- The Messianic blogosphere and me – Daniel is fed up with the discussions on Messianic blogs:
I’ve recently started to notice that for the most part interaction on the blogs I visit tends to be quite poor. There’s much circular debate and it’s hard to find a quality dialogue that builds on what is discussed before.
- Mixed – James on Jews, gentiles, and distinctions in the Messianic movement.
- Numbers 4 and the Messianic movement – Darren summarizes Messianic teacher Daniel Lancaster, saying we need more old wise people instead of all the crazy zealous young people. Even though I’m one of those crazy zealous young people, I agree – we need to cool down the zeal and head towards a more pragmatic approach.
- To convert or not to convert – Amusing, half-serious post by Derek Leman on some reasons gentiles ought not to convert to Messianic Judaism.
Video blogs
- John McKee on Jew/gentile equality and distinctions in the Messianic community. He nails it, offering a clear, big picture view of the the Jew/gentile issue in the Messianic movement.
Podcasts
- Pastoral Epistles – John McKee on 1st Timothy 2:8-12. Big issue tackled here in the analysis: women in leadership? Paul’s words here suggest no. McKee tackles this very touchy subject.
Enjoy the tasty bracha bits.
A trivia question:
ReplyDeleteJohn Mackee mentioned that the outpouring of the HS happened in the Upper Room. How do we know this? Acts 2:1: "And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in ONE PLACE."
Was this "one place" the Upper ROOM? Could have been that 3000 people were baptized in the Upper room?
I'm expecting a surprise. The answer is no?
ReplyDeleteWell, let's see....
ReplyDeleteCould the streets of Yerushalim of old accomodate 3000 people?
Nowhere in the whole text up and including Peter's speach does it say that the disciples left where they were at the opening in V. 1.
Where else would 12 Law-abiding Jews be on the day of Pentecost? In the time of worship?
Were there any baptismal pools to accomodate 3000 in the Upper Room?
V. 2: "...the whole HOUSE they were sitting..."
What House can it be?
you do the math...
Blessings
Dan
Dan, I was clear to say *at* the Upper Room in the YouTube podcast. That could imply a location immediately adjacent to the Temple complex.
ReplyDeleteLet's not make too big a deal out of this, because Biblical scholars are not agreed among themselves.
I agree John. It was just a trivia question.
ReplyDeleteBTW, a very good teaching.
Thank you. :)
ReplyDeleteI think it would be good if John McKee were medical doctor as I am sure that he could administer a needed injection and the patient wouldn't feel a thing.
ReplyDeleteI mean that in a positive way.
The whole Jew/Gentile thing is just wearing people out. It is distracting and will produce no usable fruit in the end.
Wild olive branches and natural olive branches. Saints and sinners. Kings and priests.
This is not Yitz'chak and Yishama'el, Ya'akov and Esav. We are the sons of YHWH, brothers in faith, workers in the Kingdom of Messiah.
What upper room? They were on the roof!
Shalom
Efrayim
"The whole Jew/Gentile thing is just wearing people out. It is distracting and will produce no usable fruit in the end."
ReplyDeleteDon't you worry, we are working to remedy the situation, so that the Jewish Movement for Messiah can once again focus on its purpose.
And just what exactly would that "solution" be Gene?
ReplyDeletePlease do share with the rest of the class.
So, I just want to clarify. J.K. McKee says that:
ReplyDelete(1) those of us emphasizing bilateral ecclesiology do so because we have insecurities as leaders
(2) that we are errant in ignoring the unity of Jew and Gentile teaching of Paul
(3) that the solution, apparently, is for all followers of Yeshua/Jesus to keep Torah and live as de facto Jews.
And you post this as a positive example of discretion and theological clarity.
A fact that this position ignores: Paul's letters are written with the Gentile mission in mind and frequently indicate freedom from Jewish identity markers. Paul's letters indicate freedom from Sabbath observance, for example.
So, if you deny distinctions (for Jew and Gentile only or men and women too?) then the real Pauline prescription would be for Messianic Jews to join the church and forget about Torah.
What McKee and others are doing is misreading Paul as a One Law teacher and then saying the unity passages eliminate distinction. This is hardly clarity.
Further, his rhetoric is far from unifying. But that is probably just because I am "insecure."
Meanwhile, MJ is about the revival of Jewish people in Yeshua. If you can't get excited about that, why are you in Messianic Judaism (note the connection to Jew in the name)?
Derek Leman
Derek, I think you're drawing conclusions beyond what John reached. But I'll let JK respond there.
ReplyDelete>> And you post this as a positive example of discretion and theological clarity.
