christianity as part of the Jewish tradition. From a theological point of view, Messianic Judaism is viewed as fundamentally distinct from traditional Judaism because of the centrality of Jesus. Furthermore, Orthodox Jews regard Messianic Judaism\u2019s conviction that the New Testament is part of God\u2019s revelation as a fundamental deviation from the Jewish faith.
\nThe second model\u2014non-Orthodox Judaism\u2014categorically denies legitimacy to Messianic Judaism. Yet, the non-Orthodox rejection of Messianic Jews is more difficult to comprehend given the multidimensional character of contemporary Jewish life. Concerning belief and practice, there are fundamental divisions between the various non-Orthodox movements: modern non-Orthodox movements embrace a wide range of theological and ideological perspectives. There is simply no consensus among non-Orthodox Jews concerning the central tenets of the faith, nor is there any agreement about Jewish observance. Instead, the various branches of non-Orthodox Judaism embrace a totally heterogeneous range of viewpoints. Nonetheless, these disparate branches of modern Judaism are united in their rejection of Messianic Judaism as an authentic expression of the Jewish tradition. Even though the adherents of these branches of the tradition differ over the most fundamental features of the Jewish religion, they have joined together in excluding Messianic Judaism from the range of legitimate interpretations of the faith.
\nThe final model\u2014Pluralism\u2014is a very different approach. According to Jewish pluralists, the non-Orthodox exclusion of Messianic Judaism from the circle of legitimate interpretations of the Jewish faith is baffling. Given the multi-dimensional character of modern Jewish life, pluralists contend that Messianic Judaism should be viewed as simply one among many interpretations of the Jewish heritage. The central difficulty with the non-Orthodox exclusion of Messianic Jews, they point out, is that the various non-Orthodox movements are themselves deeply divided over the central tenets of the faith. Belief and practice no longer unite Jewry; instead, the various branches of the modern Jewish establishment have radically separated themselves from the past. In the light of such an abandonment of the tradition, pluralists maintain that the exclusion of Messianic Judaism from the circle of legitimate expressions of the Jewish heritage is totally inconsistent.
\nJewish pluralists understand why there is a visceral rejection of Messianic Judaism within the community. Despite modern ecumenical efforts, Christianity in its various manifestations is still seen to symbolize centuries of oppression, persecution, and murder. Nonetheless, Jewish pluralists insist that given the multi-dimensional character of contemporary Jewish life, the rejection of Messianic Judaism from K\u2019lal Yisra\u2019el makes little sense. If non-theistic and non-halakhically observant forms of Judaism are acceptable, why, they ask, should Messianic Jews, who are observant believers, be denied recognition within the Jewish community?
\nAfter my book was published, I was invited to be the guest speaker at the annual conference of the UMJC. After discussing the contents of my book, I stressed that in my view Messianic Judaism constitutes an innovative, exciting, and extremely interesting development on the Jewish scene. Messianic Judaism was a new movement, wrestling with the big issues of modern Jewish life. In the articles I had read in the theological journal Kesher, Messianic leaders were struggling with fundamental questions: Who is a Jew? What is the authority of halakhah? Should conversion be permitted? This quest to make sense of the tradition is fascinating and important. Today many Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, and Humanistic Jews are preoccupied with other issues. But from reading about the movement and meeting its members, I could see that Messianic Jews were constantly engaged with central religious issues.
\nDuring the UMJC conference, I met with Barry Rubin, the president of Lederer\/Messianic Jewish Publishers to discuss a book project exploring the issues now facing Messianic Judaism. After having studied Messianic Judaism for several years, I came to the view that there is a pressing need for Messianic thinkers to address the nature of the movement for the future. This volume, which includes twenty-seven chapters written by leading figures within the movement, seeks to examine a wide range of key topics.
\nBeginning with a discussion of liturgy, Stuart Dauermann, rabbi of Ahavat Zion Messianic Synagogue, maintains that Messianic Judaism must embrace traditional Jewish music if it is to remain authentically Jewish. Such an infusion of tradition should infuse congregational life, as well as the home. Increased contextualization of Messianic services, he states, is directly proportional to the increased use of the Hebrew liturgy. Hence, Messianic Judaism must institute ongoing programs designed to nurture liturgical literacy. The greatest obstacles to liturgical renewal are ignorance, fear, and prejudice.
\nAdopting a different stance, Joel Chernoff, president of the IMJA, argues that the Messianic movement was vitally revived in the 1970s by the inclusion of Jewish liturgical music, including new instrumentation for Messianic Jews. This music was a fresh expression, a hybrid of modern pop and traditional minor key Jewish music. The objective was to express the joy that believers had found in knowing the Messiah. Although appreciative of traditional Jewish liturgy, he argues that Messianic Jewish music must be spiritually moving.
\nRegarding Scripture, Dan Juster, the director of Tikkun International, contends that the Hebrew Bible and the New Covenant are the primary authorities within the Messsianic community. This view of Scripture is rooted in the biblical material, but theologians have developed it for centuries. For Juster, the Bible is infallible, a view enshrined in the statements of both the UMJC and the IAMCS. Infallibility, he argues, means that the Bible is true in all that the writer claims to teach as true. Because it is the highest and final authority, subsequent teaching cannot supersede Scripture. Yet, it is crucial that Messianic Jews recognize that hermeneutics are of vital importance in understanding the meaning of the biblical text.
\nMark Kinzer, Executive Director of Messianic Jewish Theological Institute, argues that the Bible requires interpretation. It is not possible, he writes, to adopt a purely biblical perspective. One never reads the biblical text apart from one\u2019s own preconceptions. The historical setting in which one finds oneself shapes the questions addressed to the text, as well as the concepts and terms used to respond. The interpretative tradition, he argues, consists of the accumulated insights of a community transmitted from one generation to the next. In a Messianic context, tradition represents the understanding of Scripture preserved through generations among the Jewish and Christian communities. Hence, interpretive tradition is always necessary in seeking to understand the meaning of the biblical text.
\nIn the view of Russell Resnik, General Secretary of the UMJC and leader of Adat Yeshua Messianic Synagogue, rabbinic halakhah is vital for the Messianic movement. Halakhah, he contends, serves as the bridge over which the Torah moves from the written word into living deed. Without the rabbinic tradition, he argues, Messsianic Judaism lacks integrity as an authentic form of Judaism in the modern world. Even though the halakhic system cannot simply be imported into the Messianic community, it is vital that Messianic Judaism is informed by the tradition.
\nAs to congregational life, Bruce Cohen, rabbi of New York\u2019s Congregation Beth El of Manhattan, argues that Messianic Jews should orient themselves toward synagogues rather than churches. In his view, adherence to Jewish cultural norms and customs is of primary significance. As a result, Messianic Jews must establish their spiritual home within the context of Jewish life. Rather than disengage themselves from Jewish identification, Jewish believers must embrace Torah Judaism as well as Jewish national identity.
\nPresenting an alternate point of view, Jim Sibley, Coordinator of Jewish Ministry for the Southern Baptist North American Mission Board, maintains that Jewish believers should not be reluctant to join Bible-believing churches. In answer to the question, \u201cCan a Jew go to church and still be Jewish?\u201d he asserts that those who feel comfortable in such a setting should have no hesitations. Jewish believers, he states, should not deny their unity with Gentile believers. Rather, both groups desperately need one another.
\nTurning to organizational structure, Barney Kasdan, rabbi of Kehilat Ariel Messianic Synagogue in San Diego, California, argues that Messianic congregations should be run on democratic lines. The movement, he maintains, must listen to the collective voice of its members. As the current president of the UMJC, he stresses the ways in which this body seeks to provide all congregational members with a voice in the affairs of the movement. Such a system, he alleges, provides a vital system of checks and balances. In addition, such a structure can serve as a means for issuing directive policies and insuring interdependent participation in Messianic activities.
\nAccording to Robert Cohen, rabbi of Beth Jacob Messianic Congregation in Jacksonville, Florida, it is desirable that the Messianic movement be run by a central governing body. In his view, the democratic model can lead to factionalism. A centrally run organization, however, can provide a basis for the outpouring of God\u2019s Spirit, as well as a framework for the provision of rabbinic training, worship, and congregational life.
\nTurning to Jewish education, Michael Rydelnik, Professor of Jewish Studies at the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, argues that Jewish studies must be integrated with traditional evangelical theological education. In the Messianic movement, he writes, theological education has often been undervalued; what is now required is for Messianic leaders to be trained in traditional Jewish sources including biblical theology, biblical exegesis, Jewish studies, homiletics, leadership, teaching, and pastoral care. In his view, Messianic Jewish leaders should train in academically accredited evangelical schools whose facilities would encourage and support the Messianic movement.
\nFor Paul Saal, spiritual leader of Congregation Shuvah Yisrael, there is now a need for an indigenous and integrative Messianic Jewish education. As he explains, the UMJC has developed a yeshiva program consisting of intensive college level courses leading to ordination. In his view, the movement must develop its own educational institutions along these lines to set high standards for credentialing, education, information dissemination, and platforms for theological and halakhic disputation.
\nConcerning children\u2019s education, Eva Rydelnik, an adjunct professor at the Moody Bible Institute, states it is vital that children should be taught about the Messiah. In her view, the wealth of educational material available to Messianic congregations provided by Christian publishing houses serves as a vital resource. As she notes, these publishers have been producing children\u2019s educational material for decades, and Messianic congregations should not overlook these publications.
\nAccording to Jeffrey Feinberg, chairman of education at the UMJC and leader of Etz Chaim Congregation, the nature of Messianic Jewish education must be Messiah-centered, and yet distinctly Jewish. It is the task of Messianic Jewish education, he notes, to transmit a Jewish heritage that integrates an understanding of the Hebrew Bible and the New Covenant into the context of a Jewish community. In this context, Messianic Jews should never lose sight of their calling to transmit the Jewish heritage of membership in a priestly community.
\nIn the next chapter dealing with intermarriage, David Rudolph, editor of Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism, contends that intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews can make a positive contribution to Messianic Judaism as long as the non-Jewish spouse is a believer in Yeshua. Noting that the vast majority of Messianic Jews in the United States are intermarried, he stresses that often the most committed, hardest-working members of Messianic congregations are non-Jews. These non-Jewish spouses are vital for the growth and development of the movement.
\nMichael Schiffman, on the other hand, argues that Jewish life is precious, delicate, and fragile; as such, it is vital that marriage between Jews is encouraged. Fearing the dangers of assimilation, he states that intermarriage threatens future generations. Although he believes that Messianic Judaism should be reaching out to intermarried couples, the movement should recognize the dangers inherent in such a situation. If the rate of intermarriage continues, he writes, Messianic Judaism will become a movement of people with remote or imagined Jewish ancestry.
\nRegarding Gentiles, Tony Eaton, congregational leader of Simchat Yisrael Messianic Jewish Synagogue, argues that the leaders of Messianic congregations should be Jewish. He stresses that this is of vital concern if Messianic Judaism is to constitute a Jewish movement for Jews. In this context, he argues that there should be a well-defined, rigorous rite of passage for converts. In this way Gentiles could become part of the Jewish people through a process of conversion, and thereby assume positions of leadership within the Messianic community.
\nAccording to Patrice Fischer, Gentiles should be treated as equal participants in the Messianic Jewish community. Fears, misconceptions, and unwritten rules have affected the level of acceptance that Gentiles find within the Messianic movement. She advocates the need for an open discussion of the place of \u201cRighteous Gentiles\u201d who are dedicated to a Jewish way of life and worship. The New Covenant provides a pattern to guide the Messianic Jewish movement in establishing the rights and responsibilities of these modern-day Godfearers.
\nIn his chapter on conversion, Michael Wolf, leader of Beth Messiah Messianic Jewish Synagogue, strongly opposes conversion of Gentiles to Messianic Judaism. There is no basis in Scripture for Messianic Jewish institutions to entertain such a notion, he states. Further, the practice would bring great confusion to the movement as well as accusation from those the movement seeks to reach. Noting that there is no basis in Scripture for conversion, he claims that no one in the mainstream Jewish community would regard Messianic Jewish conversions as legitimate. Messianic Jewish converts would never be considered Jewish by any branch of Judaism.
\nOpposing this position, John Fischer, rabbi of Congregation Ohr Chadash, points out that there is a basis in the Torah for conversion. In his view, Gentiles should be offered the option of converting. The issue should not be whether the Messianic movement should promote conversions\u2014rather, it is whether they should allow individuals to make the choice to convert. Some members of the movement, he notes, have been deeply drawn to Jewish traditions and observances. In many cases, they have evidenced a higher level of Jewish commitment and observance than many of the Jewish people in Messianic synagogues. For such individuals who have demonstrated their commitment\u2014there should be a way for them to identify as Jews.
\nConcerning the question of whether women should occupy senior roles within Messianic Judaism, Sam Nadler, president of Word of Messiah Ministries and leader of Hope and Israel Congregation, emphasizes that women have served with Yeshua and his apostles; they have judged, prophesized, preached, and prayed as effectively as men. Nonetheless, there are a number of reasons why women should not serve as leaders of the Messianic movement: there were no biblical models of women as senior congregational leaders; there is no biblical authorization given to women to be senior congregational leaders; all instruction assumes men as overseers; in the home the husband was always the leader.
\nRuth Fleischer, rabbi of the London Messianic Congregation and Executive Director of Yeshua Ministries and Conferences, contends that no sex should be elevated over another; rather both men and women should serve together in a program that utilizes the gifts and calling of each to advance the Kingdom of God. Although the Messianic movement has not officially ordained women rabbis, she argues that the movement should embrace those women who feel called to lead their communities.
\nAdvocating traditional missions, Mitch Glaser, president of Chosen People Ministries, argues that the Messianic movement needs an organizational structure to communicate with the Jewish people. Traditional Jewish missions, he states, are a continuation of the apostolic tradition. Today this process should continue and be attuned to contemporary Jewish culture. More than any other organizational structures, missions to the Jews are well equipped to bring the message of Yeshua to the Jewish people.
\nAccording to Kay Silberling, who has taught at West Coast colleges and universities, the Messianic movement suffers from its negative image in the Jewish world. Traditional Judaism, she writes, characterizes Messianic Jews as Christians. Hence, the Jewish community is unwilling to grant legitimacy to Jewish believers. Given this position, it is incumbent for Messianic believers to employ new methods of communication and outreach. What is now required is a form of dialogue that opens avenues of communication between Messianic Jews and others.
\nConcerning Israel, Murray Silberling, Southwest Regional Director for the IAMCS, maintains that for Messianic Jews, Israel is crucial. He stresses the fact that although Messianic Jews tend to view the Diaspora as secondary in the struggle for Jewish survival, it is an essential and effective weapon in the fight against anti-Semitism and assimilation. The Diaspora, he urges, can be a place of innovation regarding Jewish identity and practice.
\nAdopting a different approach, David Stern, translator of the Jewish New Testament and the Complete Jewish Bible and author of the Jewish New Testament Commentary, argues that Messianic Jews should actively seek to make aliyah. Not only would such an act be in accordance with God\u2019s will, the land of Israel provides a place where Messianic Jews would be able to live a truly Jewish life. Currently, Messianic Jews frequently excuse themselves from making aliyah for various reasons, but they do not actually provide a sufficient basis for refusing to immigrate to the Holy Land.
\nDiscussing the end times, Richard Nichol, rabbi of Congregation Ruach Israel, stresses that it is difficult to predict the coming of the kingdom. Further, he notes that an over-preoccupation with the end times tends to dull our awareness of the importance of creation and the human role in bringing about a better world. Yet, Messianic Jews must continue to anticipate the coming of Yeshua, and the fulfillment of God\u2019s plan for the world.
\nIn the opinion of Arnold Fruchtenbaum, founder and director of Ariel Minstries, the promises made in the Jewish covenants apply to Messianic Jews. Jewish believers, he continues, will be caught up and taken to heaven at the Rapture; there, they\u2014along with Gentile believers\u2014will be evaluated on how they served the Lord.
\nThe book concludes with two chapters from outsiders. The first, by Shoshanah Feher, the author of Passing Over Easter, outlines three challenges to Messianic Judaism. In her view, Messianic Jews will need to determine the status of Messianic Gentiles, an issue dealt with in other sections within this volume. Further, she states that the movement will need to consider why some Messianic Jews eventually discarded Messianic Judaism and became members of non-Messianic synagogues. Finally, she states, Messianic Judaism will need to determine how faith in Yeshua can be passed on from one generation to the next.
\nArthur Glasser, former Faculty Coordinator of Judaic Studies and Dean Emeritus of Fuller Theological Seminary School of World Mission, traces the development of Jewish awareness of Yeshua within the Messianic movement. Highlighting the need for the creation of authentically Jewish Messianic congregations, he points out that Messianic synagogues need to reflect the traditional role of serving as faithful custodians of Jewish communal and religious tradition. As the movement developed, he notes, various types of congregations emerged with their own distinctive features\u2014such diversity is an indication of strength as congregations seek to express their faith in Yeshua.
\nThis volume thus focuses on a wide range of issues currently facing the Messianic Jewish community. The various voices within the movement reflect a wide range of attitudes and opinions. This is not a weakness, but rather a reflection of the vitality of Messianic Jewish conviction. The Jewish religious establishment would do well to reflect on the seriousness of this quest to revitalize Jewish life in a post-Holocaust age.<\/p>\n
HOW MUCH LITURGY SHOULD WE HAVE IN OUR SERVICES?<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 1:
\nTHE IMPORTANCE OF
\nJEWISH LITURGY<\/p>\n
\u2014Stuart Dauermann<\/p>\n
This was Mrs. Jacobs\u2019 first visit to a Messianic congregation. A middle class Jewish woman with a husband in the aerospace industry and grown children, she had come to Los Angeles to participate in the Elderhostel Program sponsored by the University of Judaism. Her son Daniel, a Messianic Jew, brought her to my congregation for her first-ever exposure to a Messianic Jewish service. Seated between him and his Gentile wife Donna, midway through the service she turned to her and asked a telling question: \u201cSo tell me, don\u2019t you feel out of place in the synagogue?\u201d Her question revealed that Mrs. Jacobs felt perfectly at home: she was concerned that our congregation did not feel like foreign territory to Donna, her daughter-in-law.
\nWhat was it that made our congregation feel like \u201cJewish space\u201d to Mrs. Jacobs? In large part, it was our extensive use of traditional Jewish liturgy, something our congregation has been known for since its founding in the early 1970s.<\/p>\n
Messianic Jewish Liturgical Renewal\u2014Why?<\/p>\n
If the Messianic Jewish movement is to build communities that not only \u201cfeel like home\u201d but actually are home to Jews and intermarried couples and their families, we simply must warmly and flexibly embrace the Jewish liturgical heritage. Ma tov chelkenu umanayim goralenu\u2014How good is our portion and how pleasant our lot! Our liturgy is just one part of that portion worth handling constantly and lovingly, like a gold watch that shines brighter and brighter the more its contours are caressed.
\nThis \u201cJewish space\u201d must exist not only in our congregations but also in our individual and family lives. James Kugel, in his masterful book, On Being a Jew, invites us to take on such disciplines as a means of constructing a mishkan\u2014a tabernacle\u2014where we might encounter and honor the presence of the God of our ancestors. One is reminded of the motion picture Field of Dreams, which popularized the phrase, \u201cIf you build it they will come.\u201d Similarly, for us, it is as we build this mishkan\u2014this holy prayer structure\u2014that we will experience in a new way what it means for the God of our ancestors to come to dwell with us.
\nSome cannot be bothered with believing that such an encounter will occur. They see only the effort involved in constructing the building. Others suggest that since God is everywhere, all this building is a needless bother. They confuse God\u2019s omnipresence with his relational and manifest presence. Just because he is everywhere present, that does not mean that he is everywhere known and experienced. Building such a holy structure increases the likelihood that we will know the presence of the omnipresent One in our lives and in continuity with his engagement with the House of Israel throughout time.
\nHappily, some find it within themselves to believe the promise that such a humble structure is just the kind of place God delights to dwell in. Such a summons comes to each of us individually, and each must respond personally. As with the little child Samuel, so for us\u2014we must personally say to the Holy One, \u201cSpeak Lord; your servant is listening.\u201d
\nFor Messianic Jews, who draw near to HaShem (God) through Yeshua our Great High Priest, and in the Ruach HaKodesh, such a mishkan\u2014such a Jewish structure of liturgical practice\u2014is imperative. Although Emily Dickinson declared that every bush is ablaze with God, Moses did not find it so\u2014and neither shall we. We must seek the Holy One in the structures he is wont to inhabit\u2014and our liturgy is just such a place, if we, like Moses our Teacher, will but turn aside to look.
\nWhat guidelines then might Messianic Jews follow in implementing and developing our own liturgical practice, in building our mishkan? I recommend the following principles as a good place to start.<\/p>\n
The Mah Zot Principle<\/p>\n
There should be markers in our lives which memorialize our involvement in the Jewish people\u2019s experience with God and which provide occasions to proclaim and renew awareness of His saving acts.
\nThis principle is repeatedly illustrated in our Scriptures. Our ancestors in Egypt were admonished to put blood on their doorposts as a yearly reminder of the redemption from Egypt (Exod. 12:21\u201327). First-born sons and animals had to receive special treatment as a reminder of the slaying of the first-born in Egypt (Exod. 13:1, 11\u201315). Jews were admonished to wear t\u2019fillin so as not to forget these saving events (Exod. 13:9\u201310, 16). Matzah (unleavened bread) was to be eaten during Passover as a memorial of the Exodus (Exod. 13:2\u20136). Twelve stones were to be removed from the midst of the Jordan to serve as a reminder of how God cut off the flow of the river that Israel might pass through (Josh 4:1\u20139). In each case, the custom or artifact served as a memorial of the saving acts of God and as an occasion for inquiry into the meaning of the form. Someone would ask \u201cmah zot?\u201d which means \u201cWhat is this?\u201d thus presenting an opportunity to recall and to tell the next generation of the mighty acts of God.
\nWe Messianic Jews ought to incorporate such traditional markers into our personal and communal lives. We must never forget that we are participants in a common history with other Jews. The Book of Exodus expresses this clearly and the haggadah (Passover liturgy) repeats it for us as each year each father is told to explain to his inquiring son, \u201cIt is because of what the LORD did for me when I came out of Egypt\u201d (Exod. 13:8). Each father, though born after the events, is nevertheless to see himself as implicated in those events. It is for this reason that the haggadah bids us all consider the Passover events as if we ourselves had come out of Egypt, for indeed we did.
\nWe must not miss the crucial implications of this principle. Failure to preserve and honor our Jewish particularity means the neglect of our very own history and identity. More tellingly, such neglect means to egregiously disassociate from other Jews and to display a cavalier forgetfulness concerning God\u2019s benefits (Psalm 103:2).
\nThis also means that the communal and personal lives of Messianic Jews ought to be different from those of the wider Body of Messiah because our history is different and because we share a corporate solidarity with other Jews, which must not be overlooked.
\nWe need to remember the sacred calendar. The Jewish holy days, both great and small are like family anniversaries and birthdays circled on the calendar hanging in the kitchen of our people. If we consider ourselves members of the family, if we are grateful for what those \u201ccircled dates\u201d signify, then we will not treat these occasions just like any other day. We will mark special occasions in special ways, in ways customary among our people. One way those occasions are marked is in the rhythms of our liturgical tradition.<\/p>\n
The First Law of Liturgical Mathematics<\/p>\n
Increased contextualization of Messianic services is directly proportional to increased use of traditional Hebrew liturgy.
\nJews expect Hebrew liturgy in Jewish religious services. Anything less and anything else is apt to be perceived as un-Jewish and inauthentic. In my experience, nothing is more likely to add a sense of authenticity to Messianic services than the use of traditional liturgy\u2014in Hebrew, with translation as appropriate.
\nSome will object to this idea protesting that since very few American Jews understand Hebrew it is time to get rid of it. This suggests yet another principle, the law of liturgical tolerance, which states that Diaspora Jews will tolerate more liturgy than they understand so long as they perceive the service to be otherwise meaningful.
\nIn fact, most of our people do not expect to understand the Hebrew liturgy. We come to synagogue and find it meaningful for a variety of reasons, including the opportunity to associate with other Jews, a time to worship God, an occasion to be enriched in Jewish knowledge, to hear an inspiring sermon, or to reinforce our own identity in the midst of the wider world. Because Diaspora Jews are so tolerant of traditional Hebrew liturgy, we need not be fearful of alienating our people by including liturgy in our services, provided other needs are properly addressed.<\/p>\n
The Dodge Van Principle<\/p>\n
The way things stand today\u2014there are those of our people who treat us with suspicion or even hostility. If communications are ever to improve, we must maintain every possible shred of commonality with the wider Jewish community. I call this the Dodge Van Principle.
\nThere is a donut shop not far from where I live, where I used to stop daily as a matter of habit. At that time, I was driving a Dodge van. On one of these occasions, as I exited the shop, coffee and donut in hand, I noticed that in the interim another motorist had parked his vehicle in front of mine. He was also driving a Dodge van. As I prepared to enter my vehicle, he called out and asked me how I liked my vehicle. What followed was a brief conversation, a conversation which never would have taken place had I been driving a different kind of vehicle. Thus, our communicational context was directly proportional to what we had in common, in this case, the fact that we were driving the same vehicle.
\nI submit the same must be true of our religious services and other communal expressions. In our congregations we must endeavor to be \u201cdriving the same kind of car\u201d as our fellow Jews, otherwise there is no context for communication. Without such communication, there will be no commonality and little prospect of a healing of the breach between us and the rest of k\u2019lal Yisra\u2019el (the community of Israel). There will also be little opportunity to explain to other Jews the ways that we are Jews like them with a certain wonderful added extra.
\nI submit then, that our Messianic liturgical practice should be the same \u201ckind of car\u201d as is \u201cdriven\u201d by our fellow Jews everywhere. Unfortunately, too few of our Messianic Jews know how to navigate through the liturgy. That brings us to what I term \u201cthe prime directive.\u201d<\/p>\n
Messianic Jewish Liturgical Renewal\u2014How?<\/p>\n
The prime directive says that the better people understand the liturgy, the better they will like it. Therefore, we must institute ongoing programs designed to nurture liturgical literacy and competence, beginning with our congregational leaders and opinion leaders.
\nSuch programs should include instruction in Hebrew, in the history and function of the liturgical units, and practice in all aspects of participation in a traditional-style service, from dress, to bodily postures, to liturgical participation. With user-friendly resources like The Synagogue Survival Kit by Jordan Lee Wagner, there is no need or excuse to remain ignorant or inept in our tradition.
\nOur liturgical education programs must be ongoing because it is not enough to learn simply how to \u201coperate\u201d the liturgy. One must learn by experience how enriching liturgical practice can be, for individuals, and for the group as a whole. James Kugel rightly points out that Americans want to know what they will get out of something before they commit to it. Our tradition tells us we can only know by the tasting: \u201cTaste and see that the LORD is good\u201d (Ps. 34:8). Consequently, those who insist on a description of the taste before they will take a bite will remain forever empty and hungry.
\nThe reason we must begin with congregational leaders and opinion leaders is expressed in another closely related principle, the law of obstructive leadership.<\/p>\n
The Law of Obstructive Leadership<\/p>\n
The greatest obstacles to liturgical renewal are the ignorance, fear, pride, prejudice, and negative experiences of opinion-leaders and decision-makers. The next greatest obstacle is a lack of motivation.
\nToo many American Jews have a low regard for liturgy. For some this is due to negative experiences from their own childhood or the negativity they picked up from someone in their family. Some, with little or no liturgical experience, come from contexts where liturgy is categorically dismissed, being equated with spiritual deadness and \u201cvain repetition.\u201d There is a psychological inhibition operating here as well\u2014it is rare to find a leader willing to introduce some practice into his congregation for which he feels himself unprepared or unskilled. Far better to dismiss the practice as unnecessary, rather than admit to ignorance or bias.
\nFor these and similar reasons, congregational leaders and opinion leaders should be the first to receive training in liturgical literacy. Opinion leaders, those people in the congregation who may not hold any kind of office but whose opinion is sought out by others who want to \u201ccheck things out,\u201d must also be trained and won to this approach. Opinion-leaders are the ideological gatekeepers in a congregation. If they say something is O.K., then chances are the rest of the congregation will go along. Therefore, winning the allegiance of opinion leaders is crucial, so that others in the congregation will be convinced of the rightness of liturgical renewal in congregational life.<\/p>\n
Mirroring the Wider Jewish Community<\/p>\n
Some fear liturgy\u2014frightened by a boogey-man image of liturgy as a one-size-fits-all straight jacket that is sure to squeeze the life and vitality out of them and their congregations. However, our New Covenant Scriptures clearly demonstrates that the rule in the earliest Yeshua believing congregations was more \u201cdifferent strokes for different folks\u201d than it was \u201conce size fits all.\u201d To be convinced that this is true, just compare the portraits provided of congregational life in Jerusalem, Antioch, and Corinth! Now, as then, different communities will evolve different local customs and approaches.
