Dear lovers of Messiah, keepers of God’s commandments.
Please draw your attention to these public statements by Boaz Michael, head of Messianic organization First Fruits of Zion, made this week on various Messianic blogs:
The greater grievance is that of the One Law and Two House message–because it gives the impression of support for Israel and the Jewish people when in reality, the sad reality, it is another attempt to diminish it. The worst kind of friend is the one who you really think is your friend and over time turns out to be your enemy.
By “One Law”, he means gentile Messianics who keep Torah.
I interpret this statement as, “One Law and Two House people are false-friends, indeed enemies, of Israel.”
Fine blog reader, am I misinterpreting this statement?
Supresessionism is really a DNA level problem with One Law and Two House thinkers–it is going to take some bold leaders to address it and fix it.
By “Supersessionism”, he means replacement theology, and thus, gentiles who keep Torah are practicing replacement theology.
I interpret this statement as, “One Law and Two House Messianics are replacement theologians.”
Fine blog reader, am I misinterpreting this statement?
I feel like I’m the last of the hold-outs. Friends and family have been telling me to get out of Dodge and distance myself from FFOZ over Torah and the divinity of Yeshua, but I’ve held out. I’ve have been a staunch ally of FFOZ for 6+ years. I’ve stood up for them on the web, rebuked One Law folks for wishing their financial ruin, attended their conferences, promoted their materials, heck, even stumped for them at my local congregation.
Hearing Boaz call me a replacement theologian and an enemy of Israel freaking hurts.
Judah, I think your readers would be better served by seeing Boaz's comment in context as well as learning about the roots of supersessionism AMONG BELIEVERS IN MESSIAH and whether or not your readers can recognize supersessionist theology in any of the modern day Christian and messianic movements (and perhaps even their own) by visiting my blog.
ReplyDeleteNotice Gene did not answer the question, "Did I misinterpret Boaz's words?"
ReplyDeleteI am left to assume this is because he, too, believes that virtually all Messianics (except the niche who agree with his Bilateral Ecclesiology theology) are replacement theologians, and perhaps enemies of Israel.
"Notice Gene did not answer the question, "Did I misinterpret Boaz's words?"
ReplyDeleteBoaz already told you that you DID. Those are his words to interpret. I just wanted people to see the context.
As for me, as you read on my blog, I do believe that there's a great deal of supersessionism in various parts of "messianic movement". Some groups are practically built around it. I find that many (but certain not all) in the One-Law/Two-House movement are friends of the type of Israel that only exists in their own minds and within their own pet theologies - that is Israel they would like to see exist, not the Israel that exists today. Again, there are exceptions and I do not mean to imply that everyone in One-Law or Two-House feels that way.
Perhaps you do not? Yasher koach, if that's the case.
I just re-read my statement. I did not intend to insult or to cause hurt. It was a broad and general statement (within the context of Gene's blog) that I recognize could be read by some in a hurtful way. I am sorry if I offended or hurt you or others. I recall the frustration and pain that I felt when I was first presented with the idea that my own “one law” perspective was a form of replacement theology. At the time (2004ish) I rejected it the accusation. It was hurtful. But the seed that was planted at that time nagged me, challenged me, and ultimately was one of the perspectives that changed me.
ReplyDeleteI believe that “one law” people genuinely and sincerely think they are Israel’s greatest friends and are adding to or enhancing Israel. I think that the theology is based upon and is maintained under the banner of love, connection and solidarity with Israel. I appreciate that—however, I do believe, or have come to understand, how it is a form of supersessionism. Perhaps my perspectives of the broad movement on a theological and pragmatic level enable me to see this.
I rarely enter into the blog world. Words can easily offend and be misunderstood or not fully communicated.
Judah, I think you have taken my words out of contexts and used them for your own gain. You have mischaracterized me and my intentions.
Actually, I think you did misinterpret his words, or at least his intent, Judah. The Internet is a wonderful way to communicate, but sometimes the text-only interface leaves much to be desired.
ReplyDeleteI had a chat with Boaz just a little bit ago and got a better understanding of what he's trying to say. The "issues" involved in his message regarding OL and TH have two expressions.
The first is that FFOZ believes that non-Jews can choose to keep the commandments in solidarity and alignment with Israel in something of the same vein as Rabbi Twersky's viewpoint. I wouldn't really call it "Divine Invitation", but many and perhaps most of the Torah can be applied to non-Jews who may not be obligated in the same sense as Jews, but who can respond to God through the mitzvot.
The second expression (at least as I understand it), comes in when OL and TH members and organizations state and believe they are "Israel" in the same sense that any born Jews are and any ethnic or genetic or family-relatedness to the Children of Israel for Jews becomes obliterated by that "joining". If you'll look at the major objections most (but not all) MJ proponents raise with OL and TH, it's not the fact that non-Jews are saying the Shema and laying tefillin; it's that non-Jews are saying they are just as (spiritually) Jewish as any born (or converted) Jew.
I think that's more what Boaz was trying to say (and obviously I can't speak for him) when he used the term "DNA". If non-Jews believe they are so much "Israel" that they've "fused" their identity and their beings to Jewish Israel, it could be viewed as an odd form of "assimilation" (please hear me out). Traditional Judaism fears assimilation because it effectively reduces the number of Jewish people on the planet. If a group of non-Jews says they are Israel, too...it's like saying to Jewish people that it doesn't matter that they're Jewish anymore.
That's the best I can do to try and answer the question about whether or not you misunderstood Boaz. I don't know if his comment could have been written better but I do know that the message you're taking out of his words isn't what he actually was trying to say.
If you don't believe me, email him and ask.
You guys are telling me that I have misinterpreted Boaz's words. Ok.
ReplyDeleteSo here are my interpretations again:
1. “One Law and Two House Messianics are replacement theologians.”