Absolutely.
The alternative, a popular position among UMJC and MJTI, suggests Messiah has 2 assemblies, one for Jews, another for gentiles. We find this without merit from a Scriptural standpoint. I recognize that theology being born out of religious practicality, not out of Scripture.
It also positions Two House folks like myself as evil demons likened to the synagogue of Satan. It rebuilds the wall of separation between Jew and gentile.
We've heard all the bilateral arguments. We reject them. We're pursuing something more Scriptural. You ought to join us.
Without wanting to get mired in a the endless tit-for-tat debates, my advice to those of all sides is that you go off and you focus on the work that you believe the Lord has called you to do. Time in the longrun will tell which perspective accomplishes the most for Him and for the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel.
ReplyDeleteJudah:
ReplyDeleteThere are two very real sense in which you are trying to "have your cake and eat it too."
(1) you wish to represent McKee's video as an example of irenic, balanced discussion while ignoring his claim that us bilaterals are motivated by insecurity.
(2) you wish to ignore Paul's "freedom from Torah" for Gentiles theme (universally recognized by Pauline commentators) while saying us bilaterals ignore his "unity of Jew and Gentile" theme.
As I said, if Paul is talking about one-size-fits-all community in Yeshua, then we'd best all quit keeping Shabbat and dietary laws.
Derek Leman
J.K.:
ReplyDeleteYes, by all means post a video arguing against bilateral ecclesiology and then characterize any response as prolonging an argument needlessly.
If you didn't wish a debate, then why did you post the video? Why did you say insecurity is our motivation?
It may just be that we find the One Law interpretation of Paul completely untenable.
Derek Leman
Derek, the YouTube video was posted to our ministry list and then Judah decided to repost it (and I didn't specifically ask him to do it, either). I don't recall ever using the description of "bilateral ecclesiology" in the podcast, but instead my major focus was to draw people's attention attention to Hebrews 10:23-25 as we will shortly be observing Shavuot.
ReplyDeleteClaiming that much of the clamor of the past year has been caused by various "insecurities" is admittedly a broad statement, and for the record includes a wide variety of persons not limited to one particular ideology. I hope this clarifies things.
"my advice to those of all sides is that you go off and you focus on the work that you believe the Lord has called you to do."
ReplyDeleteJ.K., I too thought that it was awfully rich of you to stir the pot once again, but now refuse to partake from it.
"It also positions Two House folks like myself as evil demons likened to the synagogue of Satan."
ReplyDeleteJudah, do you know how to fix such an awful perception?
"It rebuilds the wall of separation between Jew and gentile."
No, that wall is long gone and no one can rebuild it. However, One-Law theology does build a new wall of a wholly different kind - one between "Torah-observant" Gentiles and Christian Gentiles.
>> my advice to those of all sides is that you go off and you focus on the work that you believe the Lord has called you to do.
ReplyDeleteYou're right. That is more important than these little theological spats. Thanks for the encouragement.
Might as well post Hebrews 10:23-25 here for everyone to see:
Hold unswervingly to the hope we profess; the One who promised is faithful. Consider how we may spur each other toward love and good deeds. Do not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing. Encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
Just a historical note I found in the paper this morning:
ReplyDeleteon this date in 1896, the Supreme Court, in Plessy v. Ferguson, endorsed "separate but equal" racial segregation, a concept that was renounced 58 years later with the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision.
If Sha'ul was promoting a one size fits all messianic congregation then we'd best all start keeping Shabbat and the dietary laws.
We are supposed to be pleasing YHWH and not ourselves.
"on this date in 1896, the Supreme Court, in Plessy v. Ferguson, endorsed "separate but equal" racial segregation, a concept that was renounced 58 years later with the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision."
ReplyDeleteEfrayim, here are the ways your comparison of racial segregation vs Messianic Jewish movement is bogus (not to mention insulting):
1. Gentiles will always be part of MJ congregations (just as they can freely attend mainstream synagogues) and no one is forcing anyone out.
2. Messianic Judaism is designed to accommodate the unique spiritual needs of the Jewish followers of Yeshua. As such, it's no more segregationist than say, a Korean congregation that caters to Koreans. Besides, since Jews have MORE restrictions placed on them (through Torah) than non-Jews - the discrimination is actually against the Jews.
3. Those Gentiles who truly desire to become part of the Jewish people (instead of simply playing pretend Jews and toying with Torah), are beginning to have the option to convert via official MJ auspices.
Derek,
ReplyDeleteYou talk a good game, but you have yet to defend Bilateral doctrine exegetically. On your blog you commanded me for doing just that, yet you have refused to respond, why?