\nSidney Schwarz, author of the justly praised book, Finding a Spiritual Home: How a New Generation of Jews Can Transform the American Synagogue, reminds us that if we are to attract and hold today\u2019s Jewish people, we must introduce variety and creativity into our services\u2014yet within the context of Jewish norms. He suggests that this is precisely what successful synagogues are doing in our day. Following his sage advice, we too must learn to vary and adapt our use of Jewish prayer materials.
\nMy expectation has long been that when the Messianic Jewish movement reaches maturity, it will mirror the wider Jewish community in developing expressions analogous to Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionist Judaism\u2014divergent communities that at the same time demonstrate a rootedness in a common identity and a fidelity to common patterns of worship, but who will interpret a common tradition in different but reverent ways.
\nIn the area of liturgy, our services should mirror the structure of Jewish services. We should include the basic units such as the Pesukei D\u2019zimra (Passages of Praise), the Barkhu (Call to Worship), Sh\u2019ma, Amidah (Standing Prayer), and Torah section. Many of the piyyutim (sacred poems) and hymns like Adon Olam, En Keloheynu, and much more\u2014should also be incorporated into the liturgy. Just as the Reform movement adapted this structure, eliminating repetitions of material and streamlining according to halakhic precedent while maintaining an underlying adherence to the tradition, so shall it be for us.
\nOf course, this latitude must not be interpreted as a license for each person or congregation to simply do what seems right in their own eyes. That was a bad idea for our ancestors, and it remains so for us. What is called for is a certain liberty expressed in a dialectic with a received tradition and framework. Jewish life calls these factors \u201ckeva\u201d (the received order of \u201chow things are done\u201d) and \u201ckavvanah\u201d (personal investment and directedness). We will take the keva of the Jewish liturgical tradition, and within the kavvanah of our own personalized utilization of it very much make it our own in accord with our communal needs and character. Different varieties of approach are sure to evolve in different localities. For change to be organic and not destructive, innovations will need to be undertaken soberly, with reverent awareness and knowledge of time-honored principles and precedents of liturgical adaptation, and within the context of broad community consensus.<\/p>\n
Messianic Jewish Liturgical Renewal\u2014Reflecting our Uniqueness<\/p>\n
Because of the nature of our Messianic Jewish community, some principles of liturgical adaptation are unique to us. Because we as a community accord a unique place to the Messiah and the Ruach HaKodesh, Messianic services should supplement traditional Jewish materials by using songs, hymns, piyyutim, quotations from the New Covenant Scriptures and related liturgical units which reflect our particular emphases and beliefs. Care should be taken that such additions not be stylistically intrusive. With care, such compensatory measures can be effectively implemented in ways compatible with the Jewish liturgical tradition.
\nWe ought also to remember that Messianic services should draw people to Yeshua. Our services are no mere showpieces designed to demonstrate how Jewishly authentic we can be. No, the key distinguishing characteristic of Messianic Jews is the centrality we accord to Yeshua, our Messiah. Our services should reflect that centrality and should draw people to honor him as we do.<\/p>\n
Messianic Jewish Liturgical Renewal\u2014A Final Caveat<\/p>\n
I teach a principle called \u201cThe Second Law of Liturgical Mathematics\u201d which states this: All other things being equal, increased traditional Hebrew liturgy without increased liturgical literacy yields decreased understanding, enthusiasm and attendance.
\nPeople who are becoming increasingly confused are likely to become less involved. Therefore, members of our congregations will need to be \u201cbrought up to speed\u201d as liturgy is introduced, or they may well become disaffected. Therefore, again, the \u201cPrime Directive\u201d needs to be kept in mind: The better people understand the liturgy, the better they will like it. Therefore, we must institute ongoing programs designed to nurture liturgical literacy and competence, beginning with our congregational leaders and opinion leaders. And as did Hillel, we too must ask ourselves the question, \u201cIf not now, when?\u201d
\nWe have received a precious portion and lot. It will take little effort to lose it and concerted effort to lay hold of it and keep it\u2014but we dare not neglect this heritage. We dare not lose it. The time is now for each of us to make the effort to build this mishkan, this liturgical structure, where the God of our ancestors meets with us as through the self-offering of Yeshua, our Great High Priest. So, let us lay hold of the work that lies before us. Let us begin in new ways to address the holy responsibility of so employing and so supplementing this heritage. In this way, all who come after will know us to be people who follow the example of the first Messianic Jews, who said \u201cWe\u2019ve found the one that Moshe wrote about in the Torah, also the Prophets\u2014it\u2019s Yeshua Ben Yosef from Natzeret!\u201d (Yochanan\/John 1:45 CJB).<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Have your religious practices brought you nearer or taken you farther away from other Jews?
\n\u2022 Describe any negative stereotypes you have encountered concerning liturgy, and whether they are untrue, sometimes true, usually true, or always true\u2014and why.
\n\u2022 In what ways is your congregation \u201chome\u201d to Jewish visitors? In what ways is it strange and foreign? What steps might be undertaken to make your congregation more \u201cuser friendly\u201d to Jewish visitors?
\n\u2022 Do you agree that Jewish people will tolerate Jewish liturgy that they do not understand provided they find services otherwise meaningful? What experiences can you point to which contribute to your opinion?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Kugel, James. On Being a Jew. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ., 1998.
\nSchwarz, Sidney. Finding a Spiritual Home: How a New generation of Jews Can Transform the American Synagogue. New York: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
\nWagner, Jordan Lee. The Synagogue Survival Kit. Northvale: Jason Aaronson, 1997.<\/p>\n
Stuart Dauermann has been involved in communicating New Covenant faith in a Jewish context since the 1960s. Since 1991, he has served as rabbi of Ahavat Zion Messianic Synagogue in Beverly Hills. Mr. Dauermann is President of Hashivenu, Inc., an organization that seeks to assist the Messianic Jewish movement \u201ctoward a mature Messianic Judaism.\u201d His doctoral work involves examining the ways in which synagogue leadership roles are related to those performed by priests and Levites in the Older Testament.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 2:
\nMESSIANIC JEWISH
\nREVIVAL AND LITURGY<\/p>\n
\u2014Joel Chernoff<\/p>\n
The modern day Messianic Jewish revival was born by a sovereign act of God\u2019s will and propagated by the continuous exercise of his supernatural power. All care and attention must be made to make sure that the paths we commit to in developing and organizing this revival not hinder the marvelous and supernatural flow from which the Messianic Jewish revival emanated. This concern holds the key to understanding my view of the place of liturgy in the modern Messianic Jewish synagogue.
\nI share the following perspective as the son of two pioneers in Messianic Judaism, Rabbi Martin and Yohanna Chernoff. This perspective on the expression and place of liturgy in Messianic Judaism was shaped by the lessons learned from experience in their Messianic synagogue in Cincinnati, Ohio in the early days of the rebirth of Messianic Judaism. Consequently, I believe that a brief discussion of that history will be helpful in giving a context to my conclusions.<\/p>\n
Historical Context<\/p>\n
In 1967, the spiritual revival of the Jewish people and the restoration of Messianic Judaism began in earnest. As Jerusalem was restored to Jewish control during the 1967 Six Day War between Israel and the Arab nations of the Middle East, a powerful and reviving measure of God\u2019s Ruach HaKodesh was released upon our Jewish people. At first, it was not easily perceived, for this release occurred in the context of a greater spiritual outpouring or revival in the U.S. popularly called the \u201cJesus People Movement.\u201d Although there have been many outpourings of God\u2019s Spirit on various people groups since the first century\u2014this was the first revival that included the Jewish people in significant numbers.
\nBy the early 1970s, this new Jewish revival began to attract attention in the press. Most notably, Time magazine ran an article describing the Messianic Jewish phenomenon and putting the number of Jewish believers in Jesus (Messianic Jews) at over fifty thousand. Before 1967, there were only a few thousand Messianic Jews at best in the United States and zero Messianic synagogues. No one person or institution could take credit for this spontaneous and unlikely revival among our Jewish people. I say unlikely because of the many persecutions of Jewish people in the name of Jesus, mainly at the hands of people who identified themselves as Christians. These numerous persecutions understandably resulted in a deeply felt Jewish national aversion to even considering the biblical question as to whether Yeshua was actually the promised Messiah. Nevertheless and despite these accrued hurts the Messianic Jewish revival was reborn in 1967 and has increasingly flourished even to this day.<\/p>\n
The Messianic Vision<\/p>\n
Within that initial group of over fifty thousand new Messianic Jews were a very small number of individuals within whom God implanted and began to develop a new vision. This vision was twofold: (1) to proclaim the messiahship of Yeshua within its biblical Jewish context, and (2) to restore an authentic Messianic Jewish lifestyle and worship expression for those who had come to believe that Yeshua is the Messiah. This vision became known as Messianic Judaism and its proponents as Messianic Jews.
\nA necessary step in reinvigorating a Messianic Jewish lifestyle and worship expression was the establishment of Messianic congregations or synagogues. In the traditional Jewish world, the synagogue has been the center of Jewish expression and communal life. The synagogue is an institution that has enabled our Jewish people to express and develop themselves both culturally and spiritually. In 1970, the Messianic Jewish revival witnessed the establishing of the first independent and self-supporting Messianic synagogue in Cincinnati, Ohio, Beth Messiah. It was founded by Martin and Yohanna Chernoff, my parents, and continues to this day.
\nIn the early 1970s, several other Messianic synagogues were quickly established in various cities around the U.S. and today the number of Messianic synagogues has grown to over 400 worldwide. In fact, I believe that it can be confidently asserted that since 1967, Messianic Judaism is the fastest growing stream of Jewish religious expression in the world today.<\/p>\n
Early Challenges<\/p>\n
One of the great challenges facing this new Messianic Jewish congregational movement was how to reconstitute a worship expression within our own synagogues. After all, Messianic Judaism in the twentieth century must balance the place of Jewish tradition and cultural expression (which is by no means uniform) with the fresh, new and reviving movement of God\u2019s spirit.
\nIn the first century, Messianic Jewish worship was expressed naturally within the context of the Temple and synagogue life of that time. There was no question as to whether a person could believe in Yeshua and be Jewish. Messianic Jews of the first century were not considered \u201ctraitors\u201d to their people because of their faith in Yeshua, as we are often assumed to be today. Christian persecution of Jewish people had not yet become an historical reality.
\nIn order to restore an authentic, new Jewish worship expression and congregational lifestyle, a healthy dose of prayer, creativity, and trial and error was employed. In 1970, there were no examples to follow. For my parents and others, this was a true pioneer endeavor. It was an exiting journey of discovery, which was both dynamic and challenging. There was no shortage of critics to discourage them along the way.
\nSo how did my parents handle these challenges and how did they balance the world of traditional Jewish religious expression with the fresh new wind of revival God was breathing upon our Jewish people? It is their journey of discovery and their simple but powerful conclusions (which I believe and espouse to this day)\u2014that I want to describe as a way of approaching the question as to what the place of traditional liturgy in Messianic Jewish services is today.<\/p>\n
Not an Endeavor for the Timid<\/p>\n
The one thing I can say about both of my parents is that they were visionaries. They were not afraid to swim against the current of popular worship service expression in both the church and traditional Jewish worlds. When they initially formed the congregation in Cincinnati, they took a tremendous amount of criticism from both groups. Neither of these worlds understood the prophetic objective that they were seeking\u2014to restore a place of worship that would accurately express their faith in Yeshua within a Jewish context even as it was described in the pages of the New Covenant.
\nIn the second chapter of Joel the prophet foretells that in the prophetic period described in the Scriptures as \u201clatter days\u201d God will pour out his Spirit upon all flesh and that your young men will dream dreams and your old men will see visions. My father experienced a literal fulfillment of this passage. In the middle 1960s, my father shared the vision the Lord had given him with his entire family. In that vision, he saw a great banner stretched across the sky with two words inscribed on it: Messianic Judaism. A huge multitude of predominantly young Jewish people were streaming under the banner towards a glorious light that he knew to be the light of Messiah Yeshua and the Kingdom of God. This was a few years before the Messianic Jewish revival suddenly appeared in 1967. Messianic Judaism, as a phrase, was not commonly used. God planted this vision of Jewish revival or Messianic Judaism in my father\u2019s heart and by osmosis into my heart.
\nSoon after this vision, when God began to pour out his Spirit in a great way upon our Jewish people in 1967, my parents recognized this new revival as the one described in my father\u2019s vision about Messianic Judaism. They had already begun to have a sense that if Messianic Judaism were to flourish again that Messianic Jews needed to live and worship in a Jewish context rather than be assimilated into the culture of the church. This realization led them to form Beth Messiah of Cincinnati. In the context of this newly formed Messianic congregation they began to more extensively explore what Messianic Judaism was supposed to look like and how they felt it should be expressed.
\nWhat was of paramount concern to them right from the start was to avoid what they had observed historically and believed was a potential problem for this revival. In their view, the dynamic vitality of past revivals was deadened by the almost immediate effort of trying to organize and structure the revival too quickly. The result was a dampening of the very move of God\u2019s Spirit that spawned the prophetic revival. They recognized that the great numbers of new Messianic Jews were a direct result of the sovereign moving of God\u2019s Ruach. This concern was the number one priority in deciding what direction their synagogue would take as well as how the synagogue service was to be conducted.<\/p>\n
Early Days at Beth Messiah, Cincinnati<\/p>\n
As a young college age man in the early 1970s, I recall the sudden emergence and great enthusiasm for all things Jewish that accompanied the new Messianic Jewish revival. This phenomena was not just resident in me but in all of the youth and many of the adult members of our young Messianic congregation. Not only did God set us on fire spiritually but he also stirred up a tremendous love of all things Jewish. At that time most of us sported long hair, mustaches and beards, which was not only the \u201clook\u201d of the day but also reflected a time when new and free ideas were being explored.
\nWe took great pleasure in wearing our kippot, tallitot, and ten-pound Stars of David at our services. We were militantly pro-Israel and Zionist. This was only natural given the fact that we were \u201con fire\u201d for the God of Israel and saw the restoration of physical Israel as the completion of prophecies that were to be fulfilled right before Messiah returns. Any newly discovered Jewish expression was embraced and explored.<\/p>\n
New Music is Born<\/p>\n
Along with the new enthusiasm for Jewish identity and Jewish expression, a critical innovation soon developed that had a great impact on both the liturgy and content of Messianic congregational worship\u2014the birth of messianic music. Messianic Judaism was born in the days of 1960s and 1970s rock and roll music. Since many of the new Messianic Jews were high school and college age \u201cbaby boomers,\u201d it was only natural that we express our love for God in a style of music that we were comfortable with. Our services embraced the new instrumentation of guitars, bass and drums, which at that time was considered radical for religious service.
\nI was privileged to have a significant part in popularizing and defining this music through the group known as Lamb. This music was truly a fresh new expression. It could be described as a hybrid of modern pop and traditional minor key Jewish music. The objective was to express the tremendous joy we had found in knowing the Messiah Yeshua personally. This new music became the centerpiece of our worship services in Cincinnati. It also spread around the country to the other Messianic congregations and has become increasingly popular in the church.<\/p>\n
Liturgical Trial and Error<\/p>\n
In the midst of these innovations in worship, my father and mother along with my brother David and I, began to feel the need to add elements of traditional Jewish liturgy to our services. We slowly began to add elements such as the Sh\u2019ma, Sabbath prayers over the candles and many other Jewish liturgical readings. Most of these readings were actually extra-biblical prayers recited from the Jewish prayer books.
\nThe experience was new and initially felt good. However, as we increasingly added the liturgy, we noticed that while the liturgy was aesthetically pleasing, it was also inadvertently restricting the joyful nature and free flow of the Spirit we had been experiencing in the early revival and come to know and love. More and more of the service was confined to the rote recitation of extra-biblical prayers. Simply put, there was less time and room for the Spirit of God to move. An adjustment was needed.
\nWe eliminated much of the traditional liturgy we were currently using. We started over again, this time adding liturgy slowly, but evaluating each new liturgical addition as to whether the addition had a dampening effect on the flow of the Spirit in our Shabbat service. In other words, if the liturgical addition would take nothing away from the moving of God\u2019s Spirit in the service then it was retained. Otherwise, it was eliminated.
\nA good example of this process was in the area of traditional prayer book usage. Most prayers in the prayer book, though beautiful, lack the power and authority of the Scriptures. In our experience, too many of such prayers had a deadening effect on our service. One of the ways that we eventually handled this problem was to substitute appropriate Scripture readings for traditional prayers. We did this on Shabbat and used the same principle for festival services such as Passover, Sukkot, and Shavu\u2019ot. This took some time to work out and we, even to this day, continue to experiment with this method.
\nOnce we made this adjustment, the result of increased power in the service was unmistakable. After all, we know that the Scripture says that the word of God is \u201csharper than a two-edged sword\u201d and \u201cwill not return void\u201d (Heb. 4:12). The word of God has the authority and power from God to bring life to the hearer. Although the rote recitation of traditional extra-biblical prayers from the siddur is beautiful, it does not have the life changing power of Scripture. In retrospect, this might seem to be a \u201cno brainer,\u201d but it took us some time to arrive at the conclusion that it was both acceptable and necessary to make this change.
\nVery early on, we came to a simple but important conclusion. The traditional Jewish prayer book liturgy was necessary and an important connection to our people. However, traditional Jewish liturgy should be applied to the service in such a way that there is no hindrance to the moving of God\u2019s Spirit in the hearts of his people and the consequent release of his power.
\nOf course, we were conscious of the fact that this principle could be applied in various ways in Messianic synagogues. However, for Martin and Yohanna Chernoff, coming to this conclusion was critical to gaining a sense of balance in the midst of the challenge of creating a Messianic Jewish service that was full of the life changing power of God\u2019s Spirit. It was their belief, as well as mine today, that as our Jewish people experience the touch of God\u2019s Holy Spirit in our services that lives will be changed forever.
\nIn conclusion, traditional Jewish liturgical expressions are an important component of the modern day Messianic Jewish synagogue service. However, the powerful moving and release of God\u2019s spirit is even more important. If we as a spiritually revived Jewish community continue approaching the issue of worship service liturgy creatively, keeping in mind that our primary goal is to see a release of God\u2019s \u201cbreath\u201d or Spirit on the \u201cdry bones\u201d of our Jewish people as depicted in Ezekiel 37\u2014our services will remain fresh and alive. They will continue to meet not only our own need to be refreshed by God\u2019s Spirit\u2014but those visiting us will have the great joy and privilege of experiencing the redeeming power of the God of Israel in a way they didn\u2019t know was possible. Surely, the time has come for the \u201cdry bones\u201d of our people to feel the breath of God and live!<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What was the role and function of the Holy Spirit in both the Tanakh and B\u2019rit Hadashah?
\n\u2022 What liturgical forms were employed in the Temple?
\n\u2022 Do the Scriptures indicate that there will be a Jewish revival or restoration in the prophetic period called the \u201clatter days?\u201d
\n\u2022 If so, what role will the Holy Spirit and\/or the supernatural play in that revival (if any)?<\/p>\n
Joel Chernoff is one of the pioneers of Messianic music. For over twenty years, he has been lead singer and songwriter for the music group LAMB. Besides continuing his musical career, Joel is serving as President of the International Messianic Jewish Alliance and as General Secretary of the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America.<\/p>\n
HOW SHOULD
\nSCRIPTURE BE VIEWED?<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 3:
\nBIBLICAL
\nAUTHORITY<\/p>\n
\u2014Daniel Juster<\/p>\n
The Messianic Jewish Community maintains a high view of the Bible, both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Covenant Scriptures, as our primary authority. This view of the Bible is rooted in the biblical material itself, but has been developed by the reflection of theologians over many centuries. In the Messianic Jewish Community the understanding of biblical teaching settles matters of doctrine and practice.<\/p>\n
An Infallible Bible<\/p>\n
The Messianic Jewish community shares with Orthodox Judaism and conservative evangelical Christianity, the view that the Bible is infallible. This is, for example, enshrined in the statements of belief of both the UMJC and the IAMCS, the two largest associations of Messianic Jewish Congregations in the world. Many are familiar with the extent to which this extends in classical Orthodox Judaism (though perhaps not modern Orthodoxy). Indeed, infallibility is said to extend to every word and letter of the Hebrew text, the word order, and the grammatical markings. For educated Messianic Jews, infallibility is not used to support such a minute view. For example, most would hold that by textual criticism, we now have constructed reliable texts in the original languages, but not an infallible text. Only the original autographs were infallible, not their preservation in copies. Textual criticism (which compares copies to reconstruct the original) brings us close to what the original text was; even close enough to trust our present critical texts in Hebrew and Greek (see Metzger and Harris).
\nMessianic Jewish leadership generally holds the view that both the Hebrew Scriptures and the twenty-seven writings of the Greek New Testament are part of this infallible Bible. Therefore, all teaching and insight in rabbinic texts, commentaries, legal applications, and interpretations, must all be in accord with what the Bible teaches. In addition, all Christian writings, commentaries, and applications must be judged by their agreement with the teaching of the Bible. However, finding out just what the Bible teaches sometimes requires significant effort. Finding out what the Bible teaches is the work of a science (also an art) called hermeneutics. In addition, it is important to give reason for why we accept just those books of the Bible we do as the infallible parts of the Bible. This does not mean that there are no important new insights or regulations that are not found within the Bible but are perceived as wise applications.<\/p>\n
The Meaning of Infallibility<\/p>\n
The doctrine of infallibility is based upon the doctrine of inspiration. This doctrine is taught in scripture itself:<\/p>\n
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (God breathed) and is profitable for doctrine, correction, and instruction in righteousness. (2 Tim. 3:16)<\/p>\n
This is also the understanding in the teaching of Yeshua who said that not a \u201cJot or a title of the Torah would pass away\u201d until heaven and earth would pass away (Matt. 5:19). He said, \u201cThe Scriptures can not be broken\u201d (John 10:35). Indeed, the teaching of Yeshua makes it clear that whatever the Hebrew Bible says is the Word and will of God. The classical compendium of articles by Benjamin B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, shows in article after article that \u201cIt says,\u201d \u201cScripture says,\u201d \u201cIt is written,\u201d and \u201cGod says\u201d are equivalents in the teaching of Yeshua. This understanding of the Bible is repeated in updated form in the modern classic by R. Laird Harris cited above. There are too many statements affirming the same view of the Hebrew Scriptures in the New Testament to quote here. Even atheist New Testament scholar H. J. Cadbury affirmed that the teaching of Yeshua was clearly an affirmation of the commonly held view of an infallible Bible held by the religious leaders of his day, especially the Pharisees. That the New Testament teaches such a view is not at issue in scholarship.
\nThe question arises, however, concerning the process and the result of inspiration. Did God simply dictate the Bible to the writer who acted as secretaries? Sometimes statements in both ancient Jewish sources and in Christian sources would seem to indicate this. There are cases where God is quoted as saying something like, \u201cWrite these words.\u201d Yet, we generally know that the biblical books reflect the personalities of the writers. Indeed, Paul can bemoan his situation of abandonment in jail while he awaits execution. He can be very firm concerning his superior role as an apostle compared to others who have visited the congregations he planted (2 Corinthians 10). He can appeal to Philemon to release his slave and to Mark to bring his cloak. These books seem so obviously human. Proponents of infallibility do not hold that inspiration is dictation. Rather they believe that God so oversaw the biblical writers that the product of their pen was both the Word of God and the word and personality of the writer. The very personality of the writer was used to produce what God wanted to say. God\u2019s Word and the writers will and word thus came together in a harmony producing works that are fully human and fully divine. This is known as confluence. The will of God and the will of the writer flow together. Therefore, what God says is what Jeremiah says. What Peter says is what God says.
\nWith the doctrine of infallibility, we are dealing with the major questions concerning what we are to believe and how we are to live (Torah). Usually it is held that what we are to believe and do is according to what the biblical writer is claiming to teach. Infallibility means that the Bible is true in all that the biblical writer claims to teach as true. Perhaps the greatest teacher of this view in recent years has been Dr. Kenneth Kantzer of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Unfortunately, he has not published much of his work in books. His fortunate students have his written notes. The view that Kantzer puts forth is the most refined and objective statement of the doctrine of infallibility to date and is reflected in this article. It is also summarized in my book The Biblical World View, An Apologetic. This view holds that the intent of the human author is the intent of God. Therefore, we must find the intent of the author in communicating to his original audience. This is the issue of interpretation or hermeneutics.
\nInfallibility does not mean that there are no errors in the Bible. The Bible may quote sources or common beliefs that include errors. It is only the point that the author is seeking to make (and information that is necessary to that point) that is infallible. The mustard seed does not have to be (literally) the smallest of all seeds. That is not the point. Nor do we have to decide between the Masoretic tradition and the Septuagint tradition concerning whether seventy or seventy-five people came down to Egypt with Jacob. Acts quotes the Septuagint tradition (seventy-five). What the biblical writer seeks to teach is known by the science and art of interpretation or hermeneutics. However, before we deal with this important issue, we must deal with another crucial issue we have only mentioned, that is the issue of canonicity.<\/p>\n
The Issue of Canonicity<\/p>\n
The word canon has to do with what is lawfully binding. Therefore, we want to determine which books of the Bible are lawfully binding. We begin with the teaching of Yeshua and the Apostles. It is clear from their statements that they accepted the writings that first century Jewry commonly accepted as the Hebrew Bible. This is understood to be the twenty-two scrolls mentioned by Josephus as those the Jewish community revered as the Word of God. These twenty-two books are equivalent to the thirty-nine books accepted by Protestants. Some of the thirty-nine books of the Protestant Bible were combined as one scroll in the Hebrew Canon. For example, the twelve Minor Prophets were combined in one scroll called simply The Twelve. While there are other valued ancient Jewish books, such as the Apocrypha, the Jewish community did not give the same weight to them as the books mentioned by Josephus. Indeed, the prophetic gift of inspiration necessary to write canonical biblical scrolls was stated to be absent during this time (2 Maccabees). We note that within many of these books (but not by any means all, such as Esther, Ruth etc.) there is a claim to be speaking and writing from the prophetic unction of the Holy Spirit. This includes the legislative parts of the Torah and the great writing prophets such as Isaiah and Jeremiah.
\nThat Yeshua is our primary authority as teacher because he proved his authority by rising from the dead, is a key to the doctrine of both infallibility and canonicity. He taught the full authority of the twenty-two scrolls. That settles the issue of the Hebrew Canon for us.
\nIn addition, he chose twelve apostles and gave them authority as the witnesses and teachers of the New Covenant revelation. They are authoritative teachers and prophets. It is reasonable to expect that they would leave writings that had the same authority as the Hebrew Canon. It also appears that the twelve expanded their circle to a few others including Matthias (Acts 1), Paul (according to his claim in Galatians and Acts that the Apostles recognized his equal authority as the chief apostle to the nations), and James and Jude, the brothers of Yeshua after the flesh. In the case of James, the book of Acts shows his equal authority. When the question of canonicity is therefore asked, two criteria are usually invoked for the New Testament books. The first is, does it give evidence (within or by external testimony) that its author was one of the authoritative apostles? I call this the circle of fifteen. We do have such evidence. Matthew was acknowledged by early sources in the second century as the author of this book. Its Jewish character testifies to its ancient origins. Mark was held by early tradition to be the preaching of Peter (according to Papias). John, Revelation, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John were ascribed to the Apostle John, as is claimed within the texts themselves. The Gospel of John refers to the one that Yeshua loved (clearly John) as the writer of the book. Luke and Acts were considered written under the apostolic authority of Paul, as are the Pauline epistles. 1 and 2 Peter are claimed internally as coming from Peter and were so affirmed in early history. This leaves only Hebrews with no apostolic ascription. Some think the author is Paul because its theology is so consistent with his. However, the language and style, according to some, seems more like John\u2019s.
\nThe second criterion is the witness of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of disciples who read the books. Only the twenty-seven books have been widely affirmed by all those who follow Yeshua. This is from the earliest times. Early canonical lists make this clear. A reading of the extra-biblical books (e.g., New Testament pseudepigrapha) have been perceived to have a lower quality.
\nSince the same God inspires all of these books (in both the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures), they should be consistent and coherent in their teaching. This does not mean that there is no apparent paradox. However, when rightly interpreted, and when the paradoxes are carefully interpreted, these books are fully in accord. The work of harmonizing biblical teaching is valid as long as this is not done simplistically. There should be good effort at looking for various possibilities of harmonization.<\/p>\n
No Equal to the Authority of the Bible<\/p>\n
The Bible is our highest and final authority. This does not mean that we must reject lesser authorities. However, all other authorities are subject to an evaluation by compatibility with the Bible. For Messianic Jews, only biblical teaching is fully binding, whereas other authorities might be followed because we perceive wise application or respect community practices.