2. “One Law and Two House people are false-friends, indeed enemies, of Israel.”
You guys are telling me I misinterpreted Boaz, but then go on to explain that OL and TH people are, in fact, supersessionist enemies of Israel.
Which is it?
"Supresessionism is really a DNA level problem with One Law and Two House thinkers–it is going to take some bold leaders to address it and fix it."
ReplyDeleteThat still did not stop Boaz from attending MIA conferences so he can peddel his books. A disingenuous dude isn't he our lovebal Boaz?....
"could be viewed as an odd form of "assimilation" (please hear me out). Traditional Judaism fears assimilation because it effectively reduces the number of Jewish people on the planet."
ReplyDeleteYah, James, leave it to the Gentile Boaz to worry about Jewish assimilation and use this to advance the theology of the so-called "Divine invitation"......
I can't help but think about what Justin wrote on his blog this morning.
ReplyDeleteThis is also exactly what I mean to avoid when I say that it's possible to disagree (or have misunderstandings) and still not personalize conflict.
"You guys are telling me I misinterpreted Boaz, but then go on to explain that OL and TH people are, in fact, supersessionist enemies of Israel. Which is it?"
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, let's not include every OL and TH person into the mix. Second, Judah, not enemies in the sense "we hate you and want to kill you", but rather in a sense that "we oppose your beliefs about applicability of Torah to Gentiles, reject Jewish interpretation of Torah, but especially we oppose your understanding of what Israel."
So, a better word would perhaps be "opposers" - enemies may be a bit strong, although in Romans 11:28 NT uses it to describe Jews as enemies of the Gospel for Gentiles' sake (so that, mysteriously, Gentiles may be saved because of that, of all things!)
While historically supersesionism has quite frequently (but not always) resulted in physical harm to the Jewish people, nobody is even suggesting that OL and TH kind of supersessionism threatens Jews with any kind of violence (G-d forbid)!
It's difficult -- in fact, excruciatingly painstaking -- to not take "get personal" when a longtime friend says something so hurtful.
ReplyDeleteBut I have tried to look at this objectively, which is why I have asked you fine blog readers if I am misinterpreting this, and refrained from diatribes in this blog.
But what I'm hearing is, even though Boaz wasn't so direct as to say we're enemies of Israel, he doesn't apologize for, and still believes, we are supersessionists.
It's kind of like saying,
"Honey, I'm sorry you were offended when I said you're the whore of Babylon. I have come to understand that you are the whore of Babylon. Perhaps you can't see it yet because you don't have my broad, pragmatic perspective."
See I'm sorry you were offended.
Also, just want to point this one thing out: while it's true that most supersesionists are not Jewish (for obvious reasons), there are today and have been plenty of Jewish-born supersesionists (primarily within Christianity, but also within certain messianic offshoots).
ReplyDeleteJames,
ReplyDeleteYou watch alot of movies, how about "The wizard of Oz," you know, the man behind the mask?...Sometime you have to unmask someone in order to get to the truth.
"Supersesionism"
I wonder how does it compare to "racism" in which MJ so openly engage?
Ok. To recap, here is what Gene is saying:
ReplyDeleteJudah's faulty interpretation:
"One Law and Two House people are supersessionist enemies of Israel."
Gene's correct interpretation:
"Most One Law and Two House people are supersessionist opposers of Israel."
Thank you for that contribution, Gene.
"Thank you for that contribution, Gene."
ReplyDeleteAs I said before, the "Israel" that many supersessionists love is the one that comfortably resides primarily in their own theology.
Amusing: Offended
ReplyDeleteSince this is between you and Boaz, Judah, you could just pick up the phone, call him, and discuss it privately. Or, email him and ask him to call you.
ReplyDeleteJudah, I am sorry that OL and TH being supersessionists at their cores and us not liking this fact offends you.
ReplyDeleteIs that a joke?
ReplyDelete@James,
ReplyDeleteI talked to Boaz privately, already.
The reason I posted here is, it's important for Messianics to see what our leaders are saying.
Judah, even though I view some of your beliefs regarding Israel as superessionist, I still like you and respect you for many other things that you are and do. In the same vein, I greatly disagree with those in Christianity "proper" for the very same beliefs and views, but I still like and respect them as people and fellow followers of Messiah. It will not prevent me from speaking out when I see harmful stuff being taught and believed by millions (neither did it stop you from speaking out as you did today on this YOU thought were wrong).
ReplyDelete@James,
ReplyDeleteI talked to Boaz privately, already.
The reason I posted here is, it's important for Messianics to see what our leaders are saying.
Sorry. I guess I was expecting something like, Boaz and I talked and now that I've heard the words out of his own mouth... Something like that.
I guess I must be getting something fundamentally different out of my conversation with him than you did. I don't see Boaz being racist or bad or evil or anything.
At this point, I should accept some measure of responsibility for this whole matter. Boaz asked me to have a look at the comment that started this whole mess before he actually posted it. I suggested some minor corrections, but I guess I should have used a finer "fine-toothed comb".
My bad.
And in some ways, I'm responsible for you abandoning your congregation, James. I put you in contact with Boaz last summer. I directed people (Boaz, Derek, Gene, Ovadia, others) to your blog, and they convinced you to abandon your beliefs, with the result of you leaving the congregation you now lead. And where this road leads, I am only fearful.
ReplyDeleteNow that I've seen the fruit, I sincerely apologize to you and your congregation for bringing this on you. I hope I have not caused a single person to lose their faith or their salvation through Yeshua because of it.
I replied to your email Judah, so you can stop taking responsibility for my decisions. I'm not as fragile as you might imagine ;-)
ReplyDeleteThey say a refining fire burns away the dross and leaves a more pure product. The blogosphere gets pretty hot and I'd like to think that my decisions as a result of "the heat" will result in a purer product.