I have claimed that Bilateral can only work at the Eschaton, not in the here and now. Your continues claim that the majority of commentators agree with your version is silly in light of Yeshua standing up against the majority of His time.
As of now you have no argument, at least until you ellect to respond to our claims. Preaching is not good enough anymore, we have come to far in this debate to just pay lip service.
>>Messianic Judaism is designed to accommodate the unique spiritual needs of the Jewish followers of Yeshua<,
ReplyDeleteI guess the design is not working so well?
How come there are more Jews in the churches than in MJ?
How come there are more Gentiles than Jews in MJ?
"I guess the design is not working so well?"
ReplyDeleteNo, MJ lost sight of the Jews.
"How come there are more Jews in the churches than in MJ?"
Two reasons (at least):
1. Jews are assimilated and disconnected from Judaism. They, for the most part, don't care to worship Jewishly or with other Jews. Most do not even know what they heck Messianic Judaism even is. When they hear about Yeshua and their eyes are opened to him, most Jewish converts to Christianity automatically think "Christianity" as the valid universal expression for all believers, including Jews (since Judaism has failed to teach them about the true Messiah).
2. Most Messianic places are not Jewish, but Pentecostal churches with Jewish decorations and broken Hebrew, and the few Jews which ARE in them are as ignorant about Judaism as the Gentiles who make up the majority of both leadership and attendees of these places. Why become part of such places, when churches, generally speaking, are much more stable theologically and mentally?
"How come there are more Gentiles than Jews in MJ?"
Many reasons why Gentiles are drawn:
1. They believe that these places have inside track on theology and G-d.
2. They like new worship experiences (especially true in case of Pentecostals, which make up the majority of Messianic places).
3. They fancy themselves as lost and found Israelites or conjure up some improbable Jewish ancestry.
4. They bought the lie that appropriating Mosaic Torah, Jewish traditions, taking on Hebrew names, and calling themselves Israelites or Messianic Jews gives them the upper hand against other "pagan", "Constantinite", "Torah-less" Christians.
5. Some (very few, in my experience) are genuinely in love with the Jewish people and want to bless them and be close to them. Those are the folks are welcome.
And Jewish believers - there are just very few of us who have realized that believing in Yeshua doesn't mean that we need to convert out of Judaism and live as Gentiles. Most who have trusted in Messiah are staying in churches (in our congregation we have done a good job bringing many of them out). It doesn't mean that we need to make up our small numbers by bringing on more and more non-Jews and pretend that we still have Jewish congregations. Better stay small, Jewish and relevant to our people.
Gene,
ReplyDeleteHow do you expect to fix this broken sink? Do you have a plan?
Are you going to found a new organization? How are you going to call it? A better MJ? A greater MJ? First MJ? Like the Baptists?
"How do you expect to fix this broken sink?"
ReplyDeleteI certainly won't a rat and jump off, Dan.
J.K.:
ReplyDeleteSome earnest feedback (without malice): it's difficult for me to receive your critique/corrective/call for mutual submission between Jews and Gentiles in good faith when it follows an ad hominem attack on Jewish Messianic leaders for being "insecure." Specifically, it makes me wonder what you mean exactly by mutual submission if it allows for you to broadcast judgments like that about your opponents to your followers.
We've never met, but you're generally conciliatory in your blog comments...perhaps this is why it surprised me to hear you state this judgment to all your followers in your video. I don't think that's fair.
By my count, the "insecurity card" gets played fairly regularly in the blogosphere. I personally find it frustrating, as it's basically unanswerable. Perhaps talk about "insecurity" should be reserved for personal conversations, instead public discourse (especially referring to braod groups of people). At the very least it should come along with more concrete evidence than "you hold to a bilateral ecclesiology."
In any case, that's policy I try to follow...I'll trust you all to hold me to it!
"won't be"
ReplyDeleteYahnatan, the purpose of my podcast was to draw our attention to Hebrews 10:23-25, and nowhere in the podcast did I ever even speak the term "bilateral ecclesiology."
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, I think there is plenty of "insecurity" to go around on all sides of the broad Messianic spectrum, including those of either the Two-House or One Law persuasions as well.
I think it is quite sad that what I actually tried to focus our attention to with love, good deeds, and service has been completely overlooked.
Dan Ben Zvi:
ReplyDeleteYou like to say things like, "you've never defended your bilateral view exegetically."
Yes, I have. On my blog, in my Paul book, and frequently. Even in this comment thread I said that:
(1) Paul's letters are written to the Gentile mission and
(2) Paul's letters have a freedom from Torah for Gentiles theme that is noted in practically all the commentaries.