\nThis would also apply to our approach to the Jewish doctrine of the authority of the Oral Torah. Orthodox Judaism teaches that the Oral Torah is equal in authority to the Written Word. There is a profound problem of defining canon in Orthodoxy. Is the Oral Torah the first part of the Talmud, the Mishnah? Is it a part of the Mishnah that is considered more ancient? Was the Oral Torah preserved whole and passed down from Moses? Was it, in part, lost and rediscovered by the conclusions of the Great Assembly down to the conclusions of the rabbinic schools? I recommend Lawrence Schiffman\u2019s, From Text to Tradition, for a good presentation of the issues here. His point is that the Oral Torah myth was created to establish the authority of the rabbis over the Jewish community. In reality, the Oral Law exceeds the Written Torah in authority since it authoritatively tells us what the written Torah means. Oral Law ends up being the ancient rabbinic consensus. On the other hand, Messianic Jews follow the Oral Law according to the criteria explained above.<\/p>\n
Hermeneutics, the Great Issue for Messianic Jews<\/p>\n
An understanding of the basic thrusts of much biblical teaching is available to the average reader who is seeking the truth with the help of the Holy Spirit. This is called the doctrine of the perspicuity of Scripture. However, it is not always easy to know what the biblical author is teaching. Many tools have to be applied to obtain an accurate understanding. The science of interpretation (hermeneutics) involves the use of such tools. The rules of hermeneutics are the same for all past literature.
\nFirst, hermeneutics takes into account the original languages according to definition, usage, grammar, and idiom. This is done by a broad comparison of available contemporary literature. Interpretation is more than defining words. Words are defined in the larger context of usage in sentences, paragraphs, and even in the context of the writing as a whole. This is well pointed out in the classic Semantics of Biblical Language by James Barr (see 21\u201345). Context also includes cultural backgrounds for understanding biblical ideas, illustrations, life patterns, and common beliefs. The importance of understanding cultural background is gaining greater popular acceptance. The publishing of books like Craig Keener\u2019s Bible Background Commentary: New Testament is greatly increasing popular understanding.
\nIn addition, the understanding gained from a conservative approach to form and redaction criticism brings gain to the Messianic Jewish community. Form criticism gives us cultural background for understanding the different biblical forms of poetry, narrative, short story, miracle story, and parable. This aids us in discovering the intent of author of the text. In addition, much of the Gospel material first circulated in oral form and in different arrangements. Redaction criticism seeks to understand the distinct purpose and intent of the final author-compiler of the biblical material. A comparison of the Synoptic Gospels provides us with patterns of variation whereby the intention of the author can be more readily perceived. Messianic Jews believe that the final redactor was an Apostle and that God inspires the redaction purpose and intent of teaching. For example, Christian interpreters used to say that we are not to build theology from descriptive material, but only from explicitly theological material. This is now understood by many scholars to be false. There is much theology in 1 Kings. There is much theology in the book of Acts. Indeed, since the work of Hans Conzelman and I. Howard Marshall, we now clearly recognize that theology is prominent in the book of Acts. The theology and purpose of Luke is very important for Messianic Jews, since one of Luke\u2019s purposes is to show the right relationship of Jew and Gentile in one movement. Indeed, the calling of Jews in Yeshua to keep Torah is very clear, as is the freedom from Jewish calling for the Gentiles. Another purpose of Luke is to show that followers of Yeshua are good subjects of the Roman Empire
\nThe dangers in hermeneutics today come from contemporary theories that partake of post modernist ideas of historiography. These ideas cast doubt on whether objective historical knowledge can be ascertained. All history is reduced to the power politics of the one who is writing. Such contemporary skepticism and deconstruction is contrary to Messianic Judaism. We claim that the use of good scholarship in hermeneutics brings us closer to an accurate understanding of the Bible. We do not claim perfect understanding, but adequate and growing understanding. Accurate theology is practical for it aids us to walk on the path of Torah as it is rightly applied in the New Covenant order.
\nOne significant issue in hermeneutics concerns whether a text is capable of multiple meanings or is to be understood as having one meaning. Two biblical theologians who support Messianic Judaism have different approaches to this question. Richard Longenecker, in his Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, argues that the New Testament writer finds meaning in the Hebrew text that cannot (by any means) be understood as intended by the human author (see 218\u2013219). The New Testament writer really claims that this new meaning is part of the real meaning of the text. In other words, peshar and midrashic interpretation do discover real meaning. For Longenecker, because the biblical writers were inspired, their interpretation is valid, but we can not reproduce such exegesis. For Walter Kaiser, there is but one author intended meaning in a text unless there is evidence of an author intended double entendre as in some of the passages of the Gospel of John (17\u201323). One meaning is capable of multiple applications, but never as a replacement of the original meaning of the author.
\nI hold to a more charismatic and prophetic approach whereby the Holy Spirit gives new applications and jumping off points, but never in a replacement of the original author\u2019s intended meaning. For example, I do not claim (like Longenecker) that Matthew 2:15 finds a new meaning in the verse \u201cOut of Israel have I called my Son,\u201d (that really was not intended by Hosea). I do not claim (like Kaiser) that the meaning of the Messiah really is in Hosea 11:1 because of the technical meaning of the word Son and its intended application to the Messiah. Rather, the Holy Spirit reveals new parallels, not intended by original author. Such is the nature of the gift of prophecy.<\/p>\n
New Covenant Application<\/p>\n
The New Covenant Scriptures provide a very important key for hermeneutics. These Scriptures are permeated with the idea that the Messiah has come and, in a significant sense, the expected Kingdom has come. It has not come in the fullness pictured in the most awesome terms by Isaiah and the other prophets where the lion lays down with the lamb, world peace is established, and the knowledge of the Lord covers the earth as the waters cover the seas (cf. Isaiah 11). Nevertheless, the Kingdom of God in a new and superior order is now available to human beings. The Good News of the Kingdom is really the message that the government of God is now available to human beings (see Ladd 40\u201351). The realm of the Kingdom is the realm of love, justice, and righteousness. In this realm of righteousness, there is shalom. Shalom is more than the English word peace. It is wholeness and blessing in all human dimensions. Yes, the Kingdom available now is partial. Our argument with classical Judaisms is really over the issue of this partial reality of the Kingdom, for classical Judaisms will not acknowledge the Messiah and His Kingdom for anything less than the fullness of the Kingdom. However, the whole teaching of Yeshua and the New Covenant Scriptures is that just such a real (but partial) coming of the Kingdom is reality.
\nAs part of this Kingdom reality, we are told to teach all that Yeshua has commanded. His teaching is the halakhah for our approach to Torah. This has great implications for a Messianic Jewish approach to Torah. Therefore as the rabbis anticipated, there would be a change in Torah in the Messianic Age (see Davies 147\u2013150). All of the commandments in the New Covenant scriptures are Torah. We also look to rabbinic sources for insight to help us make this application of Torah. The job of Torah application is central to a genuine Messianic Judaism.<\/p>\n
Question for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What do we mean when we claim that the Bible is infallible?
\n\u2022 What are the two primary tests for determining which books of the Bible may be accepted as part of the Canon?
\n\u2022 What are the primary issues of hermeneutics?
\n\u2022 How do we relate biblical authority to the authority of the Oral Law?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Barr, James. Semantics of Biblical Language. London: Oxford Univ., 1961.
\nConzelman, Hans. The Theology of St. Luke. London: Farber and Farber, 1960.
\nDavies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.
\nHarris, R. Laird. The Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1970.
\nJuster, Dr. Daniel. The Biblical World View, An Apologetic. Bethesda: Christian Scholars International, 1996.
\nKaiser, Walter. Uses of the Old Testament in the New. Chicago: Moody, 1985.
\nKeener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. InterVarsity: Downers Grove, 1994.
\nLadd, George. The Gospel of the Kingdom, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959.
\nLongenecker, Richard. Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.
\nMarshall, I. Howard. Luke, Historian and Theologian. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.
\nMetzger, Bruce. The Text of the New Testament. New York: Oxford Univ., 1964.
\nSchiffman, Lawrence. From Text to Tradition. Hoboken: KTAV, 1991.
\nWarfield, Benjamin B. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948.<\/p>\n
Daniel Juster is the leader of Tikkun International and has been at the forefront of the Messianic Jewish movement since its inception. The first President of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, he has served as the spiritual leader of Adat HaTikvah in Chicago and Beth Messiah Congregation in Rockville, Maryland. Dr. Juster is author of Growing to Maturity and Jewish Roots. He holds several earned degrees including a Th.D. from New Covenant International Seminary.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 4:
\nSCRIPTURE AND
\nTRADITION<\/p>\n
\u2014Mark S. Kinzer<\/p>\n
Many Messianic Jews consider the message of the Bible as clear and indisputable, a fact independent of external interpretation. The individual who reads the text with faith and an open heart will understand what it says. Why, then, are there such a plethora of divergent interpretations, so many of which strike us as misleading? The answer must lie, we think, in merely human readings of the text that have congealed into hardened traditions, which prevent others from seeing what is so evident to us.
\nIt is ironic that our contempt for tradition derives from tradition. We may think that such a view follows ineluctably from Yeshua\u2019s teaching in Mark 7:6\u201313 or Paul\u2019s in Colossians 2:8. However, there are many other passages in the Apostolic Writings that treat \u201ctradition\u201d with great respect (e.g., 1 Cor. 11:2; 2 Thess. 2:15, 3:6), and even more that employ traditional midrashic motifs (e.g., 1 Cor. 10:4; John 1:1). Distrust of all extra-biblical tradition does not derive directly from the Bible itself, but from a particular stream of Protestant interpretive tradition. In our efforts to be purely biblical, we find ourselves, once again, captive to tradition.
\nAll attempts at a \u201cpurely biblical\u201d perspective are destined to fail. One never reads the biblical text apart from preconceptions drawn from one\u2019s own particular historical setting and from some stream of interpretive tradition. That setting and tradition will shape the questions we address to the text, the concepts and terms we use to answer those questions, and our selection of the portions of the text that speak most directly to our questions, and therefore seem to be of greatest importance. They will likewise influence how we construe the unified message of the document as a whole, and relate that message to our life today. This does not mean that the Bible lacks the power to reshape our questions, or transform our preconceptions. It does mean that the direction of influence is two-way\u2014our existential situation in the flow of history and tradition forming our reading of the text, and the text in turn forming our existential situation.
\nInterpretive tradition consists of the accumulated insights of a community transmitted from one generation to the next. In a Messianic Jewish context, tradition represents the understanding of Scripture preserved through the generations among the communities\u2014Jewish and Christian\u2014within which Scripture itself has been preserved. If we are connected to these communities, then we are also heirs of their traditions. The text itself is the core of these traditions. In the words of Paul van Buren, the Bible is always a \u201ccarried book.\u201d<\/p>\n
But historical scholarship can only help us to understand these books, for we shall not have reached the understanding we seek until we have found a way to receive light upon our present path for the steps which we are about to take. For such an understanding, we need to know the steps we have already taken and what light our predecessors received\u2014or thought they received\u2014from this book. In short, we have to realize that we have this book in our hands, not directly from its original authors or even from the communities for which and in the context of which they were first written, but from those who immediately preceded us in the Way, and through the whole long line of those who have walked before them. This carried book\u2014the one we actually read and keep bringing into our own conversation\u2014is the one from which we hope to receive light for each step along the Way. (121)<\/p>\n
Respecting tradition and learning from it, is a way of recognizing that we have \u201cpredecessors,\u201d that we are part of a community with a history. It involves the humble recognition that we are not the first ones to encounter the sacred text, and that we must listen to what our parents have said about it before we speak in turn.<\/p>\n
Scripture Always Accompanied By Tradition<\/p>\n
The distinction between Scripture and tradition is problematic. In part, this is because Scripture is itself, the core of tradition. However, the distinction is also problematic for another reason: unless we are scholars dealing with ancient manuscripts, we never encounter Scripture unaccompanied by tradition. We are usually unaware of its presence, but it is as much a part of our reading of the text as the air we breathe is part of our daily physical activity. How is this the case? First and foremost, tradition is reflected in the canonical selection and arrangement of the books of the Bible. In the case of Tanakh, the basic outline of this selection and arrangement were determined before the first century C.E., but the definitive listing of books did not come till after the destruction of the Second Temple. In the case of the Apostolic Writings, the basic outline was clear by the end of the second century C.E., but the final listing of books was not complete until the fourth century. One can engage in theological disputes about whether the Jewish and Christian communities established the canon or merely recognized it. However, the essential historical fact remains: the decision as to which books are in the Bible and how they are arranged was not made through a prophetic pronouncement or an apostolic decree, but through a protracted process of communal discernment. The canon is delivered to us as a product of Jewish and Christian tradition.
\nSecond, tradition accompanies the text through the massive edifice of scribal clarification. In the case of Tanakh, the original manuscripts would have contained an unpunctuated, unparagraphed consonantal text. The Masoretic scribes developed a complex system of vocalization (vowel pointing) and punctuation, and added it to the text in a way that reflected traditional readings of that text. They also added paragraph divisions, and even indicated through their novel system of vocalization where the consonantal text needed to be corrected. Whenever we read the Hebrew text of Tanakh in a printed Bible, we encounter not only the work of the original author or authors, but also the interpretive framework supplied by the Masoretes. In the case of the Apostolic Writings, the original manuscripts have no word divisions, paragraph divisions, chapter divisions, or punctuation. Even those of us who are able to read a printed Greek New Testament do not encounter the text in its original form. We benefit from generations of scribes and scholars who supplied reading aids that the original manuscripts lacked.
\nThird, interpretive tradition accompanies the text whenever it is read in translation. Translation is the most elementary form of interpretation. It always involves restating in other words what is understood to be the meaning of the original text. The interpretive power of translation should be especially evident to us as Messianic Jews, since we must deal with anti-Jewish and anti-Torah biases every time we pick up a leading Christian version of the New Testament. This is why David Stern\u2019s labors have been of such great importance to the Messianic Jewish movement. The Jewish New Testament, like every New Testament translation, presents an interpretation of the text; but in this case, the interpretation reflects the convictions and culture of Messianic Judaism. Awareness of the interpretive power of Bible translation is reflected in the emergence of diverse translations in the second half of the twentieth century. As D. G. Hart notes in a review of Peter J. Thuesen\u2019s In Discordance with the Scriptures: American Protestant Battles over Translating the Bible:<\/p>\n
In the twentieth century, the debates about the Bible escalated as Protestants recognized that even such simple matters as translation were bound up with interpretation. Consequently, evangelicals suspected the Revised Standard Version as a liberal Bible, and eventually countered with the New International Version, a translation produced by conservative scholars. Along the way, Protestants demonstrated what Catholics already knew\u2014namely, that the Bible never stands alone but, even in its translation, is situated in a web of relationships that involve the authority of church leaders and questions about who has responsibility for determining orthodoxy. (Hart 65)<\/p>\n
Similar controversies over translation have occurred within the Jewish world. The Orthodox refused to participate in the production of the New Jewish Publication Society (NJPS) translation of Tanakh. Use of the Stone Tanakh or the NJPS Tanakh identifies one\u2019s brand of Judaism as much as use of the KJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, or NAV (a Catholic translation) marks one\u2019s Christian loyalties. Diverse translations embody diverse interpretations found in diverse communities that are heirs of diverse traditions.
\nFourth, interpretive tradition accompanies Scripture whenever we read the text in a reference edition. Study Bibles often include, along with a particular translation of the text, introductions and outlines for each book, commentary for each unit, and cross-references for each verse. Such study aids might appear to be neutral guides through the text, but they contain and conceal just as many interpretive decisions as do translations. Even cross-references entail such decisions, for they inevitably involve a selection among potential correspondences, thus inviting the reader to connect certain verses and ignore other possible relationships. Just as one\u2019s choice of Bible translation displays the interpretive tradition with which one identifies, so with study Bibles. In fact, one particular study Bible\u2014the Scofield Bible\u2014served as the single most powerful vehicle for the promotion of dispensationalist theology in America in the early twentieth century. Now, each community of interpretation has its own study Bible, or is in the process of producing one.
\nIt should be clear by now, that we never deal with the Biblical text apart from interpretation and tradition. The question is not whether we will draw upon an interpretive tradition. Instead, the question is which tradition (or traditions) we will draw upon, and whether we will do so consciously or unconsciously.<\/p>\n
Entering the Conversation<\/p>\n
This question poses a special challenge for Messianic Jews, for we have no continuous interpretive tradition of our own. The early community of Jewish followers of Yeshua became extinct in the first half of the first millenium B.C.E. Yet, we do share in the heritage of two communities\u2014Jewish and Christian\u2014each of which possesses a rich and continuous tradition of biblical interpretation and lived faith. Unfortunately, throughout much of their history, these two communities, though both rooted in the soil of Second Temple Judaism, have been locked in conflict and have defined themselves over against one another. Thus, our parents divorced with great acrimony, and though they are beginning to talk to one another again, their new identities seem to preclude genuine reconciliation.
\nThis challenge is also an opportunity. At the heart of our vision as Messianic Jews are two convictions, one treasured by the Jewish people and denied by the Church, the other guarded by the Church and denied by the Jewish people: (1) The eternal and irrevocable election of Israel (i.e., the Jewish people) as an ethno-covenantal community, with a central role to play in the Divine plan for history, and with a particular God-given way of life rooted in the Torah; and (2) The Messiahship and Divine Sonship of Yeshua, light to the nations and glory of Israel, who died as an atoning sacrifice and rose from the dead as the first-fruits of the eschaton. Therefore, we see both the Jewish and Christian traditions as bearing imperishable truth in what they affirm as their core message, and as lacking something important because of what they deny in the affirmation of the other. Our parents may find it difficult to listen to one another, but each is incomplete on its own. Our vocation is to bring our parents together again, not just as friends but as partners.
\nAs members of the one elect ethno-covenantal community of Israel, Messianic Jews receive the text of the Torah as it has been \u201ccarried\u201d by the Jewish people throughout their history, and are obliged to enter into that conversation about its meaning and application that has been central to Jewish life as long as Judaism has existed. In fact, the summit of Jewish piety\u2014talmud Torah (study of the Torah)\u2014consists of just such cross-generational conversation. Jewish study of the sacred text is never conceived of as a purely individual task, but as a communal obligation, which binds Jews across space and time. Like every Jewish conversation, this one involves argument and disagreement. Giving tradition its due in the Jewish reading of Scripture does not mean bowing before an unquestioned authority, but entering into the discussion as a serious listener and disputant.
\nThe nature of Jewish study of Torah is revealed most vividly in the classic rabbinic study Bible, Mikraot Gedolot. Edward L. Greenstein describes this text as follows:<\/p>\n
The traditional Jewish edition of the Bible, Mikra\u2019ot Gedolot, \u201cGreat Readings,\u201d or \u201cBig Scriptures\u201d \u2026 is essentially a medieval product. It presents the standard Hebrew text of the Bible, an ancient rabbinic translation into Aramaic\u2014the targum\u2014and a number of medieval commentaries in Hebrew.\u2026 Although most extant works of the major commentaries are available in separate editions and can be read in isolation from the others, the arrangement in Mikra\u2019ot Gedolot encourages dialectic among the distinguished voices on the page, confirming the well-known witticism that where there are two Jews, there are three opinions. (214\u201315)<\/p>\n
In his novel, In the Beginning, Chaim Potok describes how young David Lurie first learns from his teacher, Mr. Bader, how to read Mikraot Gedolot.<\/p>\n
I opened my Mikraot Gedolot and reread the Rashi commentary on the first word of the Hebrew Bible, bereshit, \u201cin the beginning.\u201d Then I reread the Ramban, another commentary. \u201cListen to how they talk to one another, David,\u201d Mr. Bader had said to me the week before in his study. \u201cLook at how the different parts of the page are arranged and you\u2019ll understand how Jews have been talking to each other for two thousand years about the Bible.\u2026 You\u2019ll learn to listen to their voices, David. You\u2019ll listen to the way they talk to each other on the page. You\u2019ll hear them agreeing and disagreeing with each other. Sometimes the Ramban gets very nasty when he disagrees with Ibn Ezra. At times he disagrees strongly with Rashi.\u201d (249\u201350)<\/p>\n
David immerses himself in Mikraot Gedolot, and he experiences the Biblical text in a new way.<\/p>\n
I shuttled back and forth between ancient Palestine and medieval France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy. I listened to them talking to one another about the words of the Torah.\u2026 Through their voices, the text of the Torah took on a luminous quality. (256)<\/p>\n
Yet, David eventually finds that he must enter into the discussion himself and offer his own answers. He does not become a scholar of rabbinic commentary on the Bible, but a true biblical scholar. Still, he never leaves the conversation\u2014that would be to leave Judaism.
\nThus, Mikraot Gedolot functioned for centuries as the authorized Jewish study Bible, presenting traditional Jewish interpretation and defining the issues that were important in the text. However, unlike most modern study Bibles, it did not present one view of the text, but several divergent views. The reader was summoned to make choices among possible interpretations. In this way, the reader learned that the text was not simple and self-evident in its meaning. Also, the way was implicitly left open for new readings of the text. This approach to the study of Scripture is of crucial importance for us as Messianic Jews. If Messianic Judaism is truly Judaism, we must imitate David Lurie: we must offer our own explanations for the difficulties posed by the text, explanations that reflect our distinctive Messianic perspective, yet always as our contribution to an ongoing cross-generational conversation.
\nAt the same time, Messianic Jews also share in the heritage of that multi-ethnic people who have been joined to Israel in Messiah. Just as Israel was entrusted with the Torah and has carried it through the centuries, so the Messianic community was entrusted with the Apostolic Writings and carried it faithfully. We have received these writings through the Messianic community, and are obliged to enter into its conversation about the meaning of the person and work of Yeshua for Israel and the Nations. We are not free to ignore or reject with contempt, those fundamental decisions reached in the fourth and fifth centuries regarding Yeshua\u2019s identity and its implications for our understanding of the Divinity. We may have concerns with some aspects of the conclusions reached or the language used to express them, but they embody the unified insights and intuitions of the community which transmitted the Apostolic Writings and the Apostolic Faith to us, and must be treated respectfully, and engaged with seriously.<\/p>\n
The Primacy of Scripture<\/p>\n
If the distinction between Scripture and tradition is problematic, it is nonetheless necessary. An appreciation for tradition and a serious engagement with it in our reading of Scripture need not imply an obliteration of the line separating biblical tradition from post-biblical tradition or an elevating of the latter above the former. Michael Wyshogrod asserts this point from an Orthodox Jewish perspective:<\/p>\n
The rabbis instituted the reading of the Pentateuch in the synagogue and not the reading of a rabbinic interpretation. However important the rabbinic interpretation of scripture is\u2014and it is very important\u2014it is scripture without further interpretation that is read \u2026 Sometimes we are so eager to validate the divine origin of the oral Torah that we refuse to recognize any difference between the two Torahs. But that is profoundly unrabbinic \u2026 Many Orthodox Jews have lost the ability to read a biblical text as it stands, without rabbinic commentary \u2026 We must be careful not to become so anti-Karaitic that we lose direct contact with the text of scripture. (xxii, xxiv)<\/p>\n
Just as Scripture shapes our lives at the same time as our life-setting shapes our reading of Scripture, so direct engagement with the biblical text informs our understanding of tradition at the same time as our participation in the tradition informs our reading of the text.
\nMessianic Jews have an important role to play in the ongoing Jewish and Christian conversations about Scripture. Our sharing in the Jewish conversation affects our reading of the Apostolic Writings in a way that will surprise and enlighten the Christian community. Our commitment to direct and sustained contact with the Biblical text can stimulate a move in the wider Jewish community in the direction that Wyshogrod recommends. Our inclusion of the Apostolic Writings within the framework of the sacred writings will make our part in the Jewish conversation a unique one, but it need not remove us from the discussion. Our voice, though long silent, needs to be heard again. It is only by listening to all the voices speaking from the margins of the page that one hears clearly that One Voice at the center of the page, and encounters him anew in the sacred text.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What major differences in biblical interpretation have you encountered in religious groups you have been part of? How did participation in the group affect your way of reading the text?
\n\u2022 How has the translation or study Bible you use influenced your understanding of Scripture?
\n\u2022 Have you ever been absolutely convinced that a certain Biblical text had a particular meaning, only to change your mind at a later date? If so\u2014what caused you to change your mind? Did the experience of this change alert you to the difficulty in interpreting Scripture, and the potential for diverse interpretations inherent in the text itself?
\n\u2022 How does Jewish tradition resemble a cross-generational conversation? Is it possible for Messianic Jews to enter into that conversation? Is it desirable? If so, what contribution can this movement make to enrich the overall conversation?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Greenstein, Edward L. \u201cMedieval Bible Commentaries.\u201d Back to the Sources, Ed. Barry W. Holtz. New York: Touchstone, 1984.
\nHart, D.G. \u201cScriptura without Solace,\u201d First Things 106 (October 2000): 65.
\nPotok, Chaim. In the Beginning. New York: Knopf, 1985.
\nThuesen, Peter J. In Discordance with the Scriptures: American Protestant Battles over Translating the Bible. Oxford: Oxford Univ., 1999.
\nVan Buren, Paul. A Theology of the Jewish-Christian Reality, Part 1: Discerning the Way. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
\nWyshogrod, Michael. The Body of Faith. Northvale: Jason Aronson, 1996.<\/p>\n
Mark S. Kinzer, Ph.D., University of Michigan, is Executive Director of Messianic Jewish Theological Institute, a graduate-level training center for Messianic Jewish leaders. He has taught at both the University of Michigan and Michigan State University, and is an adjunct assistant professor of Jewish Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary. He is also the Spiritual Leader of Congregation Zera Avraham in Ann Arbor, Michigan.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 5:
\nHALAKHIC
\nRESPONSIBILITY<\/p>\n
\u2014Russell Resnik<\/p>\n
Josh grew up in an established Messianic synagogue on the east coast where he remained committed through high school. When it was time to go to college, he chose a school near another well-known Messianic synagogue in a neighboring state. Josh\u2019s first Shabbat at Beth Lo-Shem brought some surprises. Instead of opening with Ma Tovu, as was the custom back home, this service began with a greeting and prayer from the rabbi, who ended by asking the congregation to \u201cstand up and praise the Lord.\u201d This phrase launched a drum roll and a series of lively tunes. Josh enjoyed the songs, but he was taken aback when the congregation replaced the recitation of the Sh\u2019ma with a musical version, complete with drums and dancing, and none of the ceremony to which he was accustomed. Josh\u2019s misgivings only increased when the Torah was taken out of the ark without the usual blessings and carried among the congregation as the song service continued. At one point the Torah was caught in a traffic jam as two lines of dancers converged in front of it. There was plenty of joy at Beth Lo-Shem\u2014but not much Yiddishkeit (Jewishness). Josh was determined to remain connected to Messianic Judaism, but he felt edgy and disconnected in this new synagogue. He hoped he would become more relaxed as he tried to accept these new ways of worship.<\/p>\n
The Need for Halakhah<\/p>\n
Josh\u2019s experience highlights one of the prime purposes of halakhah\u2014to build and stabilize community. Halakhah is the body of rulings derived from the classic rabbinic writings, especially the Talmud. These rulings form not just a shared liturgical tradition, but an entire way of life. As Eliezer Berkovits writes: \u201cHalakha is the bridge over which the Torah moves from the written word into the living deed. Normally, there is a confrontation with the text, which is set, and life, which is forever in motion.\u2026 Halakha is the application of the Torah to life\u201d (1).
\nJudaism has always been conveyed through shared traditions shaped by halakhah. Without it, we do not have religious community, but as in today\u2019s Messianic Judaism, a loose confederation of more-or-less related congregations. If Messianic Judaism is to have integrity as a form of Judaism, it must first take responsibility for developing a halakhic process.
\nLisa Schiffman expresses this essential Jewish distinctive in her popular book, Generation J:<\/p>\n
If Christianity\u2019s message was Follow your heart, Judaism\u2019s was Follow the directions. Jews, however, never follow directions without asking why. They analyze words with the intensity of scientists. They find loopholes in the law, stretch the meaning of a sentence, and spend hours turning over a single Hebraic syllable. They know that Judaism is itself a language. And, like any language, it evolves, fits itself to different pockets of people, and is held up, always, by an undeniable structure. (8\u20139)<\/p>\n
If Judaism is a language, as Schiffman claims, halakhah is the evolution by which it \u201cfits itself to different pockets of people.\u201d Halakhah is essential, not only to build community, but also to any genuine claim to be a Jewish faith expression.