Since I wear my heart on my sleeve (via TCP/IP, HTTP, and HTML), you'll continue to witness the results.
I am reading through the comments here. Is there a link to the original remarks Boaz made so I can read them in context?
ReplyDeleteThanks
Yep, here it is: Boaz's original comment on Gene's blog
ReplyDeleteJudah, I do not believe we have spoken for about 18 months or so...at least on the phone. If you are referring to, "I talked to Boaz privately.." to be our Facebook chat today (which I initiated), below is that thread.
ReplyDeleteYou said, "The reason I posted here is, it's important for Messianics to see what our leaders are saying."
Here you go...
BOAZ (said): Hey. Next time you want to rebuke me...perhaps you should start with a private note.
I think you are taking my comments way out of context and to the extreme.
JUDAH (said): Boaz, you know I love you, have long considered you a friend why do you write things like this? Why do you say people like me are enemies of Israel? my God, man.
BOAZ: I did not say that. Your reading into my words.
JUDAH: Tell me what you mean. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. *meant
BOAZ: Call me or give me your number.
JUDAH: I don't wish to speak on the phone. I'm pretty livid at the moment.
BOAZ: That is OK. I'll handle your anger. I get angry calls each day.
JUDAH: I think I am done. You have insulted regular Messianic folks at supersessionist, pretend-friends of Israel, diminishing Israel. I am trying to read your comment charitably, and I am still insulted. What are you doing?
BOAZ: Well. I think we should talk on the phone.
JUDAH: The last time we spoke on the phone, you assured me FFOZ was One Law, but that it was change in language and shift from requirement to invitation. That turned out to be false, and now you are calling people like me enemies of Israel. Your comments on Dereks and Gene's blogs...I'm just blown away, man.
BOAZ: I can see how my general statement can be read...leading to your offense. I can see that may be true with Gene's blog...but not Derek's. Not sure what I said there that would be so offensive.
JUDAH: It's like me saying, "The greater grievance is that FFOZ gives the impression of support for Israel. But in the end, they just diminish it. The worst kind of friend is one who turns out to be an enemy." I mean, what you wrote was wrong, man. I don't know how to phrase that any kinder And if that's what's really in your heart, my God, I want no part of this.
BOAZ: Again. I think a phone call is needed.
JUDAH: Why? so you can explain it away, as you did with the watershed? Man. So frustrated with you guys. I love you. I need to go.
BOAZ: It is not charitable nor fits within discipleship for you not to afford me the time to discuss with you.
Thanks for posting that. I stand behind everything I've said there.
ReplyDeleteJudah,
ReplyDeleteThe chickens come home to roost. I told you a while ago that FFOZ turned their backs on their calling, and it will show up in the future. I hope now you can see it. Boaz is forced to come out from behind his arrogant facad and defend himself and his organization. Which BTW is a good point, since his MO is to let a hired hand to do the dirty work, and he found a good hire, Derek love to splash in the dirt.
Always look for the money, Judah....
Interesting discussion. You guys (Judah and Boaz) are both gifted in the area of Theology and I look up to both of you. I need to let this topic brew with me but I wish you both the best.
ReplyDeleteThanks again for the info.
Well now I'm curious as to what could be said on the phone rather than by text. It really isn't a bad thing to talk, however. Just my opinion. I asked the question on Derek's blog not realizing the one law schism was so contentious...
ReplyDeleteIf I'm to believe that I'm a supersessionist by keeping Torah then how would one take Isaiah 56 (specifically verses 6 and 7)? On one side I'm being told that Torah is a rubric for living as God would want, on the other side I'm being told I'm a supersessionist for keeping Torah. Is it a prophesy of something yet to come or is it something we should strive for in the meantime? These are questions I have been searching for recently (as this chasm widens), I have seen many points made on both sides but I haven't heard a biblical explanation as to why we shouldn't keep Torah even as gentiles... I'm searching. I'm getting pretty anxious for some sort of concrete answer from other people.
With that I look forward to what you have to say regarding your response.
Boaz and I will have a phone conversation in a day or two when things settle down.
ReplyDeleteA waste of time...He will throw you under the bus like he did to the rest of us...Or ask you to review their articles so you will feel important and get off his back....
ReplyDeleteWow! I read everything and the blog by Gene Shlomovich. All I can say is that Judah did take Boaz's words out of context. This is why I love Boaz and his leadership! He's humble, but challenging and always looking for the truth. Judah, the people that take most offense to something so small is just a reflection of the something going on in there lives. I see the way that you bash people. Shame on you! You may be very intelligent, but that is not the way HaShem wanted you to use it. What in the world would cause you to make fun of somebody when you think your right. I see (in my opinion) self fulfillment of the law, rather than love for mankind and G-d as a whole. Boaz works hard to be a light to the world so everybody with assumptions as to Boaz's plans (for ex: it's all about money), you might as well continue with your assumptions towards everybody else and keep bringing the Word of Yeshua to nothing if that's your purpose. You guys really diminish the purpose of Yeshua.
ReplyDeleteAll I can say is from what I've seen in the blog here is a humble Boaz and a self-fulfilling people. Do you really think that Christians would be attracted to your way of communicating Judah? (Not the slightest chance!) Use your intelligence for G-dliness and hold back that animalistic soul that wants to barge in and take charge, if Yeshua wouldn't say it----don't say it, hold it back! I won't post back and argue just to stoop to a level of non-objectiveness. All in love and to make you aware of how you are sometimes replying (for ex. to Gene.) with that animalistic soul that we need to keep in check. Shalom!
James, you say I have misinterpreted Boaz's words. If you have an alternate interpretation, I'm listening.
ReplyDeleteJudah,
ReplyDeleteI am with Dan! Get out.
James, you say I have misinterpreted Boaz's words. If you have an alternate interpretation, I'm listening.