Thus, even in this comment thread I have given exegetical support for much of the bilateral view. But, it is easy to throw stones and you have a talent for an easy hobby.
Derek Leman
J.K.:
ReplyDeleteWould anyone be criticizing you if you had made a podcast about love?
You made a podcast about people who threaten to deny equality and who are motivated by insecurity.
If you'd stuck to love, you'd not be catching heat.
Derek Leman
This question is addressed to adherents of bilateral ecclesiology:
ReplyDeleteJudah wrote: "The alternative, a popular position among UMJC and MJTI, suggests Messiah has 2 assemblies, one for Jews, another for gentiles. "
My question is: do you feel that this is an accurate/complete summary of your ecclesiology? Does bilateral ecclesiology really mean "2 assemblies"? Obviously "bi" means two and "ecclesia" refers to churches. But what about the lateral?
I say this because sometimes it seems like adherents of bilateral ecclesiology accept this summary without objection. However, Mark Kinzer is credited with creating the term, and I believe that the full term he created is "bilateral ecclesiology in solidarity with Israel." When I read Kinzer it sometimes seems to me that he's talking about one large assembly which has distinct parts within it. And there's also this "solidarity with Israel" component--by which I think he means that Jewish believers in Jesus remain a part of "all Israel"--a present remnant within a future whole. Thus, in Kinzer's case, bilateral ecclesiology seems to reach beyond simply those Jews who believe in Yeshua at this present point--i.e. it has an eschatalogical dimension).
Perhaps I need to go back and re-read Postmissionary Messianic Judaism...Gene, Derek--want to help me out here? Feel free to point me to an existing relevant blog post.
Derek,
ReplyDeleteWe do not throw stones anymore, remember? We all pledge that on your blog. No offense meant.
Having said that, I don't see on this comment board any exegetical support for you position. All I see is two comments which is unsupported by Scriptures.
On your blog I have asked you to respond to my comments which you ignored. how do you expect to have a debate when you choose to ignore what others have to say, their reason notwitstaning?
"Perhaps I need to go back and re-read Postmissionary Messianic Judaism"
ReplyDeleteYahnatan, I think you've summarized the book's definition of "bi-lateral ecclesiology" quite succinctly. In fact, one the things that really jumped out at me when reading Kinzer's book is the loving UNITY he's seeking with Christians/Gentile believers. So much so, that some accused him of being TOO ecumenical.
J.K., you wrote:
ReplyDelete"I think it is quite sad that what I actually tried to focus our attention to with love, good deeds, and service has been completely overlooked."
This is probably due to Judah's summary of the video. (And, to be fair to Judah, you DO talk for 3-4 minutes before getting to the Timothy or Hebrews passages.)
FWIW, I watched the video before anyone else had commented on it. My "earnest feedback" above really was my straight-up reaction to the video. If I had felt encouraged by your word, I would have said so--but the fact is, I didn't. I'm not lying when I say it was hard to receive your exhortation in good faith when I feel like you just finished slandering me. I just thought it would be right if I told you why.
Yahanatan, I appreciate your honesty and directness.
ReplyDeleteDirected towards Derek, because he likes to delete my post...
ReplyDeleteOr your understanding of Paul is way off... Considering your other post, I am going with that...
Anyways, I think bilateral ecclesiology misses a point when you try to say that the Messianic Movement is for Jews... If this were true, then why did Paul go to the Gentiles? The original followers of Yeshua were the true Messianic Movement, they set the example, from there example, we don't come up with a ridiculous two religion, two faith, two lord scenario, no, we come up to a movement seeking to bring Jews to the Messiah and Gentiles as well... but Jews not to a new religion, gentiles one the other hand are being brought to the Jewish religion... No where does the bible teach a separate or new religion for gentiles... and yet this is exactly what bilateral ecclesiology suggest, no way...
Jeruz:
ReplyDeleteYour main points are:
(1) there is only one biblical religion
(2) it is Torah
(3) so all the Christians need to start living Torah.
This is exactly what Paul's opponents said in Acts 15. So, I guess in one sense of the word your position is biblical.
Derek Leman
Your main points are:
ReplyDelete"(1) there is only one biblical religion"
Show another one, I dare you!
"(2) it is Torah"
Torah is the foundation for obeying God... if there is another way, please show it.
"(3) so all the Christians need to start living Torah."
What else would they start living? In reality, if Christians are not supposed to keep Torah, they better not try to imitate Yeshua, because that would involve keeping Torah.