\nLikewise, the concrete spirituality implied by halakhah is essential to Judaism. The Tanakh portrays the Almighty as Creator of this world, the God of history who acts within the mundane realm, and calls his followers to do likewise. Thus, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik writes, \u201cWhen halakhic man pines for God, he does not venture to rise up to Him, but rather strives to bring down His divine presence into the midst of our concrete world\u201d (45). Far from shrinking from such a spirituality, Messianic Judaism may be its ultimate expression, embracing a Messiah in whom Deity took on our humanity and endured the essence of \u201cour concrete world.\u201d<\/p>\n
Limitations of Rabbinic Halakhah<\/p>\n
Despite the value of halakhah, we cannot simply import into Messianic Judaism traditional halakhic content as a whole. Mark Kinzer argues that the ritual provisions of the Mosaic Law \u201cnow have a modified purpose, obligatory force, and sanction,\u201d and are subordinate to the \u201cweightier matters of Torah\u201d (96\u201397). Furthermore, New Covenant principles \u201cdiffer substantially from those held within the rabbinic tradition. Therefore, a Messianic Jew who holds them will not be able to offer unqualified submission to rabbinic halacha.\u201d
\nIndeed, \u201cunqualified submission to rabbinic halacha\u201d would violate the very purpose of halakhah, which is to apply Scripture to a living community in all its specificity and uniqueness. Traditional halakhah is flexible, but it cannot accommodate such New Covenant realities as the entry of Gentiles as Gentiles into the worshiping community, the universal outpouring of the spirit, or atonement through the blood of Messiah.
\nFurther, rabbinic halakhah rests upon an \u201cOral Torah\u201d supposedly given by God on Sinai and interpreted by an unbroken chain of divinely ordained authorities. Thus, the familiar opening of Pirke Avot traces the transmission of Torah from Moses to the \u201cMen of the Great Assembly\u201d to successive pairs of teachers down to the Mishnaic era in which Pirke Avot was written (see Kravitz, Olitzky 1\u201311). Few Messianic Jews would accept the direct divine inspiration of Oral Torah in this sense.
\nA famous talmudic story found in Bava Metzia 59b captures both the strength of traditional halakhah and its limitations. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with the majority of his colleagues on a certain matter, and produces miracles to prove that his opinion is correct. His colleagues are unimpressed. Finally, a voice from heaven declares that whenever Rabbi Eliezer expresses an opinion, the halakhah is according to him. Upon hearing the voice, Rabbi Y\u2019hoshua stands up and calls out: \u201cIt is not in the heavens.\u201d The Talmud interprets these words as meaning: \u201cThe Torah has already been given us from Sinai. We are not to listen to a heavenly voice [i.e., in matters of halakhic decision]. For Thou hast already written for us at Sinai to make decisions in accordance with the opinion of the majority\u201d (see Berkovits 47\u201348).
\nThis corporate responsibility for applying Torah to life would help build a healthy Messianic Judaism. The day of each man doing \u201cwhat is right in his own eyes,\u201d even if allegedly under the prompting of the Holy Spirit, must give way to deference and communal decision making. We must no longer avoid tough decisions by reference to \u201cwaiting on the Lord\u201d or \u201cletting the Spirit lead.\u201d We cannot build community if we are unwilling to shoulder the shared responsibility for the guidance of community.
\n\u201cIt is not in the heavens,\u201d however, goes too far for Messianic Judaism. We can imagine cases in which one leader would be justified on the authority of Scripture in standing against the majority. This is obviously a prophetic act. For Messianic Judaism, the prophetic does not supersede halakhah, but it must inform it. Thus, in a Messianic Jewish version of the story above, the heavenly voice would be welcomed, not necessarily to override the entire discussion, but certainly to reopen it on a new basis. Messianic Judaism must take responsibility not only for forming halakhah, but also for forming a halakhah that is faithful to the genius of the New Covenant.<\/p>\n
A Model for Messianic Jewish Halakhah<\/p>\n
Messianic Judaism could posit a pre-halakhic Judaism as its model\u2014which may be what those among us who speak of \u201cbiblical Judaism\u201d have in mind. However, such a model would disregard both the living continuity of the Jewish people in the post-biblical era when halakhah became a dominant force, and the power of halakhah for building genuine community today. Acceptance of halakhah in some form is essential for our transformation from a religious movement to an enduring religious community. In rabbinic thinking, halakhah implies not only specific content, but also the process of developing that content. Thus, Avi Shafran writes, \u201c\u2026 for those who accept Judaism\u2019s millennia-old conviction that the Torah and the key to its understanding, the Oral Law, are of divine origin, there are clear rules (part of the Oral Law itself) for applying halachic principles to new situations\u201d (54). Our challenge is to create a halakhic process that respectfully departs from the traditional rabbinic foundation as necessary to accommodate the realities of the New Covenant.
\nThe Apostolic Writings provide a model for such a process. We will briefly consider Yeshua\u2019s discussion of marriage in Matthew 19:3\u20138 and Sha\u2019ul\u2019s development of it in 1 Corinthians 7 as an example.<\/p>\n
Some P\u2019rushim [Pharisees] came and tried to trap him by asking, \u201cIs it permitted for a man to divorce his wife on any ground whatever?\u201d He replied, \u201cHaven\u2019t you read that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female, and that he said, \u2018For this reason a man should leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and the two are to become one flesh?\u2019 Thus they are no longer two, but one. So then, no one should split apart what God has joined together.\u201d They said to him, \u201cThen why did Moshe give the commandment that a man should hand his wife a get and divorce her?\u201d He answered, \u201cMoshe allowed you to divorce your wives because your hearts are so hardened. But this is not how it was at the beginning.\u201d (CJB)<\/p>\n
Yeshua bases his ruling, which is radical for his time, on the specific wording of a passage of Torah. This is typical halakhic discourse\u2014to discover evidence within the text itself to substantiate a ruling, even one that might appear unconventional. In typical halakhic fashion, Yeshua rules to protect the weaker party, the wives. Later, other rabbis also sought within the text of Torah, or at least in constant reference to it, for ways to protect women within the institution of marriage.
\nA superficial reading of Torah appears to grant the husband an unrestricted right of divorce, provided only that he \u201cgive a certificate a divorce.\u201d Yeshua\u2019s more holistic reading provides protection for the wife. He does not set aside the Mosaic ordinance, as some interpreters claim, but takes the responsibility implied in \u201cIt is not in the heavens\u201d to apply Torah humanely to real-life conditions. As Berkovits explains, \u201c\u2026 in case of a conflict between a specific law and another supervening concern of the Torah, one does the will of God by eliminating the specific law in the case at hand\u201d (78). In other words, Yeshua \u201celiminates\u201d\u2014or rather, limits\u2014the law of Deuteronomy 24 to support the \u201csupervening concern of the Torah\u201d for the inviolability of marriage.
\nBerkovits goes on, however, to provide a contrast with Yeshua. \u201cHowever, interpreting and deciding in all these matters has been entrusted to the Rabbanan, the sages of Israel.\u201d We might well argue that Yeshua is the greatest of the \u201csages of Israel,\u201d but he is not recognized as such by most of Israel, and he does not always function in concert with the recognized sages. Indeed, Jacob Neusner points out that Yeshua deliberately teaches on his own authority, not on the authority of the unbroken chain of halakhic discussion that preceded him (18\u201336). He claims, \u201cat many points in this protracted account of Jesus\u2019 specific teachings, we now recognize that at issue is the figure of Jesus, not the teachings at all\u201d (31). No matter how many similarities we may trace between Yeshua and traditional halakhah, there will always be this contrast over the issue of authority. Yeshua places himself as the final authority. Nevertheless, he handles Scripture with the same creative flexibility as the best traditional halakhah, a flexibility intended to preserve the deeper principles of Scripture.
\nSha\u2019ul continues the discussion of divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:12\u201315.<\/p>\n
To the rest I say\u2014I, not the Lord: if any brother has a wife who is not a believer, and she is satisfied to go on living with him, he should not leave her. Also, if any woman has an unbelieving husband who is satisfied to go on living with her, she is not to leave him. For the unbelieving husband has been set aside for God by the wife, and the unbelieving wife has been set aside for God by the brother\u2014otherwise your children would be \u201cunclean,\u201d but as it is, they are set aside for God. But if the unbelieving spouse separates himself, let him be separated. In circumstances like these, the brother or sister is not enslaved\u2014God has called you to a life of peace. (CJB)<\/p>\n
Sha\u2019ul\u2019s bold statement in verse 12, \u201cto the rest I say\u2014I, not the Lord \u2026\u201d is a clear application of \u201cIt is not in the heavens.\u201d He takes responsibility for dealing with the difficult ramifications of Yeshua\u2019s teaching. In typical halakhic fashion, he rules to uphold shalom bayit, the peace of the household. Verse 14 is also typical in its use of a broad Torah principle (children are a fulfillment of God\u2019s holy purpose) to address the more specific question of the holiness of a marriage with an unbeliever. Finally, in verse 15, Sha\u2019ul protects the more vulnerable party, the abandoned believing partner, who is \u201ccalled \u2026 to a life of peace.\u201d The implications of this \u201cpeace\u201d remain controversial, but the point is that halakhah works to preserve peace, even within difficult and complex situations.
\nOn the other hand, in contrast with traditional halakhah, Sha\u2019ul, like Yeshua, invokes his own authority rather than the authority of a pre-existing majority opinion. This distinction underscores a unique feature of Messianic Judaism\u2014its recognition of the abundant presence of the Holy Spirit in this age and the ability of spirit-empowered individuals to speak directly for God. Some would argue that such ability rested solely with Messiah and the original apostles, but the contrast with more traditional forms of Judaism remains.<\/p>\n
Conditions for Halakhah<\/p>\n
These examples help us to identify conditions that are needed for the development of a halakhic process within Messianic Judaism:<\/p>\n
\u2022 1. Build Messianic Judaism as a Jewish movement for Yeshua rather than a church movement for Jewish roots.<\/p>\n
Such a movement will naturally remain deeply connected with Jewish tradition and perspectives, but it will be firmly centered on Yeshua as Messiah. John Fischer portrays this balance well:<\/p>\n
The focus of Messianic Judaism must remain squarely on Yeshua, but this does not mean setting aside the traditions. Further, the traditions are not authoritative, only the Bible is. Nor are we under \u201cthe authority\u201d of the Rabbis; we are under Yeshua\u2019s authority! However, the prayers and teachings of the Rabbis are valid and helpful as they reflect and do not contradict Scripture. In fact, rather than obstacles, the halachic traditions serve as rich and meaningful pointers to, and reinforcers of, Yeshua! (79)<\/p>\n
\u2022 2. Couple a high view of Scripture with a realistic sense of the needs of contemporary life.<\/p>\n
Yeshua and Sha\u2019ul demonstrate this essential balance. Halakhah requires leaders who take responsibility to guide the life of the community in all its concreteness and complexity according to the principles of Scripture. Halakhah differs from fundamentalism in avoiding a simplistic reading of the text that would preserve dogma at the expense of the weightier matters of Torah or the peace of the community.<\/p>\n
\u2022 3. Provide structures for halakhic discussion.<\/p>\n
Rob Berkowitz, in his article \u201cA Model for Messianic Jewish Halacha,\u201d develops \u201cone possible scenario for the process of elaborating halakhah within the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations\u201d (46). This worthwhile scenario involves a halakhah committee that interacts with discussion groups within individual congregations. The process properly focuses on discussion and consensus building rather than codification. Berkowitz concludes his article, \u201cIf we set our goal for a codified halacha far into the future, and focus for now on the benefits we can garner from the process itself, we may well become a better educated movement with more consistent practices.\u201d
\nAnother structure would be informal discussion among like-minded leaders seeking to resolve real problems within their congregations. Again, the goal would be discussion and consensus rather than codification.<\/p>\n
\u2022 4. Ask the right questions.<\/p>\n
Halakhic process will be strongest as it responds to real questions that arise within Messianic congregations. Therefore, Messianic Jews need to begin asking the sort of questions that lead to halakhah. This questioning in turn requires a greater earnestness to apply Torah to the specifics of life. Structures for halakhic discussion already exist, such as Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism, which devoted an entire issue to halakhah, or the UMJC leaders\u2019 e-mail listserve, which has been a forum for extended halakhic discussions. The UMJC Judicial Board is authorized to issue advisory opinions, which could provide a precedent and basis for further halakhic discussion. These structures have not reached their potential, however, because they are generally not responding to specific, real-life questions. This element is essential.<\/p>\n
\u2022 5. Be willing to defer for the sake of common practice between congregations.<\/p>\n
Perhaps, if Messianic leaders take responsibility for building a more consistent multi-congregational community, members will take responsibility to live according to the values of this larger community. Then the right questions will arise and the halakhic process will go forward.<\/p>\n
To the Future<\/p>\n
May the leaders of Josh\u2019s two synagogues agree on the need to create a multi-congregational community for Josh and others like him. May these leaders have the wisdom to address their differences in a halakhic process. And may they practice the deference required to make halakhah a living reality.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What is halakhah? Provide a brief definition of one or two sentences.
\n\u2022 What features of the New Covenant point beyond traditional rabbinic halakhah?
\n\u2022 What is the significance of the phrase \u201cIt is not in the heavens!\u201d to our discussion of halakhah, especially the title \u201cHalakhic Responsibility\u201d?
\n\u2022 What are some ways in which the rulings of Yeshua and Sha\u2019ul typify halakhic process? How do they differ from more traditional halakhah?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Berkovits, Eliezer. Not In Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha. New York: Ktav, 1983.
\nBerkowitz, Rob. \u201cA Model for Messianic Jewish Halacha.\u201d Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 5 (Summer 1997): 42\u201329.
\nFischer, John. \u201cWould Yeshua Support Halacha?\u201d Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 5 (Summer 1997): 51\u201380.
\nKinzer, Mark Kinzer. \u201cForum: Authority Old and New\u201d Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 5 (Summer 1997): 96\u2013116.
\nKravitz, Leonard and Kerry M. Olitzky, eds. and trans. Pirke Avot: A Modern Commentary on Jewish Ethics. New York: UAHC, 1993.
\nNeusner, Jacob. A Rabbi Talks with Jesus: an Intermillennial, Interfaith Exchange. New York: Doubleday, 1993.
\nSchiffman, Lisa. Generation J. San Francisco: Harper, 1999.
\nShafran, Avi. \u201cThe Conservative Lie.\u201d Moment (February 2001): 52\u201354.
\nSoloveitchik, Rabbi Joseph B. Halakhic Man. New York: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.<\/p>\n
Russell Resnik serves as General Secretary of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations and leader of Adat Yeshua Messianic Synagogue in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Ordained through the UMJC, he also maintains credentials as a clinical mental health counselor. Russ is a frequent contributor to Messianic Jewish periodicals and the author of The Root and the Branches: Jewish Identity in Messiah, and Gateways to Torah: Joining the Ancient Conversation on the Weekly Portion.<\/p>\n
FINDING A
\nCONGREGATIONAL HOME<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 6:
\nMESSIANIC JEWS SHOULD
\nATTEND MESSIANIC JEWISH SYNAGOGUES<\/p>\n
\u2014Bruce L. Cohen<\/p>\n
They have been told of you that you teach all the Jews who are among the nations to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, nor to walk after the customs \u2026 do therefore what we say \u2026 then all will know that these rumors about you are nothing, but that you yourself still walk in order, observing the Torah. (Acts 21:21, 24, author\u2019s translation with emphasis)<\/p>\n
This essay advocates that Messianic Jews should attend Messianic Jewish synagogues rather than churches. We shall primarily be exploring, in Scripture, the premise that New Testament faith neither models nor advocates Messianic Jews abandoning circumcision of sons, the Torah of Moses, or the customs of our Forefathers. Such Scriptures form the best possible foundation for choosing where Messianic Jews should worship, because the life of practices they describe can most successfully be lived in a synagogue context.
\nOur twenty-century Galut (Dispersion) among the nations complicates developing an answer to this question, because an authoritative response must be faithful to Scripture (Isa. 8:20), and Scripture does not view the question as we presently might. The Jewish world today is very different from that of Yeshua\u2019s sh\u2019lichim in the first century. Our long exile from our Homeland has bereaved many of our people of a national or racial sense of self. It is possible for a Jew in today\u2019s world to be without any personal history of Jewish identity or experience of life in Jewish context; however, neither testament of Scripture looks at a Jewish person as culturally or religiously neutral.
\nThe question posed by Scripture (Matt. 5:17\u201319; Acts 15:1\u201319; 21:18\u201325) is not whether a Jew should take on Jewish practices like circumcision, the Torah and Jewish custom. Scripture assumes those practices already exist in the life of any Jew, and addresses whether Messianic Judaism teaches that a Jew who becomes a follower of Yeshua should abandon (apostasia) the three-fold inventory or practices mentioned above. Retention of Jewish identity and practice is seen by Scripture as a given, and that understanding is vital to addressing the issue of where Messianic Jews should attend worship.
\nLet us further remember the false rumor addressed in Acts 21 was that faith in Yeshua of Nazareth as Messiah teaches Jews to forsake the three-fold inventory of Jewish practices described above. That false rumor is still so rampant in the Jewish world that even the Israeli Supreme Court repeats it as if it is true. Justice Menachem Elon wrote in 1989, \u201cIt was rejection of all authority to the Torah \u2026 which placed [New Testament faith] outside the bounds of Judaism. Here was the fork in the road\u201d (Stern 21). Yet, Yeshua\u2019s sh\u2019lichim promptly labeled this rumor false the moment it surfaced, and called it \u201cnothing.\u201d
\nWe should treat it way! My view of where Messianic Jews should make their primary spiritual communities embarks from the idea that the scripturally normal condition of a Jewish believer is a life containing circumcision of sons, the Torah of Moses and the customs of the Jewish people (Acts 21:24).
\nNote that the above applies as an incumbent responsibility to Jewish believers only. Moreover, it is not a salvation necessity (Matt. 5:19). Jews and non-Jews all come to salvation\u2014the rescue of our spirit from eternal death\u2014the exact same way (Gal. 3:28). Yet, all that are saved do not walk exactly the same way after receiving salvation. There are differing New Testament instructions to all the Galatians 3:28 groups: men and women (Eph. 5:22\u201328), masters and servants (Col. 3:22\u20134:1), Jews and non-Jews (Acts 21:24\u201325).
\nReinforcing this reality, after Scripture tells us what \u201cwalking in order\u201d is for a Jewish believer (Acts 21:21\u201324), the very next verse (21:25) goes on to state:<\/p>\n
\u201cBut concerning the Gentiles (non-Jews) who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.\u201d (Acts 21:25 NKJV, with emphasis)<\/p>\n
\u201cNo such thing?\u201d What thing is Scripture saying is not incumbent upon non-Jews? Adherence to circumcision, Torah and Jewish custom, as is incumbent upon Messianic Jews. Non-Jewish believers have been free to develop worship within the context of their own national cultures, and they have done so (Romans 14:5). This freedom has given rise to what we now see as the multi-cultural \u201cchurch.\u201d The other nation-groups coming to faith in the one True God and His Messiah have chosen their own days for worship (predominantly the first day of the week), and they have developed their own particular holidays, customs and rites for worship. Scripture accorded them these rights, and firmly removed Jewish practice as a necessity for non-Jews.
\nHowever, such churches are not culturally neutral. They only seem that way to their inhabitants for the same reason cool, dry air feels \u201cnormal\u201d to someone from Russia, and warm, humid air feels normal to someone from the Caribbean. An American church is not a neutral assembly of the \u201cone new man\u201d (Eph. 2:15)\u2014it is an American assembly. A French church is French. A Korean church is Korean. Churches are reflective of the customs and cultures they inhabit. What are Jewish spiritual assemblies by custom and culture?
\nThey are synagogues. The Greek word sunagogi is used abundantly throughout the New Testament as the word referring to a Jewish house of worship. By the New Testament era, it is well-established historically that Jewish people gathered together in local synagogues for several socio-religious purposes, including the public reading of the Torah and study of the commandments (see Levine 54\u201355). Of Yeshua himself, the New Testament tells us, \u201cAnd as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read\u201d (Luke 4:16 NKJV, with emphasis).
\nHebrews 10:25 commands Messianic Jews to a life \u201cnot forsaking the synagoguing (episunagogeen) of yourselves together, as is the habit of some\u201d (author\u2019s translation). There are several other Greek words for assembling, collecting, and gathering, but it seems the writer of Hebrews was deliberate about his vocabulary concerning what Jewish believers should not forsake. The tone of the words \u201cas is the habit of some\u201d makes it clear that the writer disapproves of Jewish believers drifting away from the \u201csynagoguing\u201d of ourselves. It is incumbent upon us (Messianic Jews) to worship in a synagoguing of ourselves, when possible.
\nWhy do I say \u201cwhen possible?\u201d During the last eighteen centuries, for Messianic Jews, a church was usually the only faith community available. As famed screenwriter William Goldman put it,\u201d There\u2019s no point questioning the air when it\u2019s all there is to breathe.\u201d While there are still regions in which it is difficult to find suitable Messianic synagogues, the earlier restricted zone of choices is no longer so dominant. The landscape of history has changed, and with it, our imperatives have changed as well. Yet, it must be recognized that we are presently in a transitional season of history, and transitions deserve respect. Many of the Messianic pioneers of the last century started their journeys from within church theologies. They had an entrenched view of Jewish culture as antithetical to New Testament grace. The fact that Messianic Jews in meaningful numbers were able to retrieve any substantial reconnection to our Jewish cultural and faith roots at all, from 1880 to the present, is a miracle of upstream swimming. It should be acknowledged as such\u2014even as we labor in order that the vision the modern pioneers began may mature.
\nJewish people in our present era become churchgoers either because (1) they want to disengage themselves from Jewish identification for some personal reason, or (2) they have been taught that they should on some theological basis.
\nThe former experiential reason is readily understandable concerning abuse survivors in this post-Holocaust, post-pogrom era. The roots of the latter theological reason go back nearly eighteen centuries into the era that led fourth century Christendom to make a deliberate separation of Two-Testament faith from its Jewish source. A fourth century Jew believing in Yeshua was required to make the following oath:<\/p>\n
\u201cI renounce all customs, rites \u2026 and all other feasts of the Hebrews \u2026 all Sabbaths \u2026 hymns and chants and observances and synagogues, and the food and drink of the Hebrews; in one word, I renounce absolutely everything Jewish, every law, rite and custom\u201d (Cohn-Sherbok 6).<\/p>\n
Later seasons of church history were equally anti-Jewish. Such was the case when Luther advocated the eradication of all evidence of Jewish national existence (Nicholls 270\u2013271). The wake of this scripturally unfounded de-Judaization has rippled out into the present day. This idea would have horrified Yeshua of Nazareth and Rabbi Saul of Tarshish.
\nI am not alone in this view. Influential historian William Nicholls recently wrote, \u201cHistorical scholarship now permits us to affirm with confidence that Jesus of Nazareth was a faithful and observant Jew, who lived by the Torah, and taught nothing against his own people and their faith\u201d (xxvi). Among scholars of \u201cthe historical Jesus,\u201d we find similar views of first-century Messianism\u2019s message, \u201c\u2026 to Israel precisely as prophets working within and for Israel. This prophetic critique of Israeli-within-Israel will take on an entirely different meaning when the early church uses it in its debates with Israel as a justification for separation from Israel\u201d (Meier 29, with emphasis). The contra-Judaic debates\/diatribes to which church historian John Meier refers above, spoken by early \u201cChurch Fathers\u201d like John Chrysostom right through to later authorities, advocated that Jewish believers in Yeshua should abandon every iota Jewish life (Nicholls 221). Such an idea would have been unrecognizable to the same Yeshua and Paul the Church Fathers claimed to be representing.
\nYeshua commanded us not even to think his coming meant diminishment of the Torah of Israel, and he never envisioned the creation of a new religion (Matt. 5:17\u201319, 23:2\u20133). Rav Sha\u2019ul and the rest of the sh\u2019lichim merely sought the establishment of an inclusive faith context for non-Jews that did not deprive them of their individual non-Jewish national uniqueness (Acts 15:19, 21:25, Eph. 3:14\u201315). The idea of a Jew singing the Doxology rather than the Sh\u2019ma was not their plan. Rav Sha\u2019ul stated bluntly, \u201cI am indeed a Jew\u201d (Acts 22:3 NKJV). Please notice that Paul did not say, \u201cI was a Jew.\u201d He said further, \u201cI have done nothing against our [the Jewish] people or the customs of our fathers\u201d (Acts 28:17 NKJV). This is a far different theology than that of the fourth century enforced oath of departure demanded of Jewish \u201cconverts\u201d to Christianity, as quoted earlier.
\nAlso crucial to the decision Messianic Jews make about where to make their spiritual home are the Scriptures stating that Jewish national identity will either cease or be irrelevant only when the physical laws of universal gravitation cease.<\/p>\n
Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for a light by day, The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night, Who disturbs the sea, And its waves roar (The LORD of Hosts is His Name): \u201cIf those ordinances depart from before Me,\u201d says the LORD, \u201cThen the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me forever.\u201d Thus says the LORD: \u201cIf heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done,\u201d says the LORD. (Jer. 31:35\u201337 NKJV)<\/p>\n
As to whether God would ever cast Israel aside for our sins and replace us with another more favored group called \u201cThe Church\u201d (the bedrock position of \u201cReplacement Theology\u201d), the above passage of Scripture states that this could only occur if mankind could measure the universe exactly on the macro-scale (above) or the micro-scale (beneath). Since physicist Werner Heisenberg\u2019s \u201cUncertainty Principle\u201d has fairly well established we will never be able to measure the sub-atomic realm accurately; and since the universe itself is of such magnitude that to inventory its exact dimensions and total contents seems eternally unachievable; it seems any \u201creplacement\u201d theology lacks biblical basis.
\nUnfathomably, however, a supersessionist view of \u201cThe Church over Israel\u201d forms a major part of the justification for some Yeshua-believing Jews to choose church going. Strong voices such as John Chrysostom\u2019s directly contrast Jewishness against New Testament faith. Chrysostom is hailed into the modern era as one of the best voices of Christian doctrine, and yet he said, \u201cDon\u2019t you realize, if Jewish rites are holy and venerable, our way of life must be false?\u201d (Nicholls 271). Chrysostom advocates departure from Jewish customary practice. By so doing, he contradicts the direct prescription of Scripture for Jewish believers.
\nExamination of customary faith practices is how the need for Messianic Jews to attend Messianic synagogues becomes most apparent. Yeshua of Nazareth spoke of Jewish practice of Torah as follows:<\/p>\n
Do not think that I have come to destroy the Torah, or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass, not one yod or one stroke shall in any manner pass from the Torah, until all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches other men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:17\u201319 NKJV, with modifications and emphasis)<\/p>\n
This passage is about practice and the teaching of practice. Is it not fascinating that Yeshua cited Jeremiah\u2019s same physical timepieces when explaining the relevance of the Torah for Jewish believers in light of his redemptive mission? Upon the above basis, in light of Jeremiah 31:35\u201337, the idea that God is somehow either pleased by (or indifferent to) abandonment of Jewish identity or Torah observance seems biblically untenable.
\nYet, this is exactly where synagogue life shines. Synagogues convene for worship on the day of Shabbat because the Torah commands Israel to have a holy convocation on that day, (Lev. 23:3). Thus, a synagogue attending Messianic Jew dwells in and broadcasts Jewish perpetuity by his worship attendance habits. Church going has the opposite effect. Jews, by custom, study the Scriptures in our holy convocations in the context of the Torah and Haftarah ceremonies, with the traditional blessings of the Torah forming the setting in which the jewel of the Torah rests. Church services do not practice these customs, nor must they (Acts 15:19; 21:25). We have not even included life-cycle events such as circumcisions, b\u2019nai mitzvah ceremonies, and marriages.
\nScripture benignly assumes the presence and availability of synagogue practice for whoever wants it (Acts 15:21). It is not condemned or tagged for avoidance. For Jews, there are synagogues. For Messianic Jews, there is the \u201csynagoguing of yourselves together\u201d (Heb. 10:25). These places of assembly are now known as Messianic synagogues.
\nGod speaks of the season of spiritual return in which we are living: \u201cAnd I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes (hukai), and you will keep My judgments (mishpatai), and do them (Ezek. 36:27 KJV).\u201d The hukim and the mishpatim are the Hebrew words for the ceremonial, and national incumbencies upon Israel such as Passover (Exod. 12:14), Yom Kippur (Lev. 16:31), the social laws of Leviticus 18, and the entire body of Law conveyed at Sinai (Lev. 26:46). The passage does not merely use the generic Hebrew word Torah (instruction) that has been held forth by some supersessionist theologians as \u201cThe Law of Messiah\u201d\u2014a Torah\/Law supposedly different from and superseding the Law of Moses (see Fruchtenbaum 649\u2013657).
\nWe will not just be generically Messianic (Acts 21:25). We will be Messianic Jews (Acts 21:24).
\nThis is not to say that we Messianic believers swallow all historic Jewish precepts or talmudic culture wholesale. I believe Messianism has as much to teach by what it rejects as by what it affirms. The practical core of talmudic Judaism is the S\u2019yag l\u2019Torah (fence around the Torah) philosophy, by which the \u201cfence\u201d of man-made commandments has been erected to keep us distant enough from the biblical commandments to prevent their breakage (Avoth 1:1; 6\u20137). This and many other arenas of Jewish faith will be undergoing takkanah (doctrinal revision) among all segments of Jewry as the Messianic movement makes more inroads into Jewish conversation across time. Yeshua modeled this kind of healthy reevaluation for us (Mark 7:1\u201325). So long as the standard we hold is faithful to the letter and spirit of Scripture (Deut. 18:21\u201322, Isa. 8:20), we shall do well.