ReplyDeleteI did in my first comment on this blog post (Wednesday, January 12, 2011 2:17:00 PM).
Oops. Wrong "James". Sorry.
ReplyDeleteJudah,
ReplyDeletehonestly, it seems that there is no alternate interpretation that you are WILLING to believe.
This is alarming.
Even Boaz admitted that his statement could be read wrong and that it could communicate something(s) that he did not intend. And then he apologized.
You seem to be unwilling to hear past your own subjective reading in this case. It is not anyone elses place to explain Boaz' point of view, so you asking other to do that is contributing to hurtful speciulation and often to slander.
btw- "recapping" and "editorializing" are 2 very different things.
Too often your "recaps" are nothing more than an opportunity to voice your own bias for or against something.
That's editorializing plain and simple.
Your assumptions are wrong Judah because you have taken one sentence and phrase out of context and exploited it. You give the impression that I think Gentiles who keep Torah are all practicing a form of replacement theology. That is wrong.
ReplyDeleteLast year FFOZ published a book on the mitzvah of Tefillin by Toby Janicki (a Gentile). Did you read that? Did you see his balance, perspective, his personal struggles, and his application of this commandment? Many Messianic Jewish leaders read this book spoke well of the balance, perspective, and the approach. In fact if was reviewed, prior to publication by some of the MJ leaders that are so demonized in this blog. They critiqued it, gave suggestions, and help shape it. It deals with one simple command, Tefillin--yet it becomes a template for balanced application and understanding of how to guard, preserve, and apply commandments that are specifically commanded for Jewish people.
I would be willing to send this booklet for your readers to review. Let them judge us by our own words in very specific examples of application. If anyone reading this would a copy of this book you are welcome to write I would be happy to send it to you for free.
I think that this would be a good way for people to see that you are wrong and that FFOZ is teaching people (all people) about the commandments, specifics of the Torah, historical understandings, Jewish approach and application, boundaries, and how the nations can benefit from all of God's goodness.
Your assumptions are wrong Judah because you have taken one sentence and phrase out of context and exploited it. You give the impression that I think Gentiles who keep Torah are all practicing a form of replacement theology. That is wrong.
ReplyDeleteLast year FFOZ published a book on the mitzvah of Tefillin by Toby Janicki (a Gentile). Did you read that? Did you see his balance, perspective, his personal struggles, and his application of this commandment? Many of the Messianic Jewish leaders that read this book spoke well of the balance, perspective, and the approach. In fact if was reviewed, prior to publication by some of the MJ leaders that are demonized in this blog. They critiqued it, gave suggestions, and help shape it. It deals with one simple command, Tefillin--yet it can become a template for balanced application and understanding of how to guard, preserve, and apply commandments that are specifically commanded for Jewish people.
I would be willing to send this booklet for your readers to review. Let them judge us by our own words in very specific examples of application. If anyone reading this would a copy of this book you are welcome to write I would be happy to send it to you for free.
Your assumptions are wrong Judah because you have taken one sentence and phrase out of context and exploited it. You give the impression that I think Gentiles who keep Torah are all practicing a form of replacement theology. That is wrong.
ReplyDeleteLast year FFOZ published a book on the mitzvah of Tefillin by Toby Janicki (a Gentile). Did you read that? Did you see his balance, perspective, his personal struggles, and his application of this commandment? Many of the Messianic Jewish leaders that read this book spoke well of the balance, perspective, and the approach. In fact if was reviewed, prior to publication by some of the MJ leaders that are demonized in this blog. They critiqued it, gave suggestions, and help shape it. It deals with one simple command, Tefillin--yet it can become a template for balanced application and understanding of how to guard, preserve, and apply commandments that are specifically commanded for Jewish people.
I would be willing to send this booklet for your readers to review. Let them judge us by our own words in very specific examples of application. If anyone reading this would a copy of this book you are welcome to write I would be happy to send it to you for free.
Hahahaha, its comical to see people think Judah can misinterpret words to blunt as "One Law and Two House Messianics seem like Israel supporters, but actually diminish it."
ReplyDeleteIts like... how is it possible to have an alternate understanding of those words!? Haha.. does anyone else see the ridiculousness of it?
And this is totally unbiased, where I'm coming from, because I don't agree with either side.
Judah has every right to be upset that this major Messianic organization thinks Messianics like him are diminishing Israel. I'm not even Messianic whatsoever, and I know Judah, my bro, and know he loves HaShem, Israel, and Tora. Sure are there misconceptions and misunderstandings? In my opinion, yes. But that doesn't detract from the authentic zeal that does exist not just in Judah, but many average-joe Messianics.
My only prayer is that they take that love and zeal all the way, to its fullest degree... and that destination is where I disagree with Messianics... but it doesn't mean they're not unknowingly heading there by HaShem's hand. ;)
"Hahahaha, its comical to see people think Judah can misinterpret words to blunt as "One Law and Two House Messianics seem like Israel supporters, but actually diminish it."
ReplyDeleteAaron - it's all quite simple really: supersessionism diminishes Israel. The One Law and Two House Messianics' supersessionism is not far removed from your vanilla Christian supersessionism - in fact, it's pretty much the same on many levels, but with Torah thrown in. To be a supersessionsist doesn't mean one "hates" Israel. It just means that one loves Israel that exists in one's theology: for supersessionsist Christians it's the New Israel (the Church) composed of all believers (Jews, Gentiles - it doesn't matter), for supersessionsist One Law messianics it's the Messianic Community (really Church by another name), for Two-House messianics Israel is Jews + Lost Tribes (Gentiles who "forgot" they were really "Israelites" all along).
Just like "another gospel" is no Gospel at all, so is "another Israel" is no Israel at all.
Boaz, if you did not mean that Messianics (OL, TH) are supersessionists, I will immediately write a blog post detailing my error, I'd privately repent to you, I'd publicly apologizing for taking you out of context and misinterpreting your words.