""This is exactly what Paul's opponents said in Acts 15. So, I guess in one sense of the word your position is biblical."
You do realize others interpret Acts 15 differently than you right?
Jeruz:
ReplyDeleteCan you please point me to a well-researched commentary that interprets Acts 15 as meaning: we won't make Gentiles get circumcised now, but we will later after they have attended synagogue for a little while?
Derek Leman
"Can you please point me to a well-researched commentary that interprets Acts 15 as meaning: we won't make Gentiles get circumcised now, but we will later after they have attended synagogue for a little while?"
ReplyDeleteNo, because Acts 15 is not about that issue, it is about how Gentiles are saved and brought into the Jewish community.
Maybe it is because you ask the wrong questions, you get the wrong answers?
Zion = Jeruz... Jeruz is my Wordpress name.
ReplyDeleteJK, I loved your video message, I think it hits right on key... Obviously this is a big issue within the Messianic Movement, I know you say time will tell... I kind of think we should hash it all out... seems like at one point we will have to. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteZion/Jeruz, I am a good Scots pragmatist, which means I am going step back and reflect on the responses the YouTube podcast solicited, and when I say anything in the future on this subject they will be targeted words.
ReplyDeleteI trust that in the sovereign plan of God things will work out, even though it might not be the way that any of us as finite mortals would choose.
Three hours before candle lighting I have infinitely better things to do than blog.
ReplyDeleteThis debate is tiresome, wearying, and downright counterproductive.
Given that tonight is the commemoration of Matan torah, the giving of the Torah at Sinai, I think it is very appropriate for this discussion.
Having been a gentile in the free for all that is the one law movement, the "Gentile" law movement as it is, I feel I certainly have a valid responsibility to comment. I find it interesting that Kinzer and his peers are always loooked on as some sort of Messianic boogeyman.
You know "careful or the bilateral ecclesia will get you."
Jewish believers who want to see a legitimate expression of judaism as taken through the eyes of Messiah, yup that seems like an outrageous and offensive position to me. To Mark and Karl and Stuart and Derek, Yasher Koach!!!
To me , Kinzer is not the boogeyman, nor is a bilateral ecclesia. The boogeyman for me is a 350 pound truck driver from Mobile named Billy Bob "Moshe ben Avraham" Sugarbaker, who wears camouflage colored tsitsit that dangle from sterling silver rings off his belt loops. The camouflage color of the tsitsit of course matches the "G-d loves the IDF" t-shirt that he wears everyday, when he is not wearing his camouflage colored "prayer shawl". He does these things of course because he is led by the "spirit" and he has a far better idea of what Judaism is then those 'evil men who follow their traditions of man".
Caught up in some very physical trappings of his so called "biblical Judaism" he never fails to let people know that the "spirit" has given him the freedom to interpret his faith and practise any way he wants.
Divorced from any sense of the nature or basis of what "Judaism" really is,he continues unabashed and unabated in somethng that is neither Judaism or biblical, and quite frankly borders on offensive, if not downright anti-semitic.
Any move towards establishing a legitimate expression of Messianic Judaism, starting at a Jewish perspective is certainly better than a move to legitimizing more Sugarbakers.
Mr. Mckee, I fully agree that this movement needs to step back and examine its purpose in the greater scheme of things. Sadly, unfortunately, I think that re-evaluation needs to come more desperately and more urgently from a quarter other than the UMJC/MJTI.
Particularly at this time, at this festival of Shavuot. Recognizing the biblical nature of how the Torah was given and to who.
Chag Sameach and blessings at this feast time.
Michael W., I don't think we've ever interacted before, but I have a consistent track record of speaking against the a- or non-traditional type of Torah observance of which you speak. For the most part, my own level of Torah-keeping is on par with the Conservative movement.
ReplyDeleteI wish you chag sameach as well!
Yo sugarbaker,
ReplyDeletethe Torah was given to all who were standing there at that time listening and willing to do what was commanded with all their heart.
What? you want to be special at the expense of someone else?
Shame on you.
Gene,
ReplyDeleteI didn't compare the MJ to racial segregation, you did.
"Efrayim, here are the ways your comparison of racial segregation vs Messianic Jewish movement is bogus (not to mention insulting)"
It's nice that you let Gentiles attend your fellowship. I suppose if a white person really wanted to they could attend Jeremiah Wright's church. Why they would want to is beyond me, but it could happen.
Now did I just compare your fellowship to a Black Nationalist church?
You saying that "no one" is asking Gentiles to leave their MJ congregations is not entirely accurate is it?
When the shaking starts so much of these challenges will fall by the wayside.
A new day awaits. May we all be ready.