\nMay the Holy One of Israel do as He sees fit among us, in His own good time.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What Scriptures speak directly to the question of Jewish practice being retained by Jewish believers in Yeshua?
\n\u2022 What early Church Father spoke strongly against Messianic Jewish retention of Jewish customs and rites, and what did they say?
\n\u2022 What customs in the Jewish life cycle would Jewish churchgoers find difficult to practice in a church setting?
\n\u2022 Is there any Scripture indicating that Yeshua or Paul ever broke with a Torah commandment, or established Jewish custom? If so, where and under what circumstances?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Blackman, Philip, ed. Mishnayot. New York: Judaica, 1983.
\nCohn-Sherbok, Dan. Messianic Judaism. London: Cassel, 2000
\nFruchtenbaum, Arnold. Israelology, Tustin: Ariel, 1992.
\nHebrew Old & New Testaments, Jerusalem: Bible Society in Israel, 1991.
\nKittel, Rudolf, ed. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1977.
\nLevine, Lee I. The Ancient Synagogue, New Haven: Yale, 2000.
\nMeier, John P. A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. New York: Anchor, 1994. Nestle, Erwin, Eberhard Nestle, Kurt Aland, and Barbara Aland, eds. Greek-English New Testament, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1981.
\nNicholls, William. Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate, Northvale: Jason Aronson, 1993.
\nStern, David H. The Beresford Case Judgment: Unofficial Translation, Jerusalem, 1990.
\nThe Lion in Winter. Dir. Anthony Harvey. Acvo Embassy, 1968.<\/p>\n
Bruce L. Cohen is founding rabbi of Congregation Beth El of Manhattan. In Messianic ministry since the 1970s, he has served as principal and teacher in a Messianic day school, and director and teacher of synagogue yeshiva and b\u2019nai mitzvah programs. Rabbi Cohen has also been the Development Chairman for the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America and a composer\/producer for the Kol Simcha musical ensemble. He and his wife, Debra, have two sons.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 7:
\nMESSIANIC JEWS MAY JOIN
\nBIBLE-BELIEVING CHURCHES<\/p>\n
\u2014Jim Sibley<\/p>\n
The pastor of a new Baptist congregation in a northern city called my office with a request for assistance. A Messianic congregation in the area had split over significant doctrinal error. A substantial segment had left the congregation and for weeks had been meeting in homes for Bible study and prayer. None, however, felt qualified or gifted for leadership, and thus they were exploring their options. Finally, they had decided to join this young church. The pastor told me that this decision had awakened his church to the needs of the substantial Jewish population in the area. He also realized his own lack of preparation to minister effectively to his new, Messianic Jewish members.
\nIn the weeks that followed, I had the opportunity both to encourage the Jewish believers and to offer training to the pastor and his congregation. This body of believers eventually decided that they should launch a Messianic fellowship within the church. The Gentile believers were instructed about the Jewish roots of their faith, and the fellowship afforded an opportunity for the Jewish believers to maintain and to deepen their own Jewish identity and heritage. They also received solid Bible teaching and demonstrated the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers in Messiah.
\nThe rise of the Messianic congregational movement in the last half of the twentieth century has afforded Jewish believers an unprecedented choice. In many cases, Messianic congregations are a viable alternative to membership in denominational churches. In the future, these congregations will doubtless multiply and mature. At present, however, the decision can be agonizing for some. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Jews who believe in Yeshua are members of culturally Gentile churches. I recently heard that there were more Jewish believers at Willow Creek Community Church, alone, than the combined Jewish membership of all the Messianic congregations in the Chicago area. Whether this is actually the case or not, the larger point is hardly to be argued.
\nIn the first century, the question was, \u201cCan a Gentile believe in Yeshua without first becoming Jewish?\u201d More recently, the question is, \u201cCan a Jew believe in Jesus and still be Jewish?\u201d However, in Messianic Jewish circles, the question seems to be, \u201cCan a Jew go to church and still be Jewish?\u201d Who has the right to determine if the choice to join a local church is \u201cacceptable\u201d? Do the leaders of Messianic organizations or Jewish mission executives or church leadership have the right to decide whether any particular Messianic Jew should join a church or a Messianic congregation? Ultimately, the decision rests with the individual or the family as they prayerfully seek the Lord\u2019s direction for their lives. Others are entitled to their opinions, but must trust that God is leading in the lives of his children. The only absolute and objective standard of \u201cacceptability\u201d is the Word of God.
\nI write as one who has both planted and led Messianic congregations in Israel and who enthusiastically affirms the value of biblically sound, culturally Jewish congregations. Yet, too often, one may see the very attitudes of spiritual pride on the part of Messianic Jews that have characterized\u2014and all too often still characterize\u2014the predominantly Gentile Church throughout most of its history. Because Christendom has excluded and persecuted Jewish people throughout most of its history, it is understandable that some Jewish believers would want to move away from the Church and to focus exclusively on the development of Messianic Judaism. Sometimes, predictably, one encounters Church-bashing in Messianic circles. Sometimes there are partisans in Messianic congregations who sneeringly refer to any Jewish member of a church as a \u201cHebrew Christian,\u201d in an effort to disenfranchise such a person of his or her Jewishness. We must remember the words of Ya\u2019akov, leader of the first Messianic congregation when he said:<\/p>\n
Do not speak against one another, brethren. He who speaks against a brother, or judges his brother, speaks against the law, and judges the law; but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law, but a judge of it. (James 4:11)<\/p>\n
This admonition should serve as a reminder that all must take pains to speak and act out of humility and the awareness that we cannot claim any credit either for our ethnicity, which we received through our parents, or our salvation, which has been received as a gift.<\/p>\n
A Biblical Perspective<\/p>\n
Ethnically, there are only two categories in the Scriptures: Jew and Gentile. Culturally, all Gentiles, whether French, Chinese, African, or Latin American, share something in common\u2014their cultures are not Jewish. This is not just an ethno-centric inanity, for of all nations, God has chosen Israel alone:<\/p>\n
For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. (Deut. 7:6)<\/p>\n
God has said that through Israel he would bless all nations:<\/p>\n
Now the LORD said to Abram, \u201cGo forth from your father\u2019s country, and from your relatives and from your father\u2019s house, to the land which I will show you; and I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and so you shall be a blessing; and I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.\u201d (Gen. 12:1\u20133)<\/p>\n
This blessing would come pre-eminently through Israel\u2019s Messiah and the New Covenant that he would initiate with the remnant of Israel. This was prophesied in Jeremiah:<\/p>\n
\u201cBehold, days are coming,\u201d declares the LORD, \u201cwhen I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,\u201d declares the LORD. (Jer. 31:31\u201332)<\/p>\n
Jeremiah\u2019s prophecy was fulfilled symbolically in the Last Supper that Yeshua shared with his disciples (as representatives of the remnant of Israel) and ultimately in the death of Messiah: \u201cAnd in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, \u201cThis cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood\u201d (Luke 22:20).
\nAt the first Shavu\u2019ot following the resurrection of Messiah, this New Covenant community would be empowered by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2) and Messiah would begin to build an entirely new entity (Matt. 16:18), a people comprised of both the remnant of Israel together with Gentiles who would place their faith in Messiah for the atonement of sin. This new entity is thus a composite unity comprised of the remnant of Israel, together with Gentile believers, who have joined themselves to the God of Israel, through the death, burial, and resurrection of Messiah.
\nThis is not a unity of uniformity, however, but of diversity. For example, Paul writes, in Eph. 3:4, 6:<\/p>\n
And by referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Messiah, \u2026 to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Messiah Yeshua through the gospel. (cf. Rom. 11:17\u201324; Eph. 2:11\u201322)<\/p>\n
God has promised to preserve the remnant of Israel in this unity. Arnold Fruchtenbaum is correct in highlighting the importance of this doctrine by beginning with it in his essay, \u201cMessianic Jews and Their Congregations\u201d (123\u2013124). Paul was insistent, as well:<\/p>\n
I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? \u201cLord, they have killed Thy prophets, they have torn down Thine altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.\u201d But what is the divine response to him? \u201cI have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.\u201d In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God\u2019s gracious choice. (Rom. 11:1\u20135, cf. vv. 16\u201317, 24)<\/p>\n
This new unity is one in which he has ordered that no Gentile should become a Jew and that no Jew should become a Gentile.<\/p>\n
Was any man called already circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God. Let each man remain in that condition in which he was called. (1 Cor. 7:18\u201320)<\/p>\n
Yet it is a unity\u2014in order that in Yeshua, \u201cHe might make the two into one new man\u201d (Eph. 2:15). Here we find not a separate body for each nation and people, not two brothers (one Jewish and the other Gentile). In fact, the New Covenant is replete with passages that speak of the fact that in Messiah, there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile with reference to salvation or fellowship in the Body. For example, Paul says in Gal. 3:27\u201329:<\/p>\n
For all of you who were baptized into Messiah have clothed yourselves with Messiah. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Messiah Yeshua. And if you belong to Messiah, then you are Abraham\u2019s offspring, heirs according to promise. (cf. Rom. 10:12; Gal. 6:15; and Col. 3:11)<\/p>\n
These passages are not saying that these distinctives are no longer present or relevant. There are still instructions in the New Covenant that are addressed specifically to men as men and to women as women. Likewise, Paul specifically addresses Gentiles in Rom. 11:13, and we have an epistle in the New Covenant addressed to the \u201cHebrews.\u201d These passages are simply saying that the way of salvation is the same for all, and that our differences should not contradict our unity in Messiah. In fact, the Church of the New Covenant was one composed of both Jew and Gentile.
\nA variety of local congregations are described in the New Covenant. The congregation in Jerusalem was, apparently, fully Jewish with no mention of Gentile members. The congregations in Samaria, as far as we know, were comprised only of Samaritans. There may have been other congregations that did not have any Jewish members. However, if this is so, I am unaware of them. The vast majority of the congregations mentioned in the New Covenant were of mixed (i.e., both Jewish and Gentile) membership.<\/p>\n
A Congregational Perspective<\/p>\n
Gentile believers too often want to deny Jewish believers the right to be distinct, and Jewish believers too often want to deny their unity with Gentile believers. In other words, some of the Gentile members are not very happy about including the Jewish members, and some of the Jewish members are equally unhappy about being lumped in with the Goyim. How much evidence is required to demonstrate the obvious: That we desperately need each other?
\nHow can this need be met unless there is a vital connection between Messianic Jews and Gentile Christians? If there are deficiencies and misunderstandings in the predominantly Gentile congregations, how will it help to quarantine them from Messianic Jews? Separatism is not the answer. We must not abandon the Church! If one loves Yeshua, he will love the things Yeshua loves. Paul said:<\/p>\n
Husbands, love your wives, just as Messiah also loved the Church and gave Himself up for her; that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the Word, that He might present to Himself the Church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. (Eph. 5:25\u201327)<\/p>\n
Translations are problematic. If you translate ekklesia as \u201cChurch,\u201d it does not sound as though you are referring to Messianic Jews. If you translate it as \u201cMessianic community,\u201d it does not sound as though the reference includes the predominantly Gentile Church. But, let there be no misunderstanding. That for which our Messiah died, and that which he loves, includes both Jewish and Gentile believers, in both Jewish and Gentile culture congregations.
\nMessianic Jewish leaders and authors have made the same point. Jeffrey S. Wasserman, in his book, Messianic Jewish Congregations: Who Sold This Business to the Gentiles, quotes Dan Juster and Stuart Dauermann (see 101\u2013103). In The Nature of Messianic Judaism, Mark Kinzer provides a different application (see 34\u201335). Yet, the way forward is not articulated often. The answer lies not in an \u201ceither\/or\u201d framework, but in \u201cboth\/and.\u201d We must affirm the validity of both Messianic congregations and of the full participation of Jewish believers in churches; of Jewish congregational planters and evangelists in both Jewish and in Gentile contexts. There is a rich heritage of Jewish believers in pioneer work in many countries of the world. Have not the redeemed of Israel been made a \u201clight of the nations so that [His] salvation may reach to the end of the earth\u201d (Isa. 49:6)? Yes, there are times when even \u201ca Hebrew of Hebrews\u201d (Phil. 3:5) needs to become as \u201cthose who are without the law \u2026 that I might win those who are without law\u201d (1 Cor. 9:21).
\nAnother way to approach this separatism would be to imagine the consequences, should this view really prevail. A case could be made that Messianic congregations would become ingrown and fractious; anti-Semitism would be allowed to regain a foothold in the Church; Replacement Theology would be largely unchecked; and Jewish evangelism would drop precipitously. Wasserman says, \u201cTraditional Protestant Evangelical churches have been far more successful in Jewish evangelism than Messianic congregations.\u201d He then points out that in Rom. 11:11, \u201cThe apostle Paul saw Gentile salvation as God\u2019s primary method for Jewish evangelism\u201d (106).
\nActually, the neglect of Jewish evangelism, in particular, by all of the major denominations following the Holocaust had the effect of marginalizing Jewish believers and Messianic ministries. The lack of active support from the major denominations gave credence to the charge that it was indeed impossible to be both Jewish and a follower of Yeshua, and those who objected were written off as either deranged or dishonest. Yet, paradoxically, when the major Protestant and evangelical denominations give their support and encouragement to Jewish ministry and to Messianic Jews, not only does the number of Messianic Jews and Messianic congregations increase, but they are seen as more legitimately Jewish.<\/p>\n
The Challenges for the Future<\/p>\n
The primary challenge for the future will be to raise up healthy congregations in both Jewish and Gentile cultures that are biblically sound and spiritually vibrant, and that are following the biblical mandate of proclaiming the Good News of Messiah \u201cto the Jew especially and also to the Gentile\u201d (Rom. 1:16, author\u2019s translation). These congregations should enthusiastically affirm differing cultural expressions, yet with a focus on the source of our unity\u2014the person and work of Yeshua HaMashiach. He is the essence of Jewishness. He is the crown jewel of the Torah. When a believer wants more than Yeshua, he usually gets less, for he is the Alef and the Tav, the Alpha and the Omega.
\nWithin churches, ways need to be developed to assist Jewish believers in maintaining their Jewish identity and heritage. Messianic fellowships are part of the solution, but Sunday school literature that emphasizes the Jewishness of our faith would be a welcome addition. Contexts in which Jewish believers could lead their predominantly Gentile churches in celebrating the feasts of Israel and in instructing them in how better to pray for, and reach out to, the non-believing Jewish community are also desperately needed.
\nAffirming Messianic Jews who choose to join Bible-believing churches enriches the heritage of all Jewish believers. Instead of identifying only with a movement that began to fade from the scene in the second century, Jewish believers can claim a heritage that stretches back two thousand years (\u201cChristianized\u201d Jews who were motivated more by a desire for revenge than sincere faith, such as Nicholas Donin, notwithstanding). They can praise the God of Israel, not only for the preservation of the Jewish people, but also for the preservation of the remnant of Israel throughout history.<\/p>\n
Note: For all quotations of Scripture, I have used the NASB, with two modifications: I have substituted \u201cMessiah\u201d for \u201cChrist\u201d and \u201cYeshua\u201d for \u201cJesus.\u201d<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What additional steps should churches take to assist Jewish members in enhancing their distinctives as Messianic Jews?
\n\u2022 How can informed and sensitive Gentile believers assist Jewish believers in having a voice in churches?
\n\u2022 What biblical passages suggest that witness will be enhanced through a demonstration of the unity between Jewish and Gentile believers in Yeshua?
\n\u2022 How can one legitimately express ethnicity, yet avoid the dangers of ethno-centrism?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Fruchtenbaum, Arnold. \u201cMessianic Jews and Their Congregations.\u201d Jewish Identity and Faith in Jesus, Ed. Kai Kjaer-Hansen. Jerusalem: Caspari Center, 1996. 123\u2013135.
\nKinzer, Mark. The Nature of Messianic Judaism. West Hartford: Hashivenu Archives, 2000.
\nWasserman, Jeffrey S. Messianic Jewish Congregations: Who Sold This Business to the Gentiles? Lanham: Univ. Press of America, 2000.<\/p>\n
Jim Sibley is Coordinator of Jewish Ministry for the Southern Baptist North American Mission Board and is based in Dallas, Texas. An SBC representative in Israel for fourteen years, he helped plant two messianic congregations. Jim served on the editorial board of Mishkan, and as a member of the International Coordinating Committee of the Lausanne Consultation on Jewish Evangelism. He has taught courses related to Judaism and Jewish Evangelism at SBC seminaries and colleges.<\/p>\n
HOW SHOULD AN ASSOCIATION OF MESSIANIC CONGREGATIONS BE STRUCTURED?<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 8:
\nA REPRESENTATIVE
\nPRESENCE<\/p>\n
\u2014Barney Kasdan<\/p>\n
As one reflects on the rebirth of Messianic Judaism in recent decades, many observations become apparent, including its statistical growth as well as its qualitative development. Not surprisingly, such growth has also brought several requisite challenges. One of the vital questions confronting us in the 21st century is how will we structure ourselves in the coming decades? This is not a simple question, especially in light of the diversity and independence reflected within the Jewish community. As the story goes, Golda Meir was once meeting with a foreign dignitary who commiserated that he was having a difficult time as the Prime Minister of a country of ten million citizens. To which Golda asked, \u201cHow would you like to be the leader of a country that has three million Prime Ministers?\u201d Despite our independent spirit, there has also been a felt need among most Messianic Jews to come together, as illustrated by the various Jewish missions, conferences, and member organizations. What can we learn from history and what might our movement look like in the coming years? I see three key values that help answer these questions: Representative Presence, Directive Policies, and Interdependent Participation.
\nBy the first concept, Representative Presence, I mean that our movement must hear the collective voice of our members. Certainly, this has long been a cherished value in the Jewish community. As God spoke in the Torah concerning the structure of Israel, we see a representative voice for the various classes of society. Necessary lines of communication were established through the heads of families, clans, and tribes. The establishment of the Levites also served this purpose, as they were to be, in this sense, the voice of the people before God. This structure was not fully democratic in essence. However, it was a representative form of government that gave virtually every Israelite a voice in the community. While post-exilic Judaism saw some significant changes in emphasis, this value of representation remained strong, as illustrated in the times of Ezra with the development of the local synagogue and the Great Assembly.
\nThe B\u2019rit Hadashah also reflects this value of a Representative Presence as the early believers in Yeshua sought to effectively organize themselves. In his statement, \u201cI will build my k\u2019hillah,\u201d we should not assume that Yeshua was foreseeing an entirely different structure than the one which he and his Jewish followers would already be familiar with (Matt. 16:18). The earlier models of the Temple and synagogue would most assuredly be the first ideas that would come to mind. This is why one of the tenets of Messianic Judaism is that we are indeed a Judaism which can and should make use of Jewish models when they are consistent with our faith. The record of the larger first century Messianic community also confirms this. Ya\u2019akov wrote to the Messianic Jews of the Diaspora, who were meeting in synagogues (see James 1:1; 2:2 CJB). Sha\u2019ul has much to say about the structure of the local believers including the need for z\u2019keynim to be a representative voice of the congregations (Titus 1:5). Clearly, there were some excesses in later history, most notably in the hierarchical structures of the episcopal\/papal models of the church. This was one of the reasons that Luther\u2019s Reformation took hold, as a large group of New Testament believers desired a more representative form of government. Much of the modern Protestant movement and the Jewish community still uphold the importance of the voice of the larger community.
\nSince this theme of Representative Presence is found throughout both the Scriptures and later historical models, in our day, we would do well to consider the implications. Among Jewish believers today, there are organizations ranging from alliances for individual membership (in many countries including Israel) to the para-congregational Jewish missions that are closely connected to Gentile church structures. However, the centralized voice of Messianic Judaism is being clearly heard through the more recently founded organizations for congregations that are based in the U.S.A. Among them, are the IAMCS, which is affiliated with the MJAA, and the UMJC. As the current President of the UMJC, I can speak to the strengths of the latter. One of the main reasons for the formation of the UMJC in 1979 was, in fact, to encourage the value that I call \u201cRepresentative Presence.\u201d The felt need at the time was to provide a voice for the growing number of Messianic synagogues in America and the rest of the world.
\nOne of the differences between the UMJC and the MJAA was the creation of a system of delegates who would represent every member congregation. The UMJC continues to be a delegate-based organization that consequently, provides every full member congregation with an equal voice. This filters down throughout the structure in that every significant policy must be delegate approved. These representatives also have the right to be appointed to the Steering Committee, which directs the various sub-committees of the organization. Likewise, the delegates nominate and elect the Executive Committee that contains the officers of the Union. While there may be different formats of structure (e.g., hierarchical, autonomous, pure democracy, etc.), I believe that the UMJC structure provides a healthy model that is consistent with the principles of Tanakh and the modern Jewish community. At first glance, the democratic (majority rules) model appears as a noble alternative, but it is actually the republic\/representative form that insures the equal rights of the minority. This representative form, similar to the government of the United States of America, fosters communication as well as a vital system of checks and balances.
\nAs we think about the future of Messianic Judaism, there is a second need to be addressed\u2014a structure that can formulate Directive Policies. We should admit that much of the last few decades of our movement have emanated from a quasi \u201canti-establishment\u201d and free spirit of the 1960s. Many of the current leaders in Messianic Judaism (myself included) came to our faith in Yeshua during this tumultuous time with a strong assist from the \u201cJesus movement.\u201d No doubt, this foundation brought a certain vitality and zeal to our community. However, just now, we are becoming more fully cognizant of our need for concrete directives. At this point, it is informative to note this structural need within Jewish history and to see how it was addressed. In the Torah, this need became apparent as Moses sought direction for the newly redeemed nation. While the Levites served a vital religious need in the community, judicial policies were to be formulated through a series of z\u2019keynim, shoftim (judges), and later, through kings. No one group was to wield an inordinate amount of power as a system of checks was built in. Proper representation was tempered with accountability through such checks and balances. Post-exilic Judaism also exemplified these deeply held values, albeit within the newly developed forms of the local synagogue, local beyt din, and the famous Sanhedrin (Supreme Court). All of these served to give direction\u2014with accountability\u2014to the community of Israel. Those of us who are involved in Messianic Judaism would do well to learn the lessons of these historical entities as we seek to guide our contemporary movement.
\nIt is a healthy indicator that the great majority of our contemporary congregations have a system of checks and balances through a plurality of elders. Interestingly, Sha\u2019ul notes that many of the Messianic congregations were affiliated together within the various locales (note the plural term \u201ccongregations of Galatia\u201d in Galatians 1:2). Likewise, as theological questions or disputes arose, there was a form of a Messianic \u201cSanhedrin\u201d to address these issues. The Acts 15 controversy (over the Gentile inclusion into the faith of Yeshua) was addressed within this structure. Hence, we see that although the realities of New Covenant faith bring certain changes in our approach to God, the early Jewish (and Gentile) believers in Yeshua most naturally followed the only form of government with which they were familiar. The fact that they perceived themselves as still grafted into the rich olive tree of Israel is reflected not only theologically and culturally, but also in the structures of the new movement (cf. Rom. 11:17\u201318).
\nAs the past eras of Israel illustrate, there is also a growing need in Messianic Judaism for a somewhat centralized structure in which to give directives. As with the larger Jewish community, it behooves us to place great emphasis on educational credentials. As with other new movements, Messianic Judaism has sometimes had to combat the belief in some circles that institutional education was somehow \u201cunspiritual.\u201d However, as we have matured, many now see the desirability, in fact the need, for qualified clergy. If we are to direct our movement and even establish common policies, we must have more trained leaders who are theologically equipped and culturally astute. The UMJC has been on the forefront of this trend and continues to raise the bar in the Yeshiva program (which now requires seventeen core courses). We have also emphasized the Excellence in Ministry Continuing Education program for ordained UMJC leaders. Other programs are growing as well, including various Messianic Institutes across North America and the world. Like other Jewish denominations, we must pursue a high standard for s\u2019michah of our future rabbis\u2014as well as quality training programs for Messianic cantors and even mohelim (ritual circumcisers). We are still the \u201cPeople of the Book\u201d and our educational programs need to strongly reflect this as we face the 21st century. In times past, there were not many strong Messianic Jewish educational institutions. Many, like myself, did graduate work on both the Christian and Jewish sides. Although some may still opt for such a dualistic educational approach in the future, it is the major congregational organizations (e.g., UMJC, IAMCS, etc.), which will be best equipped to provide such structure within a specifically Messianic Jewish context.
\nBesides the need for a Messianic Jewish s\u2019michah, our trained clergy will be called upon to decide issues of halakhah. As with the early New Testament believers, the modern Messianic movement will be faced with some crucial issues. How will we answer such questions as the conversion of Gentiles, the ordination of women, intermarriage, and the response to divorce? As the Acts 15 council, in essence, decided some halakhic issues, we will surely be faced with some similar, contemporary issues to be addressed. Likewise, there will certainly be some judicial or disciplinary controversies to be adjudicated. Unlike our earlier ad hoc approach to such things, I believe we will need established bodies to serve as a beyt din to resolve such questions. Messianic Judaism of the 20th century was forced to face such issues within each autonomous congregation, or perhaps, by leaning upon existing, non-Jewish structures. The UMJC has made good strides in both areas by offering non-binding, theological papers as well as an in-house Judicial Committee. Surely, one of the looming challenges we face in the coming years is the establishment of respected bodies that will be able to give Directive Policies.
\nA third element that affects the organizational structure of Messianic Judaism can be summed up in the phrase Interdependent Participation. This may be contrasted with the polarities of total independence or centralized dependence. No doubt, many Messianic Jews tend to be independent thinkers. We have had to think \u201coutside the box\u201d to even come to our faith in Yeshua. Although we have come together in such structures as the UMJC or MJAA, we have thus far, stopped short of developing a centralized denomination. Again, we can learn from the development of synagogue history.
\nFor many centuries, after the destruction of the Second Temple, Judaism retained an almost exclusive homogeneity. The only brand of rabbinic Judaism to be found was what we call Orthodox Judaism. This began to change in the 18th century due to the forces of the Haskalah (European Enlightenment). An alternative form of liberal Judaism, Reform Judaism, was birthed in Germany. In the early 20th century, yet another form called Conservative Judaism emerged, taking the middle ground between the two other movements. Today, there are several denominational structures within world Jewry. Some, like Reform Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbok, question why Messianic Judaism should not be considered as a valid branch of the menorah connected to the larger, pluralistic Jewish community (Cohn-Sherbok 212). It is noteworthy that each of these groups takes it upon themselves to ordain their own clergy, decide judicial issues, and define halakhah as they see it. I believe that the 21st century will see Messianic Judaism draw closer towards this model. In fact, it is rather amazing that the Messianic movement (including missions, alliances, and unions) has had such broad consensus and unity in so many areas up until now. In my estimation, it would be ideal to continue in a format like the UMJC; that is, a \u201cbig umbrella\u201d organization which can encompass a broad spectrum of Messianic Jewish congregational expressions.
\nWe have seen great benefit by working together even within our present diversity. Differences in Jewish expression (Orthodox to liberal), theology (covenant to dispensational), and spiritual practices (Pentecostal to non-charismatic) have sometimes challenged our flexibility. Yet, they have also added a richness in the unity of the UMJC. It has probably been to our benefit that, as a younger movement, we have not had the luxury or critical mass to split over such non-essential issues. Realistically, as we continue to grow, the day may come where, like the larger Jewish community, there will be a multitude of expressions within mainline Messianic Judaism. Perhaps, we will develop denominational structures for \u201cOrthodox, Conservative, and Reform\u201d expressions of Messianic Judaism. While some may oppose such a concept, I believe this may actually serve as a blessing as our movement expands\u2014if done for legitimate reasons and with the proper spirit. Indeed, if important differences develop in issues of theology or halakhah, it could be more problematic to try to stay together under the same organizational umbrella. Unity among believers in Yeshua will always be vital, yet this does not demand uniformity.
\nIn an ideal world, most Messianic synagogues would happily join the existing, local Jewish Federation. Perhaps the future will bring enough understanding and trust that the larger Jewish community, in the spirit of sincere pluralism, will officially welcome Messianic Judaism into their midst. Undoing two thousand years of misunderstandings on both sides will be no easy matter, but God has done even bigger miracles in our history! If it is not to be, there are yet other options. As the Jewish Federation brings together such a wide range of organizations and synagogues, so too the Messianic community may develop to a point of joining together in a similar structure for support on common issues such as Israel, shared resources, and our mutual faith. We should likewise note that even within autonomous Messianic Jewish organizations, it will be vital to continue the spiritual relationship and interaction we have with the Gentile branch of the church. However, instead of assimilating into it, I propose that we can best serve the interests of both the Jewish and Gentile branches as we retain our Jewish \u201csaltiness\u201d in Yeshua (cf. Matt. 5:13).