ReplyDeleteBut if you did mean that, and you do believe the evil thing in your heart that Messianics like me are supersessionist, then is not my initial interpretation sound?
>> Haha.. does anyone else see the ridiculousness of it?
ReplyDeleteAaron, there are times when I love you more than any other sibling. This is one of those times. :-)
"you do believe the evil thing in your heart"
ReplyDeleteOuch...
Gene,
ReplyDeleteSo some are saying Boaz meant differently, and others are saying this is exactly what he meant?
If Boaz or anyone else thinks that FFOZ does any differently, by equally embracing stam Christianity with Judaism, then they're just mistaken.
What's happening is that Messianic Judaism on one side wants to maintain a Jewish identity, embrace Judaism and incorporate Christianity into their new religion.
On the other side, tons of gentiles out of the church, who make the majority, want to actually be Israel, or think they really are as of right now, and don't settle with the separations and distinctions that groups like FFOZ make.
So of course there will be some bad blood between the two forces. And that's what we see.
But in truth, Boaz does exactly what he accuses these folks of. His brand of Messianism isn't really any better, necessarily, than any other. Why? Because its Messianism. Hate to sound harsh, but it just is not an authentic religion. I know you don't agree, I'm just stating my opinion. We will have to just disagree, because I don't want to get into a long bashing-spree argument on the subject.
Getting back to positivity... as I said before. I hope people in every strand of Messianism follow their love for HaShem, Israel, and Tora to the fullest degree, and don't stop where they are now.
"Aaron, there are times when I love you more than any other sibling. This is one of those times. :-)"
ReplyDeleteYay!!! ^_^
So when I said DNA level problem...I meant that supersessionism is such a fundamental part of all of our thinking that it is part of our very structure and core. Yes, I believe that OL and TH have many, many, elements and aspects of replacement theology. However, I also recognize that I DO AS WELL--because it is a DNA level issue. I think it would be fair so say we all do. Replacement theology finds itself in some overt and/or subtle ways in doctrines, interpretations, and perspectives that we would never even imagine.
ReplyDeleteForgive me for butting in. I can speak from experience. I think EXTREME two-house and one law theology is in error. When I say extreme I mean the people that really do think they are a "true remnant," that Jews and Christians essentially don't matter in their version of the world.
ReplyDeleteThat is overly supersessionist (is it not?). Saying that we have "realized" the truth and pretty much everyone else has it "wrong." I know because that's where I was at, and that was my thinking. I think this maturation process of recognizing the Biblical importance of the Jewish people is the next step for Messianics and Christianity as a whole.
Agree wholeheartedly with Boaz with the DNA analogy. We are essentially anti-semetic when we come out of the womb. The secular world by and large has stood against Israel for millenium. It has been ingrained in our schools through ignorance of religious history, and churches mainly through replacement theology.
The state of the discussion as it has been expressed in the last several comments seems to indicate that the development of relationships between MJ, OL, TH, and "the church" (and everything in-between) might lend itself to what I was trying to describe in Overlap and The Therapeutic Horse. All these congregations share a common core belief system (God is One, Yeshua is the Messiah) but diverge in many other significant areas.
ReplyDeleteIf we can establish relationships based on our mutual understandings, perhaps we can enter into a continuum of congregations based on those core understandings. Once we're "strung together", so to speak, productive dialogue should be possible (but misunderstandings are going to happen, anyway).
The occasional "knock down, drag out" will still happen but hopefully, we can recover, learn, and grow. I know someone is going to say that there won't be groups which will go along with this because they will be totally adamant about wanting everyone else to change except them, but no plan will be able to bring all the sheep home (only the Messiah can do that).
Yeshua said he gave us a new command: to love one another among the body of the Messiah. He didn't say we were always going to like one another and he didn't say we wouldn't argue. Most married couples argue and they love each other. They just come back after the argument and make amends (see Matthew 5:23-24).
"When I say extreme I mean the people that really do think they are a "true remnant," that Jews and Christians essentially don't matter in their version of the world. That is overly supersessionist (is it not?)."
ReplyDeleteThat's an excellent point, Cliff. That would make many of the so called "extremists" among OL & TH messianics not only supersessionist in regards to Israel but amazingly enough even towards the wider Christian community (a boogie man about whom they warn not to return to as if it was the Hell itself). I think this is true in regard to all groups who think they have the corner on religion.
First of all, I am shocked and embarrassed reading this blog. What must visitors to this thread think of the people of God? When we have fruitless discussions like this it damages the body of Messiah. The original question was not one of concern regarding a misunderstanding of a quote, it was on outright, public attack. I think if we truly took Torah seriously in our own lives we would not let anger rule our hearts…or our writing. This indeed could have been addressed in a more constructive manner.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I have been friends with Boaz for many years and have learned with FFOZ since the beginning of my Torah walk. I am a Gentile who has been learning Torah and implementing it into my life for as many years and Boaz has walked with me through that journey. Never has he called me a supersessionist or a replacement theologian. He has always been honest with me and discipled me. But, I have also known that if I had a question I could go to him to discuss it…as he offered to you, but you refused.
I have seen many in the messianic movement who have believed in their heart that they have the right…no…the responsibility to interpret the Torah anyway THEY see fit. This IS indeed no different than the Church's brand of replacement theology. To interpret Torah separate from the historic and faithful understandings of greater Israel may indeed place gentile messianics in a place where they feel they know better than those who have followed the Torah for centuries. This indeed could be seen as supersessionism and is rampant in the messianic movement.
Our inability to explore these possibilities and simply attack because our feelings might be hurt is irresponsible.
Shalom Bill, it has been along time.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Bill, very well said.