\nWhatever form it may take, the desired core value that we must pursue is Interdependent Participation; that is, interacting together while acknowledging our diversity. Since our people are often described as the Jewish \u201ccommunity,\u201d it follows that a relevant and successful Messianic Judaism should relate via a similar model of community. Organizations for individual Jewish believers will continue to have an important role (e.g., the IMJA, which connects people globally). The Jewish mission structures can likewise continue to contribute to the Messianic community as they share the message of Yeshua in the public square. The weakness of the mission approach is that there is often a \u201cconversion of communities\u201d as well to the non-Jewish church. While there are some Jews who will opt for this choice, it will continue to not be a viable option for the greater percentage of Jews who desire to stay (at least) culturally Jewish. The future of Messianic Judaism must continue to embrace this central value by relating to our world within the Jewish cultural milieu. If organizational structures relate more within the context of \u201cchurches,\u201d \u201cmissions,\u201d and \u201cpastors\u201d\u2014then they face the historic danger of being irrelevant to the bulk of the Jewish community. It seems much more logical, even biblically based in principle, to sincerely relate in the context of \u201csynagogues,\u201d \u201cfederations,\u201d and \u201crabbis\u201d\u2014as we express the Jewishness of our faith in Yeshua as the Messiah (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19\u201320).
\nNonetheless, even if we differ in structures and methodology, we need to realize our interdependence upon one another in the larger Messianic community. This is illustrated in the Midrash that describes Israel \u201clike a company of men on board a ship. One of them took a drill and began to bore a hole under him. The other passengers said to him, \u2018What are you doing?\u2019 He replied, \u2018what has that to do with you? Am I not making the hole under my seat?\u2019 They retorted, \u2018But the water will enter and drown us all!\u2019 \u201d (Lev. Raba IV.6). The Messianic Jewish community, as diverse as it may be, is seated together in the same boat. God has been faithful to watch over us in the early years of our renewed movement. As we navigate the future, these three values will assist us greatly: Representative Presence, Directive Policies, and Interdependent Participation. We have the promise that we will indeed fulfill our calling within the organizational structures of the future as we keep our eyes on Yeshua, the Author and Finisher of our faith (Heb. 12:2).<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Why were the Levites chosen to represent the larger body of Israel?
\n\u2022 Who were the members of the Sanhedrin?
\n\u2022 How were the values of Representative Presence, Directive Policies and Interdependent Participation demonstrated in the Tanakh and B\u2019rit Hadashah?
\n\u2022 What are the differences between the episcopal, presbyterian, and congregational models of church structures?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Cohn-Sherbok, Dan. Messianic Judaism. London: Cassell, 2000.<\/p>\n
Barney Kasdan is the founding rabbi of Kehilat Ariel Messianic Synagogue in San Diego, California. He has a B.A. degree from Biola University and an M.Div. from Talbot Seminary. He served on the staff of Ariel Ministries for eight years and is ordained through the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, where he currently serves as President. Rabbi Kasdan is the author of the popular books, God\u2019s Appointed Times and God\u2019s Appointed Customs, both published by Messianic Jewish Publishers.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 9:
\nA CENTRALLY RUN
\nORGANIZATION<\/p>\n
\u2014Robert Cohen<\/p>\n
The question before us is \u201cHow should an association of Messianic congregations be structured?\u201d I will argue that such an association should be centrally run, as is the IAMCS\u2014as opposed to democratically run.
\nThe IAMCS is a Steering Committee comprised of nine members, all of whom are rabbis, appointed by a chairman. The President of the MJAA appoints this chairman. The President\u2019s appointment of the chairman is made with the approval of the Executive Committee of the MJAA, a body elected from the member-ship at the bi-annual business meeting during the Messiah Conference. Although the IAMCS is appointed as the Steering Committee to oversee the rabbinical organization, the Executive Committee is elected in a democratic manner.
\nSince the beginning of the IAMCS, the Executive Committee of the Alliance has been composed mostly of rabbis. In effect, we have rabbis appointing rabbis, which produces a consistency of leadership. The reason this structure works best for us is because it evolved out of who we are as an organization. Our vision, history, leadership, and theology have shaped and formed the structure we have.
\nThe seeds for the vision of the modern Messianic Jewish synagogue movement began in the early years of the MJAA. In 1917, Elias Newman addressed the second Messiah Conference of the MJAA with these words:<\/p>\n
Is the Alliance a mere organization or a providential movement? If it is simply an organization, like one of hundreds of others that exist, we can afford to disregard its principles and its progress.\u2026 But if the Alliance is a great providential movement and not a mere organization, if it is born of God, as we believe it to be, then we must look into God\u2019s design and shape our course by the Divine compass.\u2026 We believe that the Alliance is more than an organization, greater than an idea and is in fact a spiritual force.<\/p>\n
Later he states, \u201cNo council of fathers decreed it. No assembly or conference said it must come \u2026 There was divine life in this Alliance seed and it grew. This is its history in a single sentence \u2026 Men may start an organization, but God starts a movement.\u201d In this quote, the Alliance viewed itself as part of God\u2019s Divine plan. Leaders like John Zacher and Mark Levy would also call upon the Alliance to look favorably upon Jewish Believers in Yeshua, keeping their Jewish identity and starting Messianic Jewish Synagogues. In 1923, John Zacher presented a paper entitled \u201cUntrodden Paths\u201d at the Seventh Annual Conference of the Hebrew Christian Alliance of America (HCAA), the predecessor of the MJAA, which called upon the Alliance to embrace the idea of establishing Messianic Jewish Synagogues. \u201cWe venture to prophesy that the future Jewish missionary effort will accomplish infinitely more through three Hebrew Christian congregations than all the Jewish missions on the American continent combined\u201d (Winer 111). The seeds of the vision were planted. Fifty-two years later the Alliance would look favorably upon the creation of a congregational organization.
\nIn the mid 1970s, the vision and history of the Alliance changed forever. The name was changed from the HCAA to the MJAA; but of more importance, the growth of Messianic synagogues replaced the branches of the Alliance, which were in various cities. By the end of the 1970s, the Messiah Conference of the MJAA saw as its vision, the promoting, assisting and encouraging of the development of Messianic Jewish Synagogues in the U.S. and throughout the world. An intermediate step taken by the formation of a fellowship of leaders, but it was not until 1986 that the IAMCS was formed.
\nAlthough the vision of the concept of Messianic synagogues had its early prophetic voices in the Alliance, latter prophetic voices like those of Martin Chernoff and his family and others in the mid 1970s effected the change of the name and the vision to Messianic Judaism and Messianic Jewish Synagogues. Marty\u2019s vision of an alliance of independent Messianic Jewish congregations coming together in an affiliation under the umbrella of the MJAA would finally happen. As David Chernoff, Marty\u2019s son, and the first chairman of the IAMCS states, \u201cI view the IAMCS as a permanent ministry of the Alliance that God has established. If one thinks of the YMJA [Young Messianic Jewish Alliance] as the right hand of the Alliance, then the IAMCS is the left hand. Together all three form a composite whose strength is greater than any of its separate parts. Our ultimate vision is not just to see the growth of Messianic congregations in the U.S., but to see the movement of Messianic Judaism break forth world-wide\u201d (Winer 65).
\nMost corporations, both non-profit and for-profit, have what is known as a Mission Statement, a proclamation of its purpose for being. This purpose is the key to an organization\u2019s structure. The structure is an outgrowth of the mission statement as evidenced by the following examples. In an interview with Dr. Ruth Fleischer in 1991, Rabbi Daniel Juster, the first General Secretary of the UMJC, said, \u201cThe primary purpose of the UMJC is to strengthen and foster Messianic Jewish Congregations\u201d (Fleischer 104). Because of this, the congregation is viewed as the centerpiece. The presbyterian form of government represents it. Congregations send delegates to conferences to vote on various papers and hold elections. The purpose of the individual delegates is to represent their congregation.
\nThe conferences provide educational resources, leadership training, fellowship, and forums for communication between member congregations. Member congregations support the organization by paying a tithe of two percent. Rabbinical ordination, a Yeshiva, fund-raising programs, inspiration to congregations to plant other congregations, and outreach to the Jewish and Christian communities are some of the missions of the conferences.
\nConferences are held both nationally and regionally. Recently, a Rabbis\u2019 Conference has been instituted as well. Its structure is much more formal and denominational that of the IAMCS.
\nI perceive some drawbacks with the democratic model. Factions and politics could play a big role where nothing could be done if the delegate composition were split, as the U.S. Senate is today, 50\u201350. Individuals that do not hold to the same values as the organization could get in. As we all know, splits have developed along theological issues in some major denominations. The culture that this model creates is more formal and corporate than that of one-on-one or of fellowship. This may be due to the fact that since it is a delegate structure, the delegates view themselves as being there to conduct business.
\nThe IAMCS mission statement is found on its brochure: \u201cThe Spiritual Vision of the IAMCS is to see the outpouring of God\u2019s Spirit upon our Jewish people through Messianic Congregations. The IAMCS is not designed to be a denominational structure, but rather to be an instrument in promoting Messianic revival and to provide for the needs of its members, whatever their affiliations.\u201d From reading the mission statements of both organizations, their differences are apparent.
\nI want to focus on eight major distinctions of the IAMCS mission statement. Because of them, the only way this organization can prosper is to be centrally run.
\nThe first distinction is a spiritual or theological one; to see the outpouring of the Ruach HaKodesh upon the Jewish people through Messianic Congregations. This is based theologically on the belief that we are in the last days, evidenced by the return of Israel to the Land and the fact that Jerusalem is back in Jewish hands. These are viewed as key prophetic events which have been fulfilled, along with the revival of Jewish people receiving Yeshua as their Messiah and the outpouring of God\u2019s Spirit (Ezek. 36, 37; Joel 2:20\u201332; Deut. 30:4\u201310; 1 Kings 21:24.) This is the central fact on which the IAMCS is based. Today we have 125 congregations in our organization.
\nThe second distinction is that the IAMCS views itself as an instrument or vehicle for this move of God\u2019s Spirit. Its defining itself as \u201cnot designed to be a denominational structure\u201d emphasizes this. Its goal is to promote spiritual revival for its members and the revival of the Jewish people. It views congregations as vehicles, not as destinations. The goal is not the congregation, but what that congregation can do to impact the Jewish people.
\nThe third distinction is found in what it has done since its inception; namely, to hold a Rabbis\u2019 Conference yearly. Not only is the IAMCS vision-driven but also leader or rabbi-driven. As someone has said, \u201cEverything rises and falls on leadership.\u201d The emphasis of the IAMCS is to build, strengthen, encourage, and train leaders and to provide support through prayer and ministering one to another, as we do during our Rabbis\u2019 Conference.
\nThe fourth distinction is that the rabbis are interconnected with each other through the planning of our regional conferences, rabbi forums on the web, and the national Rabbis\u2019 Conference, as well as the MJAA national conference. Time is set aside for personal ministry and sharing. Much of the teaching is geared toward the personal and spiritual life of the rabbis, as well as congregational issues. This care flows from the top down. The Steering Committee is diverse and yet its members enjoy and thrive on personally networking with each other. Two of our great values are the unity we have in our common vision and the value of working together as a team. Regional Directors get together with rabbis in their regions to pray for and encourage one another. This is the glue that holds our relationships together. We may come together because of a vision, but we stay together because of the bond of unity and love we have for each other.
\nThe fifth distinction is that we are continually open to more of God\u2019s Spirit in our movement. Messianic Davidic praise and worship (Hebraic music and Israeli dancing) within our congregations, as well as at our conferences is a vital part of our identity.
\nThe sixth distinction is that we actively help in the formation and establishment of new congregations. From the very beginning, we viewed the overall Messianic synagogue movement as a pioneering ministry. The result was that we made joining, ordination, and the Yeshiva more accessible. Because we viewed ourselves as a vehicle, we were able to help congregations establish the criteria for joining the IAMCS, not based on whether the congregation had a certain number of Jewish believers, but based on a percentage. We did not require two percent of the member\u2019s annual income as a membership fee, but $25.00 (the membership fee in 1986, which has increased over the years). Our goal was to help congregations and encourage them in fellowship with a greater community of congregations. Our Yeshiva courses are designed to help them in practical areas. These classes can be taken by correspondence, at one of our regional or national conferences, or at the rabbis\u2019 conferences. We have also given away thousands of dollars to works that have already been started and are in their first couple of years of existence.
\nThe seventh distinction is in our process of ordination. First, the prospective ordinees must already be leading a congregation and a relationship must be established with them through our regional directors. The prospective members must join the MJAA and attend either regional or national conferences. They go through an intern program so they may fulfill the course requirements and develop relationships with those in leadership and with fellow rabbis. This gives the leadership time to know them personally and deal with any issues that may arise. This approach is totally different from that of a seminary or Bible school. We accept that they may have a calling on their life to be a Messianic rabbi, but we will only confirm ordination on them if we are satisfied that they have met the requirements of ordination. However, the process does not automatically result in ordination. The Steering Committee must believe that these persons have a call and have met the requirements; only then will they lay hands on them in ordination. To this date, we have ordained only forty rabbis.
\nThe eighth distinction is what I call the governmental distinction. We operate under the biblical model of appointment to leadership and confirmation by the governing body. The democratic model of voting (much like the process of voting for a congressman or senator) provides for people to select members to represent them in the body, leaving it up to the body to make decisions for their selectors. I believe this is not the Biblical model. We see this in a number of Scriptures. In Acts 6, the disciples lay out the requirements; leaders picked other leaders. The apostles then laid hands on them and confirmed them in the duties and privileges of their office. The governing body of the IAMCS, the MJAA Executive Committee, appoints and confirms the leadership of the Steering Committee. Since the vast majority of those who sit on the Executive Committee are rabbis, we have rabbis appointing and confirming rabbis to lead the rabbinical organization of the MJAA, in the same manner as Rav Sha\u2019ul directed the appointment of elders over Crete. The commission of Sha\u2019ul and Barnabas in Acts 13 provides the example; they were appointed and confirmed with the laying on of hands, and then sent out.
\nIn summary, the organizational structure of the IAMCS, as a centrally run organization, evolved out of the history and vision of the MJAA and its sense of Divine purpose. Though seeds were planted early on, it was not until the 1970s that Marty Chernoff and others began to see the fruition of Messianic synagogues. It was to take another ten years before we saw the formation of the IAMCS. That the IAMCS is a part of the MJAA, not distinct from it, coupled with its mission statement and the eight distinctions, provides evidence that the only workable governing system is one which is centrally run. Most importantly, the appointment and confirmation of members to the Steering Committee conforms to the biblical model of the early Messianic Jewish community. In the next fifty years, we will see which model will prevail.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Who votes for the members of the Executive Committee and what are the qualifications for membership in this committee?
\n\u2022 What are the major differences between the mission of the MJAA and the mission of UMJC in theory and in practice?
\n\u2022 Since those seeking ordination must already be leading a congregation, have they already been ordained somewhere? If so, what is unique about ordination by the MJAA?
\n\u2022 Describe the benefits of a centrally run organization of Messianic Jewish congregations?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Fleischer, Dr. Ruth. \u201cSo Great A Cloud of Witnesses.\u201d U.K. Unpublished paper, 1996.
\nWiner, Dr. Robert. The Calling. Wynnewood: MJAA, 1990.<\/p>\n
Robert Cohen was a radical leftist during the hippie movement of the 1970s. After becoming a believer in Yeshua in 1975, he began working in Cincinnati, Ohio for Messianic Ministries under Martin and David Chernoff. In 1987, he and his wife, Roxanne, answered a call to lead Beth Jacob Messianic Congregation in Jacksonville, Florida. Rabbi Cohen has been involved in Alliance leadership for the past twenty years, and presently serves as Chairman of the IAMCS.<\/p>\n
EDUCATING
\nOURSELVES AND OUR CHILDREN<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 10:
\nMESSIANIC JEWISH HIGHER EDUCATION: AN INTEGRATIONIST APPROACH<\/p>\n
\u2014Michael Rydelnik<\/p>\n
Learning has always been a vital element of Jewish life. Even in the Torah, the king was more than political figure. He was to make his own copy of the Torah and study it all the days of his life (Deut. 17:18\u201319). Ours was the only nation ever required by God to have its rulers be scholars. However, this was not limited to our leaders. God required all Jews to study the Torah, to meditate upon it, and to teach it to our children (Deut. 6:4\u20139).
\nIn time, the Talmud elevated scholarship to such a degree that it stated that \u201cthe scholar takes precedence over the king.\u201d Jewish life is centered on study because we are a people of The Book (as well as other books). After God gave us the sacred Scriptures, the rabbis developed the Mishnah, Gemara, and the Midrash. Thus, the search for meaning from the sacred text became a central feature of the Jewish spiritual quest.
\nIn the medieval period, particularly while under Islamic rule, our people not only studied Jewish subjects, but also philosophy, law, philology, poetry, mathematics, medicine, and science. We transmitted this learning to the Western world, thereby maintaining the spark of knowledge in the dark ages. At this time, when most Gentiles were illiterate, even among the ruling classes, all Jewish people knew how to read. We had to\u2014because of our commitment to the sacred text.
\nIn modern times, we Jews maintained our commitment to learning. The Haskalah (Jewish enlightenment) afforded Jewish people the opportunity to apply Hebrew to secular subjects. Emancipation enabled us to study secular subjects and we responded by becoming physicians, attorneys, and scientists. In the United States, not only were Jewish immigrants allowed to study, they were actually sent to night school to learn the language. The government required Jewish children to go public school with all the other immigrant children. This was remarkable in light of Europe\u2019s exclusion or quota systems. To the further amazement of our grandparents and great-grandparents, this was free of charge.<\/p>\n
The Need for Messianic Jewish Theological Education<\/p>\n
So why this paean to the history of Jewish learning? Because unfortunately, we in the Messianic movement, have too often undervalued the need for theological education in our congregations. Perhaps, we do this because we want only to be taught \u201cby the Spirit\u201d or maybe we only want Messianic Jewish (and not Gentile) teachers. Whatever the reason, our lack of learning has resulted in some Messianic leaders who know little or no Hebrew, cannot defend sound doctrine, or are weak at understanding and\/or teaching the Scriptures. Too often, our preaching is comprised of simplistic homilies with a smattering of Yiddish or Hebrew. If this is the state of the leadership, then what of the people? For the Messianic movement to grow in size, strength, and spiritual vitality, our leaders must be well trained in biblical theology, biblical exegesis and exposition, Jewish studies, leadership, homiletics, teaching, and pastoral care. Education is not a panacea to cure all our ills. However, it will provide for a stronger Messianic movement in the future.<\/p>\n
The Options in Messianic Jewish Theological Education<\/p>\n
There are a variety of ways for the Messianic movement to approach theological education. In the past, we have encouraged potential leaders to attend evangelical Bible colleges and seminaries. This option has provided sound Biblical\/theological\/practical training in accredited schools, but it has had some drawbacks. Frequently, these schools taught through a Western Hellenized grid and were occasionally insensitive to the learning needs of Messianic Jews.
\nA second option has been to study at Jewish schools or in university Jewish studies programs. While very frequently helpful in providing for a Jewish perspective, these programs do not provide for a New Covenant or Messianic perspective. Additionally, some Messianic Jews who have attempted this option have not been welcomed in these schools or programs because of their identification as Messianic Jews.
\nRecently, a third option has been proposed: to establish graduate level Messianic yeshivot. Hopefully, these schools would combine biblical, theological, and Judaic studies with a distinctly Messianic Jewish perspective. While certainly a worthwhile approach, there would be significant difficulties with accreditation, library resources, and the development of a faculty capable of devoting themselves to this kind of work. Since the Messianic movement presently needs\u2014and will continue to need\u2014trained leaders to assure a healthy future, all these approaches seem appropriate and commendable. But which approach is the best for us?<\/p>\n
A Proposal for Messianic Jewish Theological Education<\/p>\n
In light of the great need for theologically sound and academically strong Messianic Jewish education, I propose an integrationist approach. By that, I mean that Messianic Jewish leaders train in academically accredited evangelical schools whose faculties support and encourage the Messianic Jewish movement. It would be particularly helpful if these schools would develop Jewish studies programs that could be staffed by Messianic Jewish scholars and supported by an umbrella organization of various Messianic Jewish associations.
\nMy own experience as a student and now a teacher at the Moody Bible Institute (MBI) encourages this perspective. In 1923, the Moody Bible Institute foresaw a need to train workers in Jewish ministry. So with the support of the Hebrew Christian Alliance of America (now the MJAA) it began a Jewish Studies program. Since that time, all the Jewish Studies professors were Jewish followers of Yeshua, from Solomon Birnbaum to Max Reich to Nathan Stone to Louis Goldberg. Shortly after the inception of the Jewish Studies program, Moody committed to funding it without Alliance support. As an institution for theological and ministry training, MBI has fostered in its graduates, sound theology, biblical expertise, practical skill for service, high integrity and spiritual commitment, as well as knowledge of Jewish studies. It is a model for what the Messianic Jewish movement needs and should pursue for its training in the future (see Ariel, 2000).
\nThe integrationist approach to theological education is not limited to the Moody Bible Institute. Other institutions have attempted similar programs, the most recent being Fuller Theological Seminary. Furthermore, Fuller has expressed great interest in adjusting their program to meet the needs of the Messianic Jewish movement. Other colleges and seminaries have expressed interest in doing the same. Some theological schools have begun to offer courses in Jewish studies even if they do not yet offer them as a major course of study. Gordon-Conwell Divinity School belongs to a consortium of schools that enables their students to take Jewish studies courses at neighboring universities such as Harvard Divinity School, as well as at Jewish institutions.
\nAdditionally, students that attend colleges or seminaries that do not offer any Jewish studies can study in local Jewish schools. For example, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School students have taken courses or completed M.A. degree programs at the Spertus Institute of Judaica in Chicago. Students at the Talbot School of Theology have studied at the University of Judaism. Although these courses lack the integration available when the professors are Messianic Jewish scholars, they are still valuable for training leaders for Messianic synagogues.
\nThe benefits of the integrationist approach are manifold. First, the integrationist approach to theological education provides academic credibility. By attending schools with recognizable accreditation, a scholarly faculty, sufficient library resources, and educationally effective curricula, graduates will have a better education. Furthermore, they will not be subject to the criticism that they were trained in academically limited and unaccredited schools.
\nSecond, the integrationist approach provides sound scholarship. Certainly, the Messianic movement has developed a number of scholars in Bible, theology, Judaic studies, worship, and homiletics. However, at this time, we do not have sufficient numbers of scholars to fully staff a school in all the subjects necessary for a sound education. By joining with established schools, we will share in the benefits of studying with world-renowned scholars in their fields, and provide Messianic Jewish scholars to enrich these schools. Learning from such scholars can only enhance our own biblical exegesis, theological reflection, and practical exposition.
\nThird, the integrationist approach provides a broader perspective. I fear that if we limit ourselves to Messianic Jewish schools we will become narrow and ingrown in our thinking. Rather, we must benefit from exposure to alternative theological perspectives and methodology. The Messianic Jewish movement has not yet reached the summit of our knowledge. We must guard against the arrogance of thinking that we alone have all truth. It will be to our advantage to study in schools taught by others\u2014not merely among ourselves.
\nFourth, the integrationist approach provides for greater interaction. It is imperative that Messianic Jews not become isolated from the entire body of Messiah. In fact, one of the factors that caused the initial Messianic Jewish movement to dwindle and die was that it became disconnected and ultimately excluded from non-Jewish followers of Messiah Yeshua. By interacting with non-Jewish scholars and teachers, we will benefit from their knowledge and experience.
\nFifth, the integrationist approach provides for greater influence. If the Messianic movement maintains its participation in evangelical theological institutions, it will prevent us from becoming a marginalized sect. Most groups that refuse interaction with other followers of Messiah, ultimately, are seen as separatist and out of the mainstream. As such, we will lose our influence on non-Jewish followers of Messiah. However, as long as we participate and benefit from broader theological education, we will continue to influence teachers and fellow students alike. They will learn sensitivity to Jewish people and obtain a positive perspective of a Messianic Jewish lifestyle.<\/p>\n
Conclusion<\/p>\n
The future leaders of Messianic Judaism must learn to teach well so that their congregants, in turn, will learn well. This includes teaching the entire Jewish Bible, sound doctrine, and holy living. The Midrash says, \u201cAnyone who teaches Torah in public and does not make the words as pleasant as honey from the honeycomb for those who are listening, it were better that he not teach the words at all\u201d (Mid. Rab. Song 4:11). \u201cA good teacher makes learning a joy\u201d (Prov. 15:2 LB). To secure our future as a movement, Messianic leaders must be both strong learners and sound teachers.
\nOne of the most effective ways to produce fine leaders and teachers is through an integrationist approach to theological education. However, regardless of the preferred approach, the entire Messianic Jewish movement should be in agreement with the need for theological education. In Living a Jewish Life, Anita Diamant and Howard Cooper write, \u201cStudy may be the only undisputed and shared value upon which all Jews, regardless of affiliation or belief, can agree\u201d (144). We Messianic Jews should excel in holding that \u201cundisputed and shared value.\u201d<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Why has theological education been so important to Jewish people throughout our history?
\n\u2022 How has the Messianic Jewish movement sought to provide theological education and what limitations have we faced in past efforts?
\n\u2022 What is meant by an \u201cintegrative approach\u201d to theological education for the Messianic Jewish movement and what are its advantages?
\n\u2022 How can an integrative approach to theological education be successfully implemented in the Messianic Jewish movement?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Ariel, Yaakov. Evangelizing the Chosen People. Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina, 2000.
\nCooper, Howard and Anita Diamant. Living a Jewish Life. New York: HarperCollins, 1991.<\/p>\n
Michael Rydelnik is Professor and Coordinator of Jewish Studies at the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago. Raised in an observant Jewish home, Dr. Rydelnik is the son of Holocaust survivors. After receiving a diploma in Jewish Studies from MBI, he earned three degrees including a D.Miss. from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. In the past, he has served as the spiritual leader of several Messianic congregations and the Northern Regional Director for Chosen People Ministries.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 11:
\nMESSIANIC JEWISH INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING<\/p>\n
\u2014Paul Saal<\/p>\n
Licensed and accredited universities, colleges and institutes of higher education, many of which teach religious studies, proliferate throughout the United States. Included are seminaries, divinity schools and yeshivas from the broad range of Christian and Jewish sects represented by constituencies in this country. So, why should Messianic Judaism, a small and incipient religion, invest the large financial and human resources requisite to launch its own brand of higher education? I believe the following story will help to exemplify the need.
\nIn 1995, I took the opportunity to attend a seminar on Midrash offered at a local university, which was taught by a prominent Jewish scholar-in-residence. The seminar was well attended by both Jewish and Christian clergy, many of whom I already knew. It soon became clear that the professor\u2019s primary purpose and hope for this class was to promote an understanding of Jewish interpretive practice that would help fund a respectful dialogue between Christian and Jewish religious professionals. The questions asked revealed the intentions of the students. The Christians were largely there to learn about Judaism. The Jewish clergy wished to discover new bridges between the writings of antiquity and the contemporary needs of their congregations. While I also found this aspect important, I was most interested in the potential of discovering cognate methods of interpretation that connected the midrashic writers and their apostolic contemporaries. I suspected this would be of some interest to the other attendees, but I did not ask any questions, fearing I might be stepping over a boundary that would make my teacher uncomfortable. I was uncertain whether he knew who I was, but I sensed that he knew and was uncomfortable with my attendance. I wanted to be careful not to give the impression that I was, in any way, challenging him.
\nTo his credit, while teaching on the akeydah (the story of the binding of Isaac), the professor did not avoid the obviously Christological implications of several of the aggadot (legends), including a particular story that portrayed Isaac\u2019s death and resurrection. He explained them as Jewish reactions to Christian hegemony in the fourth century and Jewish alternatives to \u201cChristian answers.\u201d After class, I asked to speak to the professor, to ask whether he thought it plausible that this aggadah existed in an inchoate oral tradition during the first century, since it seemed to parallel the writings in the Book of Hebrews (Heb. 11:19). He did not seem at all surprised by the question, and in fact, appeared prepared for it. He replied \u201cof course it\u2019s plausible, but if I believe that, then I would have to believe what you believe.\u201d
\nThis class proved helpful and informative, but it became increasingly clear that if I was going to find an organic relationship between Judaism and belief in Yeshua, I was going to find it alone. My concern about asking questions was well founded since my interests were well outside the pale of the collective understandings and concerns of the remainder of the class. Both the Christian and the Jewish clergy who took the class, as well as the scholar who taught it, were interested in the symmetrical relationship between the two religions, not in the harmonization of the foundational traditions and history that constituted the formative sea from which both religions emerged. Certainly, I was the only person in the room who was oddly occupied with how to understand Yeshua in and through contemporary Jewish practice.
\nThese experiences were not new to me. While attending a Baptist Seminary, I had already developed internal filters by which to sift the residue of historical anti-Jewish bias from the inductive reasoning of my professors, my classmates, and my textbooks. At first, I was surprised that I appeared to be the only person who noticed that this bias even existed, but after awhile, I realized that it was so deeply acculturated that it could not be separated from the general dogma. And why should it be? For Baptists, the universality of the gospel is understood through particularity of the elect\u2014in other words, those who give intellectual and verbal ascent to the widely held ideology of their denomination. So, despite limited conversation by some about the election of Israel, the relevance of flesh-and-blood Jewish people was of small importance unless they became \u201cChristians.\u201d Jewish group identity, then, counted for very little inside the walls of a Baptist Seminary.
\nThe seminary tried to accommodate the special needs and context of my chosen ministerial path, but lacked both the resources and the perspective to do so. I was allowed to complete some of my coursework by contracted independent study, especially in the area of ministerial skills, but I did not receive the appropriate guidance or encouragement. A faculty member who had a background in Jewish studies was assigned to mentor me, but his fascination with Jewish tradition was like a paleontologist\u2019s absorption with fossils. If there was anyone at the school who understood my reverence for the rites, customs, traditions, and the writings of my people, they were certainly not letting on. Yet, my polite disinterest with Christian hymns and school chapels was viewed by some as unspiritual and cause for suspicion. Those who could understand that these were cultural distinctions could still only appreciate Jewish religious norms for their inherent missiological value. To contexualize a baptism with Hebrew prayers was admirable, but to officiate over a bar mitzvah was potentially legalistic and definitely separatist. The source of my difficulties was not the school, the instructors, or the students. I had merely come to the wrong place to learn how to be a rabbi.
\nUnfortunately, my story is not unique. Many of Messianic Judaism\u2019s religious leaders have spent a great deal of time and effort distilling multiple religious disciplines into a Messianic Jewish education. Clearly, there is a need for an indigenous and integrative Messianic Jewish education. In recognition of this need, the UMJC has developed a Yeshiva program, which consists of a series of intensive college level courses leading to ordination in the Union. I attended my first UMJC Yeshiva class in 1994 and immediately recognized what I had been missing\u2014others who were on the same journey I was, attempting to be religious functionaries in a world that did not\u2014quite yet\u2014exist. While the Yeshiva provides a good supplemental education, it is not an accredited degree program. It still falls short of being a legitimate \u201cthink tank.\u201d
\nIn Judaism, institutes of higher learning do more than just educate\u2014they create the fabric of thought from which Jewish communal life finds meaning. Furthermore, these institutions help determine who can declaim on Jewish life and practice. Presently, Messianic Judaism has no such institutions, so it only takes a poorly designed web page or a self-published book to gain a hearing from those who are less informed. If Messianic Judaism is going to mature, it will need its own educational institutions to set high standards for credentialling, education, information dissemination, and to develop platforms for theological and halakhic disputation and consensus building. Of course, the investment of financial and human resources to develop such institutions will be great, but relative to the collective cost of avoiding this endeavor, the price is miniscule.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 How much emphasis should be placed on historical Jewish thought (i.e., Mishnah, Rashi, and Maimonides) in a Messianic Jewish education?
\n\u2022 How much emphasis should be placed on historical Christian writings (i.e., the Greek fathers and the church reformers)?
\n\u2022 How much should a Messianic Jewish rabbi learn about halakhah? How much training should a Messianic Jewish rabbi receive in Jewish liturgical practice and lifecycle events?
\n\u2022 Do you think higher critical thought is an important element in a Messianic Jewish education?<\/p>\n
Rabbi Paul L. Saal is the spiritual leader of Congregation Shuvah Yisrael in West Hartford, CT where he resides with his wife, Robbie, and their four daughters. He received his ordination through the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations and has served on its Steering Committee as Planter Chairman since 1996. Rabbi Saal is the Editor-at-Large of Boundaries and is a former editor of Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 12:
\nMESSIANIC JEWISH CHILDREN\u2019S EDUCATION AND CHURCH RESOURCES<\/p>\n
\u2014Eva Rydelnik<\/p>\n
The Jewish Value of Children\u2019s Education<\/p>\n
Teaching our children to love and obey the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is so important that the Talmud says, \u201cA village without a school should be abolished\u201d (Sabbath 119a). The education of our children one of the highest values of the Jewish people.
\nThe Tanakh emphasizes the responsibility of teaching our children to love and obey the Lord. The Sh\u2019ma commands us to teach our children diligently to love the Lord with all their heart (Deut. 6:4\u20139). Each year at Pesach, we are reminded of the importance of instructing our children in all the details of the festival and of observing Pesach forever (Exod. 12:24\u201327). Proverbs instruct us to \u201ctrain up a child in the way he should go, even when he is old he will not depart from it, \u201c(Prov. 22:6 NASB). The concept of early education is echoed in the Midrash when it says, \u201cIf you don\u2019t teach an ox to plow when he\u2019s young, it will be difficult to teach him when he is grown\u201d (Midrash Mishlei, 22).
\nChildren were important to the Messiah Yeshua. He gave them priority, even after a long day of ministry, when the disciples wanted to send the children away. Yeshua, said: \u201cLet the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these\u201d (Mark 10:13\u201316 NASB). On the Shavu\u2019ot immediately after the Messiah\u2019s ascension, Peter spoke powerfully to the crowds who had come up to Jerusalem for the festival. As he challenged this Jewish audience to recognize Messiah, Peter said, \u201cFor the promise is for you and your children\u201d (Acts 2:39 NASB). How are our children to know of the Promise, unless they are taught?<\/p>\n
The Messianic Movement and Children\u2019s Education<\/p>\n
The Messianic movement is faced with the issue of how to best teach our children about the Messiah. Of course, each family is to instruct their children in the Scriptures \u201cas we talk about them when we sit at home, walk along the road, when we lie down and when we get up.\u201d However, we must be diligent to provide high quality Messianic education in Messianic Synagogues as well.<\/p>\n
Christian Publishing Houses as a Resource for Messianic Children\u2019s Education<\/p>\n
There is a wealth of educational material available to Messianic congregations that is often overlooked. In order to broaden their educational resources, Messianic congregations should consider using traditional Sunday school material prepared by one of the Christian publishing houses. These classic church based materials could be used as supplements to Messianic educational materials that focus on the Jewish holidays.
\nMessianic congregations do not need to \u201creinvent the wheel\u201d in children\u2019s education. These Christian publishers have been producing children\u2019s educational material for decades, and have produced a wealth of excellent lesson plans and teaching resources that cover almost every aspect of the Scriptures\u2014from the Creation to the Second Coming. Although some of the lessons are not culturally relevant to the needs of a Messianic synagogue, much of the curriculum is useful and should not be overlooked when we are searching for educational resources.
\nWhen choosing a church based curriculum, all publishing houses are not equally suitable for Messianic needs. Of the dozens of Christian publishing houses, many are too denominationally focused, while others are generally insensitive to Jewish issues\u2014making them unsuitable for our use. However, two publishers in particular have proved especially sensitive to Jewish needs. They are a good option for augmenting Messianic education.
\nDavid C. Cook Communications has excellent graded Sunday school materials. The lesson books for children are colorful and the crafts are well explained. There are resource packets for each quarter (three-month period) and the instruction books for teachers are easy to follow. The lessons are designed to teach through the major events of the whole Bible in a three-year cycle. They have lesson plans and materials for nursery age through high school.
\nGospel Light Publishers also has exceptional material that is suitable for Messianic use, and is perhaps the stronger of the two resources. Gospel Light provides excellent biblical background in the form of maps and archaeological insights. They often include information about the Jewish holidays. The illustrations of Bible characters are appropriately Jewish, but not stereotypical in appearance. The language used is generally sensitive to Jewish concerns. Another advantage of Gospel Light is that the weekly handouts are not dated (e.g., Sunday, January 4) but are designated with sequential numbering (e.g., Spring #4). Thus, the material is useful for Friday or Saturday services, and allows for interruption of the curriculum for teaching special Jewish holiday lessons without falling behind printed dates on the handouts. Gospel Light has a wide variety of teaching resources available, including curricula for nursery through high school. These include easy to use instruction books for teachers, resource packets, and hands-on learning materials for students.<\/p>\n
Messianizing and Adapting Church Based Materials<\/p>\n
When using a church based curriculum, certain adaptations must be made. By taking the following steps, these church based materials can be helpful and effective for Messianic use. The following strategy for Messianizing the materials can make them workable in any Messianic setting. This will take some extra effort on the part of the education director and the teachers, but it is well worth the effort to make use of these valuable educational resources.
\nTo begin, read through the curriculum and be sure that the lesson plans coincide with the Jewish calendar. If the curriculum has the Passover lesson plan for November, hold it back and teach those lessons in the Spring at Pesach. Likewise, if teaching about Ruth is scheduled in the curriculum for winter, move those lessons to Shavu\u2019ot. In the same way, watch for stories about Esther and have them taught at Purim. Hold the Jonah lesson for Yom Kippur and the creation lesson for Rosh HaShanah. This keeps the curriculum in line with Jewish calendar. Of course, these church based lessons will not include all the necessary materials for complete Jewish holiday lessons. Special effort must be made to teach about all of the Jewish holidays in our Messianic congregations.
\nAlways use Jewish terminology when teaching. Speak of the Scriptures or the Tanakh and the B\u2019rit Hadashah, instead of the Old and New Testaments. Focus on the Atonement and Redemption. Avoid using the term saved. Talk about the Jewish people specifically\u2014not generically, as \u201ca special people.\u201d Avoid the term Christian, which may be confused with Gentile. Instead, speak of Messianic believers, believers, or followers of Messiah. Watch out for the word church, and instead, teach about the congregation, synagogue, or fellowship.
\nUse the Hebrew name Yeshua, instead of Jesus. Always say Messiah\u2014not Christ. The words are parallel, yet Christ is strongly linked to the history of anti-Semitism. Most church materials will use the words Jesus and Christ. These expressions can be easily adapted by the teacher and corrected in the resources and the handouts so as to read Yeshua the Messiah, or Messiah Yeshua.
\nCarefully screen all crafts and games to eliminate any pictures of the cross. Often, stars of David or other meaningful Jewish symbols can be substituted in the crafts or handouts. Watch for pictures of churches with steeples, and substitute synagogue style buildings instead.
\nWhen the geography of the Middle East is part of the lesson, identify the Land of Israel. Do not merely teach about \u201cGod\u2019s special place\u201d or whatever vague term may appear in the curriculum. Do not call the land Palestine. Since this is the name of the area before 1948, sometimes, it still crops up in church materials. Instead, remember to always use the biblical name\u2014Israel. Always connect the biblical land of Israel (Judaea, Zion, Canaan) as well as place names such as Jerusalem, Galilee, Jericho, and so on\u2014with the ancient and modern State of Israel (Eretz Yisra\u2019el). It is helpful to have a map of modern Israel in the classroom to keep the children oriented to the Land. Put up posters of modern Israel and Israeli cities.
\nWatch for insensitive words in the teacher\u2019s lessons or children\u2019s handouts that could be offensive to Jewish people. Watch for negative comments about \u201cJacob the cheater,\u201d for example, as a stereotype of all Jewish people. Carefully correct any lesson that places blame on the Jewish people for the death of Yeshua. Clarify the fact that Yeshua died for all people and rose again\u2014proving he is God.
\nLook for opportunities to focus on God\u2019s faithfulness to Israel and the Jewish people as the stories from the Scriptures are taught. This may not be the emphasis of the church based lesson for that week, but it is easily customized to fit the focus of a Messianic congregation.<\/p>\n
Learning, Learning, Learning<\/p>\n
Our children must grow up to know God\u2019s word and to value their Jewish identity and heritage. As Ahad HaAm said, \u201cLearning, learning, learning: that is the secret of Jewish survival.\u201d Learning God\u2019s word and about our Jewish heritage should be a joy for our children. Messianic educators should not overlook the wealth of resources that lie outside the traditional Messianic circles\u2014resources that can be found in classic church based curriculum. We must ensure a bright future for our children (and the Messianic movement) by instructing them in the word of God and helping them grow in knowledge and appreciation of their Messianic Jewish heritage.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Why is it important to teach the Scriptures to our children?
\n\u2022 Some Christian educational materials are good resources for Messianic congregations. Do you agree or disagree\u2014and why?
\n\u2022 What precautions should be taken when selecting Christian educational materials?
\n\u2022 What adaptations can be made to prepare a Sunday school curriculum for Messianic Jewish congregational use?<\/p>\n
Eva Rydelnik is an adjunct professor at the Moody Bible Institute and the Chicago Area Coordinator for Chosen People Ministries. She has a Diploma in Jewish Studies from The Moody Bible Institute, a B.A. from Azusa Pacific University, and an M.A. from Wheaton College Graduate School. She is married to Michael Rydelnik. They have two sons.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 13:
\nEACH GENERATION MUST TEACH THE NEXT<\/p>\n
\u2014Jeffrey E. Feinberg<\/p>\n
What could be more bizarre than to educate a child, born into the tribe of Judah, that he must no longer value that membership if he chooses to accept Yeshua, born of the tribe Judah, as King of the Jews? Yet, religious Judaism and religious Christianity have joined ranks to construct a middle wall of partition. Ironically, both sides accuse Messianic Judaism of erecting the barriers: the Christians suspect that Messianic Judaism will value Judaism over Yeshua, and the Jews of Judaism loudly proclaim that bowing to the King is an idolatry that Judaism cannot tolerate. Such false dichotomies erect obstacles for the child who insists on the simple truth that it is natural to remain within Judaism while worshipping the King of the Jews!
\nThe nature of Messianic Jewish education must be Messiah-centered, yet distinctly Jewish. It is the task of Messianic Jewish education to transmit a Jewish heritage that integrates an understanding of Tanakh and B\u2019rit Hadashah into the context of a Jewish community. This chapter will discuss the purpose of Messianic Jewish education and how it can be informed by the historic vision that has guided Judaism from its inception. As a Judaism, Messianic Judaism must find its place among other Judaisms. Broadly speaking, the spectrum of traditional Judaisms accord distinctive honor to the Torah and to the holy calling of the Jewish people at Sinai; whereas modernistic Judaisms focus on the challenge of living Jewish lives within the context of modern culture. This chapter will conclude with ways that Messianic Jewish education can assist Messianic Judaism to transmit an ageless Jewish heritage to the coming generation of New Covenant priests.<\/p>\n
The Vision of Judaism<\/p>\n
Israel, as a people, first entered into covenant relationship with God at Mount Sinai. God validated his servant Moshe and spoke the Ten Words to a \u201ccalled out\u201d people fenced off from a holy mountain. Seventy z\u2019keynim ascended to celebrate a covenant feast under the feet of the Almighty. Higher still climbed Aharon and his sons, Nadav and Avihu. These kohanim (priests) represented a people called to be a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation (mamlechet kohanim v\u2019goy kadosh). Moshe and his successor Y\u2019hoshua continued on; but Moshe alone penetrated the heavenly cloud veiling the presence of the Sh\u2019chinah on Sinai\u2019s summit, where heaven touched earth. Judaism transmits this picture of the Jewish people, called to ascend the mountain of God\u2019s holiness. This \u201ccalled out\u201d people, set free from the servile labor (avodah) of Egypt, are now offered the transcendent avodah of priestly service and worship, led by its great prophet, its High Priest (Kohen Gadol), its priests, its seventy elders, and its people (am ha\u2019aretz).<\/p>\n
Imparting the Vision<\/p>\n
Transmitting Jewish identity across generations clashes directly with the formidable forces of the American melting pot. Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams writes that Jews are doomed as an ethnic, cultural, or political entity in the face of \u201ca society seeking relentlessly to include them within larger groups of citizens who do not share their religious heritage\u201d (193). Without a religious community that builds a hedge from within, the Jewish people could be cut in half within a generation or two. But what kind of religious community lends itself distinctively to a Messianic Jewish education? Can it be a Traditional Judaism that recognizes Torah as God\u2019s revelation that the Jewish people are called out and set apart to function as a holy kingdom of priests (mamlechet kohanim) among the nations? Can it be a Conservative Judaism that recognizes the synagogue and promotes the day school as an institution that will preserve the Jewish people? Can it be a Reform Judaism that cultivates values deriving from Sinai, the Jewish people\u2019s call to covenant with the God of Israel? Each approach raises its own questions. Messianic Jewish education must advance the vision of Judaism across generations, by equipping and training its members to live as New Covenant kohanim in a religious community that stresses equality of spiritual status in matters of race, class, nationality, and gender.<\/p>\n
Comparisons to Traditional Judaism<\/p>\n
Traditional Judaism emphasizes Torah as revelation, the supernaturally revealed word of God in our midst. Jews must learn Hebrew, read Torah, don priestly garments (tallit), maintain a state of ritual purity, ascend the bimah (platform), and appropriate the Torah as a heritage passed from one generation to the next, forever. For traditional Jews, halakhah regulates a lifestyle that eats and breathes holiness. Each generation learns to read Torah for itself, as interpreted over the years by the traditions and texts of the rabbis.
\nThe priest\/tzaddik is called to draw near to God. The immense amount of learning begins in the households and later in the beyt midrash (place of religious study), day school, and yeshiva. Every member of the priesthood must be equipped to lead or participate in the minyan (quorum of ten required for certain prayers), that Jewish corporate community (beyt knesset) which assembles to celebrate the vision at Sinai where God first called Israel to be His people (Parashat Yitro, Exod. 19:6).
\nBut is the priesthood still valid today, when God\u2019s manifest Sh\u2019chinah is absent? Is the sheer quantity of learning practicable for a generation raised on video and sound bites? Do the pace of life and the shortness of people\u2019s attention spans force changes on traditional methods of transmitting and celebrating Judaism\u2019s heritage from Sinai? Can every Jew become a ba\u2019al k\u2019riah (master of the reading), raised to ascend the mountain? Or is this calling only practical for the holy sons of Aharon, Elazar, and Pinchas?
\nConservative Jews also raise their members as priests in a religious Jewish community. They walk a fine line, however, between the traditional demands for holiness and relevancy to the people living in greater society. Schools assume the burden for imparting Jewish education to the membership (to make up for lapses in the home, cf. Deut. 6:4\u201311; Bava Batra 21a). Following the Orthodox lead, the day school has increasingly become the bulwark for Conservative Judaism\u2019s effort to assist the synagogue in transmitting the heritage of a priestly Judaism. Rabbi Jacob J. Schacter, at a recent conference of the Partnership for Excellence in Jewish Education (PEJE), set the price tag for a movement of day schools at one billion dollars (see Forward, 22 Sept. 2000). With only $15 million currently channeled to fund day schools, and nearly three-quarters of a billion being given annually, the private Jewish family foundations can help make progress toward the goal. But will the outcomes of day school efforts justify the costs?
\nLloyd P. Gartner points to the paradox that functional illiteracy among Jews rises with affluence (33). His observation accords with the teachings of Torah, warning against the dangers associated with wealth:<\/p>\n
Be careful not to forget ADONAI your God by not obeying his mitzvot, rulings and regulations that I am giving you today. Otherwise, after you have eaten and are satisfied, built fine houses and lived in them, and increased your herds, flocks, silver, gold, and everything else you own, you will become proud-hearted. Forgetting ADONAI your God\u2014who brought you out of the land of Egypt, where you lived as slaves. (Deut. 8:11\u201314)<\/p>\n
Abrams responds, \u201cit can be proved with statistics that Judaism and Jewish schooling maintain Jewish identity and enable Jews to pass their faith on to their children\u201d (196). Notwithstanding the need for massive funding, Schechter schools have succeeded in raising a second generation of teachers, rabbis, and community leaders to found and endow schools. Forty percent of children receiving formal Jewish education presently attend day schools (see Wertheimer 49). Perhaps financial sacrifice can reverse the trend that affluence and functional illiteracy increase together.<\/p>\n
Comparisons to Modernistic Judaism<\/p>\n
Perhaps Reform, Reconstructionist, and Humanistic Jews will consider it unfair to be lumped together. But from the perspective of the priestly Judaisms, these approaches appear to take a lighter view of the inspiration and authority of Torah, in order to accommodate Judaism to American society and serve the greater community.
\nThe majority of Jewish children enrolled in formal Jewish education attend supplementary school (up to 14 hours\/week). These schools assist the home in transmitting significant cultural, religious, and social heritage through a knowledge of history, literature, customs, and religious practices. But are these efforts enough to unlock the Hebrew language and lead to reading Torah as a way of life? How can the next generation choose to bond with Jews from the past or with Jewish people in other lands, including Israel? Hebrew language is the very lifeblood of Jewish culture and identity. Its loss cuts off continuities across generations along with the ideals that have empowered those generations. Such a loss distances Jewish people from their God, His Temple, the Land, and the call of the people to be a priestly nation among the nations of the world.
\nHow then shall we live? Writing in The Forward, \u201cReform rabbi R. Jan Katzew summarizes the role of supplementary schooling: \u201cThe success of Jewish schooling is not only how much the graduates know, or even how much they are able to do, but also how they choose to live.\u201d<\/p>\n
Fulfilling the Vision of Messianic Jewish Education<\/p>\n
Messianic Jews must never lose sight of their calling to transmit the Jewish heritage of membership in a priestly community. Each generation must teach its children to appropriate Torah and live out God\u2019s word for themselves. If this requires knowledge of Hebrew, literacy, trop (Torah cantillation), and liturgy, then we must embrace the task\u2014utilizing tutors, mentors, cantors, supplementary schools, or even day schools as necessary. Messianic believers, as New Covenant priests, must follow Moshe\u2019s lead, ascend the mountain of God\u2019s holiness, and enter the cloud to stand before God Himself. The awe of this moment lingers as individuals choose to go out and serve God, the community, and the world. Ahavat Tzion (love of Zion), bikkur holim (visiting the sick), hiddur p\u2019nay zaken (respecting the elderly), ma\u2019akhil re\u2019evim (feeding the hungry), hakhnasat orhim (welcoming guests), and the praxis of other mitzvot maintain the continuities between the Torah and the New Covenant in distinctly Jewish ways.
\nHoly people sanctify time by celebrating holy days, and the Messianic Jewish community needs to instill these holy days in the bones of each new generation. Sanctifying Shabbat and setting it apart from scheduled tasks frees up time to appreciate one\u2019s family and one\u2019s Jewishness. The day should be devoted to tz\u2019dakah (righteousness, acts of charity), reading Torah as the foundation of the New Covenant, and worshipping as a holy community.
\nSanctifying other holy days binds the worshipping community to its past and its future. The spring festivals of Pesach and Shavu\u2019ot celebrate our redemption from servile labor and calling to covenant relationship and priestly service. The fall festivals look with anticipation to the future. Christianity has no holy day devoted to Messiah\u2019s return, but Messianic Judaism has four! Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur bid a priestly community to purify itself and prepare for the days when all souls are resurrected. The B\u2019rit Hadashah says that Messiah will be Judge on this day. Sukkot climaxes the Ingathering of all nations with the establishment of Messiah\u2019s thousand years as King of kings. Sh\u2019mini Atzeret, that most final of holy convocations of Torah, welcomes the day when the nations go home from Jerusalem and the King bids his faithful entourage of holy priests to tarry an extra day. These men and women, these Levites from among the Jews and Gentiles, these rich and poor abide in the Glory of His Presence.
\nIn conclusion, Messianic Jewish education must kindle in the coming generations a passionate desire to know Hebrew and read Torah weekly as New Covenant kohanim. Observing the weekly reading cycle attaches the Messianic Jewish community to Jewish communities everywhere. The community must raise consciousness of liturgy, so that its members can join corporate worship in synagogues throughout the world. Celebrating the holy days and entering festal worship as a priestly community radiate a holiness that influences nations.
\nIntegrating understandings of the B\u2019rit Hadashah with the Torah opens one\u2019s eyes to the abiding riches of the Jewish heritage\u2014to reign when Yeshua comes. On that day, we will greet him in Jerusalem with the words, \u201cbarukh haba b\u2019shem ADONAI\u201d (Matt. 23:39). And he will say to his royal priesthood, \u201cG\u2019shu-na elai. Atsru!\u201d (\u201cDraw near to me. Tarry!\u201d) Tarry an extra day.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 Empowerment: How can someone be sanctified to hear God\u2019s word for himself?
\n\u2022 Practicality: How can Messianic Jews train and equip their children to regularly read scripture in the original languages, know Yeshua, and maintain a priestly life?
\n\u2022 Community: How can Jewish people construct a religious community that is broad enough to be inclusive, yet narrow enough to remain holy to God?
\n\u2022 Transformation: How can God\u2019s word be appropriated, internalized, lived, and passed on as an everlasting heritage for generations to come?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Abrams, Elliot. Faith or Fear: How Jews Can Survive in a Christian America. New York: The Free Press, 1997.
\nGartner, Lloyd P., ed. Jewish Education in the United States. New York: Teacher\u2019s College, 1969.
\nKatzew, R. Jan. \u201cHow We Can Make Hebrew Schools Work Again: With the Right Priorities, Learning in the Home Becomes the Primary Focus.\u201d Forward, 19 Jan. 2001.
\nStaff article. \u201cEducators Put Billion-Dollar Price Tag on Day Schools,\u201d Forward, 22 Sept., 2000.
\nWertheimer, Jack. \u201cWho\u2019s Afraid of Jewish Day Schools?\u201d Commentary 108.5 (December 1999): 49\u201353.<\/p>\n
Dr. Jeffrey Feinberg has chaired Education at the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations for more than a decade. He leads Etz Chaim Congregation of Buffalo Grove, Illinois and has five earned degrees including an M.Div. and a Ph.D. from Trinity International University. He and his wife, Pat, have written extensive Messianic Jewish curriculum materials, used by more than a hundred congregations throughout the world. Ordained by UMJC, Jeff teaches Torah at the UMJC Yeshiva.<\/p>\n
HOW DOES
\nINTERMARRIAGE IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY?<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 14:
\nINTERMARRIAGE CAN HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT ON MESSIANIC JUDAISM<\/p>\n
\u2014David Rudolph<\/p>\n
Intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews in the Messianic Jewish movement is a hotly debated issue, not only because of its social and theological implications, but also because of the emotion that surrounds it. Some leaders decry intermarriage as an agent of assimilation and an impediment to generational continuity. Other leaders contend that intermarriage can make a positive contribution to Messianic Judaism, and that we need not fear adverse consequences if scriptural standards are maintained. The latter position, being the author\u2019s view, is advocated in this essay.<\/p>\n
The Permissibility of Intermarriage<\/p>\n
Scripture is the yardstick of faith and life for Messianic Jews. It is highly significant, therefore, that Scripture not only permits intermarriage, but also sets forth restrictions for its governance. Shaye Cohen, Professor of Judaic Studies at Brown University, concurs:<\/p>\n
A general prohibition of intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews does not appear anywhere in the Tanakh. Leviticus lists numerous sexual taboos (Chapters 18 and 20) but fails to include intermarriage among them. Exodus 34:15 and Deuteronomy 7:3\u20134 prohibit intermarriage with the seven Canaanite nations, and Deuteronomy 23:2\u20139 prohibits four additional nations from entering the congregation of the Lord\u2014perhaps (but probably not) a prohibition of marriage. But neither Exodus nor Deuteronomy prohibits intermarriage with all non-Israelites, and both of them prohibit intermarriage with Canaanites only because it might lead to something else that was prohibited (idolatry). (260\u2013261)<\/p>\n
As an example of divinely sanctioned intermarriage, the book of Numbers records that, on one occasion, 32,000 virgins from among the Midianites were added to Israel\u2019s number by the Lord\u2019s command (Num. 31:25\u201347; cf. Deut. 21:10\u201314). The Scriptures generally permit intermarriage as long as the spouse in question is not from a forbidden nation or Canaanite-like (Ezra 9:1\u20132; see Cohen 243\u2013244, 261). This was the difference between Moses\u2019 intermarriage with Zipporah and Ahab\u2019s intermarriage with Jezebel. The Gentile spouse was expected to live in accordance with the laws of Israel (Num. 15:15\u201316).<\/p>\n
Caveats to Intermarriage<\/p>\n
To the above, I would add three qualifications in light of the Messianic Jewish context under discussion:<\/p>\n
1. Intermarriage is not preferable to marriage between two Messianic Jews. The scriptural witness is that intermarriage is the exception and not the rule in Israel. Sharing in common a Jewish heritage and family goes a long way toward maintaining the chain of Jewish identity.
\n2. Knowledge of the pros and cons of intermarriage is insufficient to guide Messianic Jews in deciding whether to intermarry. Personal prayer and the leading of the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) are essential.
\n3. Not all types of intermarriage are beneficial for Messianic Jews, and two types are especially problematic. The first of these is the marriage of a Messianic Jew to a Gentile who is not a follower of Messiah Yeshua. This is prohibited by New Covenant halakhah because the deepest loyalties of the couple will be divided (2 Cor. 6:14). The second of these is the marriage of a Messianic Jew to a Gentile follower of Yeshua, who prefers a church environment to a Messianic synagogue, and a Christian lifestyle to a Jewish one. This kind of intermarriage places Jewish continuity at risk.<\/p>\n
Conversionary Intermarriage<\/p>\n
Only two kinds of intermarriage are beneficial for Messianic Jews; they are (1) marriages in which the non-Jewish partner has a formal conversion, and (2) marriages in which the non-Jewish partner has an informal conversion. A formal conversion is one in which a non-Jew joins the nation of Israel through a course of study culminating in a conversion ceremony. An informal conversion is one in which covenant words are spoken or even prayed privately where, like Ruth, the intended convert declares: \u201cYour people will be my people and your God will be my God\u201d (Ruth 1:16). What makes these two kinds of intermarriage appropriate for Messianic Jews is that the non-Jewish spouse has committed to live in accordance with the laws of Israel. [Note: Throughout this essay, I continue to refer to the converted spouse as \u201cnon-Jewish\u201d or \u201cGentile\u201d to emphasize the intermarriage aspect.]