ReplyDeleteCommenting on bbeyer who said "First of all, I am shocked and embarrassed reading this blog. What must visitors to this thread think of the people of God? When we have fruitless discussions like this it damages the body of Messiah." If you really felt that way you would not add to the comment later where you said; "I have seen many in the messianic movement who have believed in their heart that they have the right…no…the responsibility to interpret the Torah anyway THEY see fit. This IS indeed no different than the Church's brand of replacement theology."
ReplyDeleteI do not altogether disagree but if you really believed what you said in the beginning you certainly would not add your own commentary to the issue at hand!!
Eph 2:11-13 says,Therefore remember that once you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “uncircumcision” by that which is called “circumcision,” (in the flesh, made by hands); (12) that you were at that time separate from Messiah, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world. (13) But now in Messiah Yeshua you who once were far off are made near in the blood of Messiah."
ReplyDeleteThe "once far off" language is linked to those who are in dispersion.
We as believers are part now of the commonwealth of Israel through Yeshua's blood. If today's unprecedented interest in following Torah is the "coming in of the fullness of the Gentiles," from Genesis 48, then at least prophetically, we are seeing Ephriam awakening. His blood is what matters not our blood.
C.F.
Professional is where it's at.... I'm pretty sure that is what he meant. All you are trying to do is defend the position of the attacker! No! a public heated argument is not professional
ReplyDelete“If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you." Matt 18:15
ReplyDeleteFirst things first "Just between the two of you" This is the way the issue should of been dealt with according to The King of Israel. Getting high blog activity vs. Yeshua' ruling, choose whom you will serve. This is very very sad. Judah you should of taken this up privately with Boaz first. What a mess and now people are hurt, full of anger, insults are thrown. This is not brother hood.
"we are seeing Ephraim awakening"
ReplyDeleteC.F. - no, Gentiles are not Ephraim. Ephraim is a tribe among the Jewish people. I could be Ephraim for all you know. The fanciful Two House beliefs color your view of the faith in general, of how G-d relates to you, as well as how you relate to Israel. They are supersessionist and replacementist because you are replacing a huge chunk of the Jewish people with someone else (no, you are not "adding" to Israel, you are replacing a part of it). Once you get rid yourself of this theology your worldview AND self-view will come into focus.
bbeyer,
ReplyDeleteAs C.F. stated, Boaz wrote this in the public forum. Why be troubled that someone is quoting a public piece of info because it was directly against them? Makes no sense.
Sounds like you have a see-no-evil approach to the people you consider your authorities. Your logic perhaps goes like this:
"Boaz is a great guy, therefore, he can't ever say things that are bad or off-base. Therefore now that someone has called him out on something which he wrote publicly, I am going to think this is a shame to the "people of God", since it appears that people actually have the capacity to argue and reason to try to come to the truth.
I'm not really in it for the truth, whatsoever. Because if I was, I would have no problem arguing and/or disagreeing when I see people are wrong in my estimation. But no, I won't do that, that is what I call "confrontational" and I believe is actually a bad thing. Why? I have a warped, messed up fantasy land ideal of everyone getting along super great, no one disagreeing.
Everyone with their own opinions, all in unison and living together... wait a sec... now this is starting to sound like the secular idea of world peace... wow, I must have been brainwashed..."
Gene,
ReplyDeleteMaybe you HATE the terminology. Maybe, since you know a bit about Judaism, you feel this is quite obnoxious and disrespectful for people to just claim they are Israel, and that they're doing things better than the Jews.
I understand that. I think there's lots of arrogance and also lack of understanding much at all about Judaism, that runs throughout the Two-House world.
But at the same time, your blatant denunciation of the whole thing is a bit off base. I don't think that people who think such are crazy lunatics. I think they're experiencing an awakening of a soul.
In Judaism, "Jewish souls" awakening from among the gentiles is something that happens. All converts are such people. Perhaps, now that we're nearing toward the geula, HaShem is harvesting some lost souls throughout the world.
I don't agree that their current state is where they are going to stay, if they're actually going to become truly part of Israel. But I'm sure that anyone who seeks out the urge and desire that they have for Israel and Tora, they will eventually end up in the right place. And may HaShem help them.
But as for standard "Messianic Judaism" goes, I think it is a closed religion. Its just taking boring, institutionalized Judaism and bringing some boring, institutionalized Christianity into it. And btw, the two don't mix at all. Even stam traditional Judaism needs to be tuned out of galuth-mode.
Jewzilla:
ReplyDeleteYou mis-characterized my position. Boaz and I have often had discussions on topics where we do not agree with each other. And I have often stated positions publically where I disagreed with people. Those who truley know me know that I am not a "stick my head in the sand" kind of person. Far from it. I do believe in theological discourse and dialogue.
However, I do not believe that we have the right or permission from HaShem in the process of theological discourse to leave behind all civility or the commands of scripture. As we have seen here from many our disagreements are not excuses to allow our yetzer hara a free reign of our tongue to speak anyway we want or to type any insult we might think is cute and witty.
When we use a theological discourse as an excuse to act out of our sinful nature then we simply show those who read this quietly our unregenerated hearts. To defend this kind of behavior as acceptable also speaks volumes.
So to answer your characterization...no, I do not have any troubles challenging people who I disagree with as I seek truth, and I have no troubles with serious thought provoking dialogue. But, I try in the process to never forget who I am as a child of God and to act like it.
In Judaism, "Jewish souls" awakening from among the gentiles is something that happens. All converts are such people. Perhaps, now that we're nearing toward the geula, HaShem is harvesting some lost souls throughout the world.
ReplyDeletethem.
Funny, that's more or less what my wife said to me once. Of all the Jews I can discuss matters of faith with, she's the only one who doesn't seem to be offended by who I am and what I believe. Of course, she loves me, which probably makes a difference.
"You mis-characterized my position"
ReplyDeletethat seems to be a common problem here lately.
bbeyer,
ReplyDeleteFair enough.