\nSome may argue that Jewish\/convert marriages are not intermarriages at all, since a Jew-by-birth marries a Jew-by-choice. What must be appreciated, however, is that marriage is not only a joining of individuals, but a joining of two families; the convert brings into the marriage his or her non-Jewish family and non-Jewish cultural upbringing. Looking at it in this way, marriages between Jews and converts are certainly intermarriages (see Petsonk and Remsen 10; Schneider 4\u20135).
\nBecause of the ongoing debate in the Messianic Jewish community over formal conversion, the vast majority of conversionary intermarriages are presently informal. While these Gentile spouses may lack official recognition as converts they, nevertheless, are converts to Judaism in every sense of the word. They pray as Jews, keep Jewish households, and raise their children as Messianic Jews. Given the opportunity, they would not hesitate to formalize their commitment to their adopted people Israel.
\nMy opinion, having been part of the Messianic Jewish community for over twenty-five years, is that informal conversionary intermarriage can be as successful in perpetuating Jewish identity as its formal counterpart, or even Jewish-Jewish marriages. It all depends on the degree to which the couple is spiritually motivated, active in their local Messianic synagogue, involved in the broader Jewish community, and committed to Jewish education. Jewish-Gentile couples who are serious about these areas will make a far greater contribution to the future of Messianic Judaism than Jewish-Jewish couples who attend services once a week but are apathetic about Messianic Jewish life in the home.<\/p>\n
Intermarriage Benefits the Messianic Jewish Community<\/p>\n
Intermarried couples already exert a profound and positive impact on the Messianic Jewish movement in a variety of ways.<\/p>\n
1. Enhanced Numbers and Resources<\/p>\n
The vast majority of Messianic Jews in the United States are intermarried. If all of these couples (and their children) were suddenly transported to heaven, the Messianic movement would shrink to less than half its present size. Such is the numerical priority of intermarried couples in the Messianic Jewish community. They represent the core of the movement at the present time and their significance will surely increase in the future. Two reasons can be given for this: (1) The American Jewish intermarriage rate has risen to fifty-two percent and shows no sign of abating (see Kosmin 13\u201316); and (2) Messianic Judaism is an attractive option for intermarried couples.
\nDan Cohn-Sherbok links the growth of Messianic synagogues with the growing interest of intermarrieds in the Messianic Jewish option:<\/p>\n
No doubt the high rate of intermarriage between Jews and Christians in contemporary society has greatly contributed to such growth. Messianic Judaism provides a home for those couples who seek to integrate Jewish living with belief in Jesus. (xii)<\/p>\n
Carol Harris-Shapiro concurs. In her book, Messianic Judaism: A Rabbi\u2019s Journey Through Religious Change in America, she states that the Messianic Jewish community is attractive to intermarried couples because it provides them with \u201ca place where both their faith and cultural needs are fulfilled\u201d (183). Intermarried couples bring to the Messianic movement their enthusiasm, spirituality, wisdom, creativity, time, and material resources. The Messianic Jewish community benefits from all of these contributions.<\/p>\n
2. Jewish Continuity<\/p>\n
In contrast to the mainstream Jewish community where intermarriage usually leads to assimilation, Messianic intermarrieds are generally successful in perpetuating Jewish heritage (see Abrams 109\u2013112). This is not to say that every Messianic Jewish marriage is a success story, but relative to the Jewish world, Messianic Jewish intermarried couples excel in commitment to their Jewishness. A principal reason for this is that intermarried Gentiles in a Messianic Jewish congregation are committed to living a Jewish life.<\/p>\n
Messianic non-Jewish spouses in the movement often times demonstrate far more of a commitment to Jewish life than Jewish unbelievers. Furthermore, their children, by and large, are expressing an interest in maintaining a Jewish heritage. (Klayman 134)<\/p>\n
Similarly, Rich Nichol, a former President of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, maintains that \u201coften, the most committed, hard-working members of Messianic Jewish synagogues are non-Jews\u201d (23).
\nWhy are non-Jewish spouses of Messianic Jews so committed to living out and conveying Jewish identity? An important contributing factor is that the Gentile spouse finds spiritual fulfillment in the Messianic Jewish faith and lifestyle. This enables the spouse to be an advocate of Messianic Judaism. In addition, since Messianic Judaism is faith-based, intermarried couples are typically motivated by spiritual zeal in expressing Jewish life.
\nThe Jewish spouses of Messianic intermarriages are also committed to Jewish continuity. Few people realize that the 1990 National Jewish Population Survey (NJPS) interviewed Messianic Jews as well as members of the rest of the Jewish community. One of the survey questions was: \u201cIs being Jewish very important in your life?\u201d The results were compiled by the North American Jewish Data Bank and sponsored by the Council of Jewish Federations. Professor Sergio DellaPergola of Hebrew University tabulated the results and presented these findings.<\/p>\n
Percent of Respondents Agreeing That \u201cBeing Jewish is Very Important in Your Life\u201d
\nBy Denomination, USA, 1990 (weighted sample)<\/p>\n
Respondent\u2019s
\nDenomination<\/p>\n
% Agree
\nMessianic
\n100
\nOrthodox
\n77
\nMultiple denomination
\n61
\nConservative
\n58
\nReconstructionist
\n49
\nReform
\n40
\nJust Jewish
\n29
\nJewish + other religion
\n27
\nChristian
\n21
\nDon\u2019t know
\n21
\nSecular
\n16
\nNon-participating
\n13
\nOther religion
\n5
\nNo answer, refuse
\n4
\nAgnostic\/atheist
\n0<\/p>\n
According to the above data, one hundred percent of all Messianic Jews interviewed said \u201cyes\u201d to the survey question, thereby indicating that being Jewish was \u201cvery important\u201d in their lives. This was higher than any other Jewish group interviewed (see DellaPergola 86). DellaPergola sums up the significance of this data as follows:<\/p>\n
Not unexpectedly, the perceived importance of being Jewish is highest among those who consistently manifest their identity via a religious definition and a clear denominational preference. The expected gradient among the major denominations (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform) emerges. Jews who are consistently secular display far lesser interest for being Jewish. The amount of interest is quite variable, though generally low among other sub-groups with the survey population, including ex-Jews. One small group with extremely high percentages of interest in Judaism is those preferring the Messianic denomination (emphasis added). (84)<\/p>\n
While it is not known what proportion of the Messianic Jews in the study were married, of those who were, over seventy percent of them were likely intermarried (see Adelstein 53; Eaton 46). Their commitment to Jewish identity is an important indicator of the Messianic Jewish community\u2019s success in promoting Jewish continuity.
\nAn example of how this translates into religious practice is that Messianic Jewish intermarrieds are usually faithful in attending Shabbat services weekly at their Messianic synagogue. By contrast, the average intermarried couple in mainstream Judaism attends synagogue services only once or twice a year or not at all (see Cohen 111). In ways such as this, Messianic Jewish intermarried couples exert a positive influence on Jewish continuity in the Messianic Jewish movement.<\/p>\n
3. Compatibility of Marriage Partners<\/p>\n
Many Messianic Jews in their twenties and early thirties face a limited pool of potential Messianic Jewish marriage partners. Compounding the problem is that it is a violation of New Covenant halakhah for a Messianic Jew to marry a Jew or Gentile who is not a believer in Messiah Yeshua (2 Cor. 6:14). Moreover, it is not expedient to marry a Gentile Christian who lacks Messianic Jewish convictions. What then, is a young Messianic Jewish man or woman in search of a future marriage partner to do? A hard line against intermarriage could result in their not marrying at all.
\nThere is a second problem. The average Messianic synagogue is made up of fifty percent Gentiles (see Feher 165; Bernstein, 1997), some of whom are unmarried and face the same dilemma as Jewish members in finding suitable marriage partners. New Covenant halakhah forbids them from marrying anyone who does not believe in Messiah Yeshua, and it is also counterproductive to their calling for them to marry Gentile Christians who do not share their Messianic Jewish vision. As posed previously concerning Messianic Jews, what are these young Messianic Gentile men and women to do? If they maintain their convictions, they may not marry at all.
\nIt is my contention that supporting intermarriage between Messianic Jews and Messianic Gentiles is an ideal solution to the above conundrum. If Messianic Jews marry Messianic Gentiles, the marriage pool doubles, young persons have a greater likelihood of finding suitable marriage partners, and Jewish continuity is not compromised because the spouses share a common background and calling to remain in the Messianic Jewish world. Additionally, by marrying within the community, they strengthen it with their commitment and experience, and their children receive the benefit of having two parents with a Messianic Jewish identity. In these and other ways, intermarriage between Messianic Jews and Messianic Gentiles contributes positively to the future of Messianic Judaism.<\/p>\n
4. Mitigation of Prejudice<\/p>\n
Besides intermarried couples, every Messianic synagogue includes Jewish-Jewish couples, Gentile-Gentile couples, and unmarried members; the intermarried couples among them are important in forming relational links between all the other segments. I wish I could say that prejudice against Gentiles did not exist in the Messianic Jewish movement; but realistically, prejudice exists in every religious community. Recognizing this, Reform rabbi Steven Foster wrote:<\/p>\n
All Jews still have prejudices and those negative reactions are often hurtful to others as well as to our self perceptions. We need to actively change our language that still refers to Gentiles as \u201cgoyim and shiksas\u201d \u2026 So long as these attitudes of superiority exist, our synagogues will not be the welcoming places they need to become. (113)<\/p>\n
Intermarried couples serve a vital role in minimizing prejudice within the Messianic Jewish community. This is because Messianic Jews who are intermarried are protective of their own spouses and refuse to tolerate insensitivity toward other Gentile members as well. In this way, the presence of intermarried couples helps to eliminate the prejudice rooted in ethnic pride that can arise from time to time.<\/p>\n
5. A Broader Perspective<\/p>\n
A final benefit of intermarriage is that it helps Messianic Jews to gain a broader perspective on the day-to-day issues that make up Messianic Jewish life. Even mainstream Judaism increasingly recognizes that synagogue members from non-Jewish backgrounds bring new kinds of creativity to the community. Gary Tobin writes in Opening the Gates:<\/p>\n
Because they come from other faith traditions or none at all, they can ask probing questions and push individual Jews to think more about what it means to be a Jew. They bring into Jewish life what has worked (and what has failed) from other faith traditions and institutional venues \u2026 An infusion of new individuals who come from outside the Jewish community brings along their experience and knowledge to help build institutional strength inside the Jewish community. (140)<\/p>\n
Intermarriage causes Messianic Jews to bring forth perspectives that would not otherwise be evident in an entirely Jewish community. Intermarried Gentiles help Messianic Jews see issues through different cultural lenses, and be more discerning (in an evaluative way) of traditional Jewish perspectives. Non-Jewish spouses can exhibit a unique frame of reference in their approach to Messianic Jewish history, theology and culture because they ask questions that Messianic Jews frequently do not ask. They also tend to focus on areas that Messianic Jews often take for granted, and this leads to a deeper understanding of Messianic Judaism itself.<\/p>\n
Conclusion<\/p>\n
The case in support of intermarriage rests on the premise that God allowed intermarriage in the first place because it could benefit his people. In the Messianic Jewish movement, this benefit is manifest in a variety of ways including enhanced numbers and resources, Jewish continuity, compatibility of marriage partners, mitigation of prejudice, and broader perspectives. On the cautionary side, intermarriage does entail certain risks that should not be taken lightly. This notwithstanding, formal and informal conversionary intermarriage has made a vital contribution to Messianic Judaism, and promises to do so in the future.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 What kind of intermarriage does Scripture permit? What kind is prohibited?
\n\u2022 What two types of intermarriage are problematic for Messianic Jews? Why?
\n\u2022 What two types of intermarriage are appropriate for Messianic Jews? Why?
\n\u2022 What are the five ways in which intermarriage can benefit the Messianic Jewish movement?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Abrams, Elliot. Faith or Fear: How Jews Can Survive in a Christian America. New York: The Free Press, 1997.
\nAdelstein, Amy. \u201cU.S. Jewish Believers Surveyed.\u201d Mishkan 1 (1984): 52\u201354.
\nBernstein, Howard. \u201cEvangelizing Jews: Messianic Jews Versus Jews for Jesus.\u201d Annual meeting of the Association for the Sociology of Religion, Toronto. Aug. 1997.
\nCohen, Shaye J. D. The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties. Berkeley: Univ. of California, 1999.
\nCohen, Steven M. Content or Continuity? Alternative Bases for Commitment. New York: American Jewish Committee, 1991.
\nCohn-Sherbok, Dan. Messianic Judaism. London: Cassell, 2000.
\nDellaPergola, Sergio. \u201cNew Data on Demography and Identification Among Jews in the U.S.\u201d Jewish Intermarriage In Its Social Context. Ed. Paul Ritterband. New York: The Jewish Outreach Institute & The Center for Jewish Studies, The Graduate School of the City Univ. of New York, 1991.
\nEaton, Tony. \u201cForum: Should Messianic Jews Intermarry?\u201d Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 9 (Summer 1999): 32\u201364.
\nFeher, Shoshanah. Passing Over Easter: Constructing the Boundaries of Messianic Judaism. Walnut Creek: AltaMira, 1998.
\nFoster, Stephen. \u201cOutreach and the Synagogue: Preparing for the Future.\u201d Outreach and the Changing Reform Jewish Community: Creating an Agenda for Our Future. New York: UAHC, 1989. 111\u2013113.
\nHarris-Shapiro, Carol. Messianic Judaism: A Rabbi\u2019s Journey through Religious Change in America. Boston: Beacon, 1999.
\nKlayman, Seth. \u201cThe Messianic Jewish Youth Experience: Our Past, Present and Future.\u201d Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 11 (Summer 2000): 117\u2013141.
\nKosmin, Barry, Sidney Goldstein, Joseph Waksberg, Nava Lerer, Ariella Keysar and Jeffrey Scheckner. Highlights of the CJF 1990 National Jewish Population Survey. New York: Council of Jewish Federations, 1991.
\nNichol, Rich. \u201cBut Will Your Children Be Jewish?\u201d Boundaries (March\/April 1999): 19\u201323, 31.
\nPetsonk, Judy and Jim Remsen. The Intermarriage Handbook: A Guide for Jews & Christians. New York: Arbor House, 1988.
\nSchneider, Susan Weidman. Intermarriage: The Challenge of Living with Differences Between Christians and Jews. New York: The Free Press, 1989.
\nTobin, Gary A. Opening the Gates: How Proactive Conversion Can Revitalize the Jewish Community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.<\/p>\n
David J. Rudolph is the editor of Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism and of The Voice of the Lord Messianic Jewish Daily Devotional. He is the author of Understanding Messianic Judaism and a forthcoming book from Messianic Jewish Publishers on the subject of intermarriage. David has served as the leader of Shulchan Adonai Messianic Congregation. He and his wife, Harumi, are intermarried and are raising their two daughters as Messianic Jews.<\/p>\n
CHAPTER 15:
\nINTERMARRIAGE CAN HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON MESSIANIC JUDAISM<\/p>\n
\u2014Michael Schiffman<\/p>\n
Jewish life is a precious, yet delicate commodity. It is fragile because of all the factors that come against it in the world in which we live. Jewish life, culture, and faith is at the heart of the intermarriage issue, and consequently, the issue of intermarriage is complicated by the factors of other issues in the Jewish world; assimilation, patrilineal descent, and conversion of non-Jews to Judaism. Considering the effect of all these factors, and the present early stages of Messianic Judaism\u2019s development, intermarriage can have an adverse affect upon Messianic Judaism.<\/p>\n
Intermarriage and Assimilation<\/p>\n
Since the emancipation in the time of Napoleon, the influence of assimilation has had an eroding effect on the Jewish community all over the world, relegating Jewish identity to a peripheral part of life, rather than its central focus. The more open any society has been for Jewish people, the stronger the attraction toward assimilation has made Jewish lifestyle at best, difficult, and at worst, abandoned. Yet, assimilation is not the only threat Jewish life faces. A stronger force is Intermarriage.
\nIntermarriage, for the purposes of this writing, is understood to be the marriage of a Jew to a non-Jew. A Jew is a descendant of Jewish parents, regardless of how religious or non-religious the upbringing may have been. Being Jewish is not merely a religious affiliation, and not merely an ethnic background, but a blend of both, and anyone seeking to grapple with intermarriage must consider both factors in their understanding.
\nThere was a time, less than fifty years ago, when intermarriage between a Jew and non-Jew was a very rare thing. Today the rate of intermarriage is over fifty percent in America, and higher in other countries of the Diaspora. It is no wonder, that the world wide Jewish community is worried. As Messianic Jews, it should also be a concern of ours.
\nAccording to Sidney Goldstein, as quoted by Nathan Glazer, \u201cJews, once 3.7% of the American Population, are now only about 2%\u201d (8). Elliot Abrams, in his important book on the current state of the American Jewish community, Faith or Fear, states, \u201cOne-third of all Americans of Jewish ancestry no longer report Judaism as their religion. Of all Jews who have married since 1985, the majority have married non-Jews, while the rate of conversion of non-Jewish spouses is declining. Only 29 percent of the children of intermarried couples are raised as Jews. Demographers predict a drop of anywhere from one million to over two million in the American Jewish population in the next two generations\u201d (1\u20132).
\nThe issue of intermarriage is not simply about two star-crossed lovers from different sides of the tracks who fall in love but whose families do not approve of the union. It is about future generations. Abrams reports, \u201cA three-generational study of the Jews of Philadelphia found that no grandchildren of mixed marriages continued to identify as Jews\u201d (111).
\nWhen people from different religious and ethnic backgrounds get married, the bottom line question they will need to deal with is, \u201cHow will the children be raised?\u201d Will their children see themselves as Jews or non-Jews, and will they go on to have Jewish homes and raise Jewish children themselves? In ancient times, there was an attitude of inclusiveness towards outsiders becoming Jewish.
\nThere are many cases of Jews who were widowed or divorced, and later in life, married non-Jews. Their children (now adults) balked because the parents did exactly what they told their children not to do. The parent\u2019s response was \u201cthis marriage is for companionship and not for starting another family, so it\u2019s not an issue anymore.\u201d This scenario illustrates the issue that future generations are at the heart of the intermarriage debate. The Messianic Jewish movement has a very high percentage of intermarriage within its constituency. This is not because Messianic Judaism advocates intermarriage, but that many intermarried couples have found a home in its midst for good reasons. Messianic Judaism provides a place where the Jewish partner feels he or she is on home turf regarding his or her background, while the non-Jew finds they can still connect to belief in Yeshua, while adjusting culturally. While neither partner may have had any Messianic Jewish involvement before their marriage, they find more comfort in a Messianic synagogue than in a traditional church or a traditional synagogue. Many such couples are otherwise lost to churches or simply cut all affiliations and raise their children with some syncretistic blend, but in such cases, the children usually do not go on to live Jewish lives or choose Jewish spouses.
\nWhile it is a good thing for Messianic Judaism to be reaching out to intermarried couples\u2014both for its own growth, and also to assist intermarried couples in creating and maintaining Jewish continuity in their lives for themselves and their children\u2014this does not mean that Messianic Judaism should encourage intermarriage.<\/p>\n
Intermarriage and Patrilineal Descent<\/p>\n
In the wider Jewish world, the topic of intermarriage has been the starting point for other discussions\u2014most recently, the halakhic issue over patrilineal vs. matrilineal decent; whether the children of a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother are to be considered Jewish. Over the millennia, traditional halakhah has maintained that the children of a Jewish mother were to be considered Jewish regardless of the father\u2019s Jewish status, but the children of a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother were to be considered to be non-Jews.
\nIn the past decade, this halakhic position was challenged by the Reform movement, and has been at odds with the rest of the Jewish world ever since. The position was taken to reach out to intermarried families, and bring their children into the fold instead of leaving them outside. Messianic Judaism, has concurred on this issue with the Reform movement, and considers the children of intermarriage Jewish regardless of whether their Jewish status is through the father or mother.
\nWhile on one level it is easier to go along with the traditional halakhic view, because it is most widely accepted, it is hard to do so in real life situations. There are many cases of Jewish children who are Jewish on their mother\u2019s side or on both sides, yet they walk away from their Jewish identification, considering themselves to be agnostic or atheist. There are also instances of children who have Jewish fathers and non-Jewish mothers, who are deeply drawn to their Jewish heritage, and want to embrace it, yet are spurned from traditional circles and considered to be non-Jews.
\nWhen I was visiting Russia, I became friendly with a young Jewish man in his early thirties, an attorney, who was very drawn to Jewish prayer. When he found out that I prayed and donned t\u2019fillin each morning, he asked if I could teach him to daven (pray). I had a Russian-Hebrew siddur with me. I showed him which prayers to pray and lent him my t\u2019fillin to wear during the prayers. I was touched by how much it meant to him. Later he told me that his father is Jewish, but not his mother, and when he tried to go to the Orthodox synagogue, they told him to not come there, because they didn\u2019t consider him to be a Jew. He said he was also acquainted with the Reform Synagogue in the city, and knowing they accept people of patrilineal descent, I encouraged him to go there.
\nUpon reflection, I realized that being Jewish is not only a matter of descent, but is also rooted in what has been called the pintele Yid (the spark of Jewish being). If someone is of Jewish descent, through either parent, and manifests a spark of Jewish being, a love of Jewish people, Jewish faith, and Jewish culture, they should be embraced, and not rejected.
\nThe position of inclusiveness is more complicated than simply affirming the Jewish status of children with a patrilineal Jewish background. That is only the starting point. The main question remains. How will the children be raised, and what will be the way they perceive themselves? Will they go on to live Jewish lives, choose Jewish spouses and make Jewish homes, or will they see being Jewish as something their father or mother was, but consider it something not relevant for their own lives? This is not simply a Messianic issue, but one with which the entire Jewish world wrestles. The goal of a Jewish household is to produce Jewish children who will go on to live Jewish lives. Whatever Jewish identity is passed on to future generations, will be learned in the home and in the religious community, not merely from a family tree.
\nThe first step is that the couple must agree that they will have a Jewish household, and that their children will be raised Jewish. If the parents are not committed to this, their children will grow up confused, not sure of what they are. They will not fit in anywhere. When the parents agree, they need to communicate this to their parents. This is academic until the children are born. Once the children come into the world, the Jewish relatives are looking for a b\u2019rit milah and the non-Jewish relatives are looking for a baptism. Intermarriage means the parents are caught between their parents and in-laws.
\nI know an intermarried family where the mother is Jewish and the father is Irish Catholic. They decided to raise their children as Jews, as the father was not a religious man and did not mind his wife\u2019s religious convictions. His mother is a religious Catholic and when the children were born, she tried to put pressure on her daughter-in-law to convert or to at least have the children baptized as Catholics. The Jewish woman refused, and said her children will be raised as Jews. Because she stood her ground, and she and her husband were in agreement, they raised their children as Jews, were members of the synagogue, and her in-laws even helped chauffeur the children back and forth to Hebrew school. While this is a mixed marriage situation, it was made easier by the resolve of the parents to be of one mind on the issue, in spite of parental pressures.
\nUltimately, while it is fine to advocate that the Messianic Jewish community should embrace intermarried families, it should not in any way endorse intermarriage as a practice that should be embraced. It is entirely possible to love and accept intermarried families without having to affirm intermarriage as good and ideal. The main reason is Jewish survival. We want our people to go on. If a person takes a cup of coffee and puts a few ounces of water in it, it is still a cup of coffee. But if a person takes that cup of coffee, puts it under a faucet, and runs the water for thirty seconds, there may be some coffee left in the cup, but it is no longer a cup of coffee. If intermarriage as a practice is endorsed and encouraged in Messianic Judaism, in a few generations, Messianic Judaism will become a movement of people with one remote or imagined Jewish ancestry. There will be coffee in the cup, but it will not be a cup of coffee.
\nIf Messianic Judaism is, as it maintains, \u201ca Judaism,\u201d then it must be seeking to produce Jews. It is right and good to draw intermarried couples to Messianic Judaism, but this does not mean that intermarriage as a principle should be advocated and supported. On the other hand, it should not be completely forbidden either. There are some very fine couples that are intermarried, who have stable home lives\u2014better than some couples that are not intermarried. Shalom bayit (peace in the home) is an important concept, in any marriage, but especially in intermarriage. This should be strongly encouraged. If the Jewish and non-Jewish spouses can agree that their children will be raised as Jews. If they endeavor to be involved in a Messianic Jewish community, celebrate Shabbat and Jewish holidays in their homes, as well as in the synagogue\u2014they will have peace in this matter. Their children will grow up with a sense of who they are, instead of confusion over who they are.<\/p>\n
Intermarriage and Conversion<\/p>\n
Another part of a solution to the intermarriage issue should be encouraging the conversion of the non-Jewish spouse to Messianic Judaism. According to Dr. Lawrence J. Epstein, in his paper, \u201cWhy the Jewish People Should Welcome Converts,\u201d [the ancient writer Philo made reference to the] \u201c\u2026 conversion of gentiles who lived among the Jewish people, including, many children abandoned by their gentile families; and through marriage of a Jew to a gentile. Such efforts were deliberately not intrusive. They did not characteristically include belittling the beliefs of others, or the creation of a widespread exclusively missionary occupation.\u201d
\nWhile the Messianic Jewish community as a whole is not now, or ever has in the past advocated the conversion of gentiles, it would do well to reconsider this option for the sake of family continuity and shalom bayit. If the non-Jewish spouse is willing and wanting to make this step, it would go a long way towards cementing the Jewish identity of the family, and help remedy the situation of the non-Jew feeling like an eternal outsider. If a non-Jewish spouse converts, they are no longer a non-Jew, and the marriage is no longer an intermarriage. Conversion involves not only a holding to Jewish beliefs, but also a commitment to the Jewish people. Being Jewish is not merely holding to certain beliefs or enjoying a culture. A Jew must be concerned for all other Jews. Conversion is marrying the whole Jewish people. A person must not convert as a means to get married to a Jew, but they must be willing to take upon themselves all that it means to be a Jew.
\nAccording to research by Ergon Mayer, \u201cOnly 24% of children of mixed marriages identify as Jews, while 84% of the children of conversion do. 86% of conversion couples joined synagogues, only 38% of their children did. Only 24% of converts say they would discourage intermarriage\u201d (24).
\nIntermarriage may indeed be \u201cwhen worlds collide,\u201d but the collision can be softened, and even remedied. Intermarriage can have an adverse affect upon Messianic Judaism. Messianic Judaism can not sit by and watch our people dissolve. As Mordechai the Tzaddik said to Queen Esther, \u201cFor if you remain completely silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father\u2019s house will perish. Yet who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?\u201d (Esther 4:14). Messianic Judaism must be part of the solution.<\/p>\n
Questions for Discussion<\/p>\n
\u2022 How can an intermarried couple nurture Jewish identity in their children?
\n\u2022 What are ways in which a couple can be connected to the Jewish world outside their home?
\n\u2022 How can a non-Jewish spouse feel more connected and welcome in our midst?
\n\u2022 Why is it important to pass on Jewish identity and heritage to our children?<\/p>\n
Bibliography<\/p>\n
Abrams, Elliot. Faith or Fear. New York: The Free Press, 1997.
\nEpstein, Lawrence. \u201cWhy the Jewish People Should Welcome Converts.\u201d Judaism, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Summer 1994). http:\/\/www.convert.org\/judaism.htm.
\nGlazer, Nathan. \u201cNew Perspectives on American Jewish Sociology.\u201d American Jewish Year Book. New York: American Jewish Committee; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1987.
\nMayer, Ergon. Children of Intermarriage. New York: American Jewish Committee, 1989.<\/p>\n
Michael Schiffman grew up in a traditional Jewish family in New York. He has earned three degrees including a D.Min. The author of Return of the Remnant, over the past two decades, he has been the leader of three Messianic Jewish congregations. Dr. Schiffman lectures on a variety of Jewish subjects in the UMJC Yeshiva and is an Adjunct Professor of Rabbinic Literature at Fuller Theological Seminary in association with the Messianic Jewish Theological Institute.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
FOREWORD \u201cI am your friend!\u201d Thus began Dr. Dan Cohn-Sherbok\u2019s speech to the annual conference of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations in the summer of 2000. With a skeptic\u2019s ear, I sat back and listened to this gentle, Reform rabbi explain why he was a friend of Messianic Jews. In case you don\u2019t know … <\/p>\n