Why then, do you think derekh eres and the miswoth are left out? What causes them to be? What is it precisely that qualifies as giving way to one's yeser hara`? Saying someone's view is ridiculous and such, certainly isn't anything bad. Maybe there's something else I didn't see that you're talking about?
If the Apostle Paul was a Messianic Jewish blogger and posted his letter to Galatians on his blog, he may have gotten these comments from his readers...
ReplyDeleteJames,
ReplyDeleteFollow up the passion with the fullest extent of action. ^_^
Boaz,
ReplyDeleteI told you that if you really didn't believe OL and TH Messianics were supersessionist, I would repent publicly.
You responded by saying we're all supersessionist.
My offer still stands.
Actually Judah, didn't Gene just say the same thing?
ReplyDeleteHere is the thing,
ReplyDeleteAs a Jewish person I cannot see my God creating divisions between people. Peter also saw it my way " ...I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality." (Acts 10:34).
There are some people who think that they are the elite of MJ and whatever they say we all must obey. So to all those people, you all know who they are I say, chill out. Live with the fact that the influx of Gentiles into MJ is the work of God. Leave you own man-made rules and refgulations and get back to Scriptures. a good way to start for you is study Gameliel.
Wow... this comment thread has some incredible arrogance. This is total chinat sinam.
ReplyDeleteMr. Benzvi - I really had thought you were turning over a new leaf and write something positive and constructive. I really see the old Mr. Benzvi that needs to read James 3 and the Chofetz Chaim at least 3 times a day for the next 10 years.
Judah - I'm extremely disappointed in you, by brother. When you can't even pick up the phone to get clear understanding from what someone has said when they are the one initiating the dialogue, that's being a cry baby, and also saying "I don't want you changing my mind. I like being pissed and I'm going to stay here no matter if you're right."
This is childish and the exact reason people are being turned away from anything Messianic. It's time to grow up, children.
Diggery, you are calling me a "cry baby" for not speaking with Boaz over the phone while angry.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you missed the above comment?
"Boaz and I will have a phone conversation in a day or two when things settle down."
I sent Boaz my phone number and told him to call me. He has not done so. Perhaps he will soon.
That said, refrain from name-calling on this blog.
The testimony of our larger work at FFOZ discredits your rebuke and substantiates that FFOZ supports, educates, and desires to see all people come closer to the God of Israel, embrace the commandments as they are able, respects Christians and honors the Jewish people.
ReplyDeleteNormally I do not engage in these endless, disrespectful, and harmful blog debates. They are damaging to people and they discredit all involved. I only jumped into this one as a matter of clarity since my words we’re being taken out of context, exploited, and used. This will be my last post in this thread. Shabbat Shalom.
Judah I will call you now.
Darren,
ReplyDeleteKeep drinking the koolaid bro....
Oh, Darren,
ReplyDeleteAt חפץ חיים Synagogue you would not be allowed to make עליה לתורה .
Hearing Boaz call me a replacement theologian and an enemy of Israel
ReplyDeleteThe irony in this thread is the vitriol in those that say Judah was wrong to speak out publicly. A public attack against an entire group (conveyed with words of feigned humility) invites, and even demands a public rebuke. If you don't believe that why are some now publicly rebuking Judah? Your scales are unjust. You rebuke the defender, but not the attacker.
You who see no wrong in those supporting Bi-Eccesiology, feel quite smug in taking Judah to task for his responding the vicious overtones against "One Law" people. BM may have been offended by Judah's rebuke. He is just one man. Who speaks for the thousands that don't care to follow BM's misguided theological detour and yet still get his indefensible comments that he persistently voices in public arenas?
Judah, you are just late to the party < grin > welcome to BE's lump-us-all-with-anti-Semites-club. Here is your first lesson: those in BE tolerate people of all theological stripes (they even speak "humbly" to real supercessionists)... but they do not tolerate people that they call "One Law." Sometimes it makes you go, "hmmmm."
B"H
I do not have any troubles challenging people who I disagree with as I seek truth, and I have no troubles with serious thought provoking dialogue.
ReplyDelete@Bill, please direct me to the web page where you rebuked Boaz for calling a whole swath of Messianic Judaism the "enemy of Israel."
Judah, I just want to say thank you for the great job you do on this blog. You are appreciated. Thank you for standing up for us.
ReplyDeleteMay the LORD bless you and keep you.
Diggery,
ReplyDelete"chinat sinam" isn't a phrase. Perhaps you meant שנאת חינם ("sinath hhinam"), which is an expression meaning baseless hatred. I don't think anything Judah is mad at is baseless... do you? And really, how could you, seriously?
Rick,
Damn good points, sir.
Sound the shofar - the reinforcements have arrived! :-)
ReplyDeleteThanks for the encouragement, guys. Particularly Rick, what you said was pure bulls-eye. :-)
Since we all seem to be up and running in the Messianic blogosphere on the Shabbat, I suppose I can add my voice to the discussion with my latest blog post.
ReplyDeleteWell, James, I would have been on during Shabat if I had been living in an American time zone when I posted that. Just to let people know, Jewzilla duz na intarwebz on shabz.
ReplyDeleteThat's commendable, Aaron. My wife and I aspire to be better in our Shabbat observance.
ReplyDeleteYes Judah; you are guilty of grossly misinterpreting Boaz's writings. Your comments show a lack of proper scholarship and smacks of a and understanding of the Bible already shaped by an already mnade-up mind, rather than by facts. Sadly you have a great company of others who like you say: 'My mind is made up, I don't want to be confused with the facts'. I am a Jewish believer and I greatly honor Boaz and his unbiaised approach. You should learn from him. You are of all things guilty of 'lashon harah' as even if you think someone is wrong, you need to go to them privately and it is toratically a sin to expose them to others publicly. This was the lesson learned by the sons of Noah. Ham exposed him, while Shem and Jepath 'covered a multitude of sin'. You are acting like a novice!
ReplyDelete>> Your comments show a lack of proper scholarship
ReplyDeleteWhich comments are those, Patrick?
The slide continues....
ReplyDeletePatrick plays the lashon hara card!
ReplyDeletePatrick, if you want to play by the rules of men please look up the cases where lashon hara is allowed and is even required.
The challenge that we have witnessed over the past few days is that Mr. Michael's remarks about supersessionism were made on a public forum. Readers can decide whether or not they agree with Judah Himango's interpretation of them, which do include some of his personal feelings, but everything is out in the open and people are hearing about it.
ReplyDeleteA discussion is taking place as to whether or not Mr. Michael's ministry, First Fruits of Zion, believes that people who advocate some form of "One Law" or "Two-House" are supersessionist and/or opponents of the Jewish people. Individuals and families, especially those who help see this ministry grow substantially over the past several years who think in those directions, may think twice given some of the thoughts of its director.
If Mr. Michael did not want this conversation to occur, and the views of his ministry to be in question, then he should never have responded to the post on Mr. Shlomovich's blog in the first place. He should have been a responsible leader and kept his thoughts to himself, exercising restraint. Even if Judah Himango included some emotional pleas, you ultimately have to evaluate Mr. Michael's words for themselves.
"Individuals and families, especially those who help see this ministry grow substantially over the past several years who think in those directions, may think twice given some of the thoughts of its director."
ReplyDeleteMr. McKee, I liked how you started all civilized and then sneaked in a not so well veiled suggestion that FFOZ be de-funded (for its leader speaking what he believes to be an uncomfortable truth, no less). Very classy. Perhaps you should suggest your ministry as a better place to spend the money? Wow...
@John, nice to see you here, commenting on the controversy. I have always appreciated your balance and carefully place words. Because Judah is also a good natured and likable person, the vitriol against him here reveals the true nature of BE.
ReplyDeleteGene's rudeness is not an aberration. It is the common denominator in Gene's, Derek's, and now Boaz' public denigration of OL and TH. So forgive Gene in the above rude comment. We've learned to ignore him < grin >. He thinks he is being our "friend" - imagine that.
B"H
@Patrick Gabriel
ReplyDeleteI agree with the first part of your post in regards to a person that already has his mind made up regardless of the facts. I don't gel with that viewpoint and I am glad some others have seen it as well.
I don't agree with pulling the Lashon Hara card however, as, in regards to the technical aspects of what is and isn't Lashon Hara, Himango's views on BE allow him to state his concerns about the movement and leave it open for discussion.
Though I don't agree with him, I will stand by his right to speak of this topic and the fact it does not fall under the category of Lashon Hara.
@ the rest of the topic
In my opinion on this whole topic, I can see and agree with Jewzilla in regards to these two house people experiencing an awakening of the soul and thus their attraction to the movement. I think it has been the MJ movement that has failed in regards to setting boundaries and halacha so that we aren't dealing with these things (and hurt feelings) 30 - 40 years after the movement started rolling. If everyone had clear, set roles this wouldn't be such a problem.
As a Jew I do not agree with the two house movement,one law, supersessionism, etc. In my view it is a diminishment of the Jewish people, but I don't necessarily blame them directly either. MJism is an utter *beep* mess. The cracks are showing and let's face it -- more than likely there will be a rift in the near future with two distinct groups going there own way. The question is... who takes the name?
My comments are not meant in divisiveness, but in intellectual honestly.
"I think it has been the MJ movement that has failed in regards to setting boundaries and halacha so that we aren't dealing with these things (and hurt feelings) 30 - 40 years after the movement started rolling. If everyone had clear, set roles this wouldn't be such a problem."
ReplyDeleteTrue, but the messianic Jewish movement early on was not in the position, theologically or spiritually speaking, to see this far ahead. It began as a missions outreach to the Jews at the time when being Jewish sucked from a social AND Christian theological point of view. Today, after the rebirth of Israel and a generally more tolerant society (specifically in America, not the rest of the world), there are many wannabes.
Historically speaking, the "Israelitish" and back to Torah movements (World Wide Church of G-d, British Israelism, Nazarenes, Black Hebrew Israelites, etc.) do not depend on a Jewish presence at all.
So, establishing clear halachic roles would only help within MJ congregations - people who resent Jewish distinctions would still create their own religious movements to accommodate their desires (e.g. One Law and Two House).
It seems quite simple to me.
ReplyDeleteJudah has a right to state his opinion and I have a right to disagree (which I do.)
I think Gene's blog sums up my feelings as well.
I cannot understand how people don't see supersessionism in the OL/TH groups. This is so very obvious to me. That doesn't mean they are not well intentioned people... but they have developed theology that is frankly, a threat to Israel/ Judaism.
Souls awakening... I can relate. I am looking into conversion. HOWEVER, once again, it seems obvious... if you have intense connection with Judaism, then convert... but DON'T try to create some isolated subgroup that holds on to bad theology that is, in fact, detrimental to the very ones you profess to love.
When it comes down to it, I think, not all, but most people in these groups ultimately would chose not to convert to Judaism... but they want the perceived 'perks' anyway.
k
@Gene
ReplyDeleteI hear you on that. I do understand it was a missions movement at first, and overall do agree they still would have started their own movement. The problem is that people who resent those Jewish distinctions would have been outside of MJ'ism to begin with since clear defined halacha would have already been set.
@Further response to the topic as a whole:
Putting this into perspective, "white man" would be damned to walk into a Native American tribe, pickup a headress and claim to be chief, let alone a fellow Native American under a traditional chief. There is a process that one must go through, but then he is accepted with full and open arms.
From an anthropological viewpoint tribal societies don't work that way -- and yes, even though we are separated in the galut, we are still a tribal group in many ways.