As part of the bilateral ekklesia, we refuse to accept the Jewish community's negative doctrinal boundary marker, just as we refuse to accept the Christian community's negative boundary marker dealing with our covenantal practice of the Torah. (Once again, we realize the significance of our hermeneutic of dialectical ecclesial continuity.)
But should we exclude from our midst those Messianic Jews who adhere to these negative boundary markers, i.e., who deny the deity of Yeshua, or who deny the covenantal obligation of Torah? I am not convinced that we should.Affirmation of the deity of Yeshua and affirmation of the covenantal obligation of Torah observance for Jews are the two central principles of our communal existence, and we can rightly require that our leaders uphold them. They are our center, but they need not constitute our outer boundary.
-Mark Kinzer, leader of the Messianic Jewish Theological Institute (MJTI), from a paper given at the Hashivenu forum
What Kinzer is arguing for is that Messianics who deny Yeshua is God should be accepted in Messianic congregations.
While that is being debated, it’s important to note that this same group, MJTI, loudly argues that other Messianic communities, such as One Law and Two House Messianics, should be excluded from the Messianic movement.
To put it succinctly, MJTI argues Messianics who deny Yeshua’s divinity are OK, but Yeshua-faithful Messianics who broaden the application of Torah, or who broaden the composition of Israel, are Not-OK.
It it times like these that I am thankful to God that intellectuals do not run the Messianic movement. I am thankful that regular folks of the Messianic movement, God’s sheep, are shepherded not by the intellectuals, but by Yeshua himself.
"To put it succinctly, MJTI argues Messianics who deny Yeshua’s divinity are OK, but Yeshua-faithful Messianics who broaden the application of Torah, or who broaden the composition of Israel, are Not-OK. It it times like these that I am thankful to God that intellectuals do not run the Messianic movement."
ReplyDelete*** CONTEXT ALERT ***. You made a big deal over something that is not. This is because, Judah, you are thinking from a Evangelical Christian point of view of who can be a member of a community (I don't blame you and it's not an insult). In contrast to this view, any Jewish synagogue is supposed to be a home for ALL Jews, regardless of whether or not they even believe in G-d. That's what makes a synagogue different from say a "church" (or a One-Law congregation), whose primary identification is based on their common "belief" vs. the intrinsic family unity of the Jewish people. I think you've jumped the gun.
Contrast what you said with Kinzer's reiteration about the leaders of MJ communities:
ReplyDelete"Affirmation of the deity of Yeshua and affirmation of the covenantal obligation of Torah observance for Jews are the two central principles of our communal existence, and we can rightly require that our leaders uphold them. They are our center, but they need not constitute our outer boundary."
So, yes - we can have Jews attend out synagogues who hold various beliefs or no beliefs at all, because they are our Jewish family. A synagogue is MORE than a religious entity espousing certain doctrines - it's a center of a Jewish comminity. The leadership, on the other hand, must hold specific beliefs to be "Messianic" Jewish.
Kinzer isn't arguing for zero boundaries. He is arguing for a boundary that includes denial of Yeshua's divinity.
ReplyDeleteThis is important for regular Messianic folk to know.
"Kinzer isn't arguing for zero boundaries. He is arguing for a boundary that includes denial of Yeshua's divinity. This is important for regular Messianic folk to know."
ReplyDeleteHe's not arguing FOR IT - as if he views it as something positive that should be promoted and upheld. He simply argues that Jews specifically (rather than Christians who call themselves "Messianics") should find a home with Messianic Jewish synagogues and not find themselves excluded because they don't sign on the dotted line regarding whether Yeshua is G-d and whether or not Trinity is biblical.
Interestingly, some time ago Christian Evangelical congregations in Israel wanted all MJ congregations in that country to sign a paper declaring certain doctrines to be inviolable and subject to excommunication from congregation. Most congregations refused to sign it.
OK, let's take the cat out of the bag...Gene, do you believe in the divinity of Yeshua?
ReplyDelete"OK, let's take the cat out of the bag...Gene, do you believe in the divinity of Yeshua?"
ReplyDeleteYes, I do. Anymore questions?
I appreciate that Judah is trying to inform his blog readers that perhaps for some Messianic Jews, Yeshua being Divine is not a central or core issue. This is something that many are not going to like, and then for others it is not that big a deal.
ReplyDeleteCertainly in many Christian churches across the world, where the official doctrinal position is that Jesus is Divine, there are many constituents who think that He was just a good moral teacher.
There is no way to serve as someone's conscience.
i also believe that the church should close it's doors to people who do not believing in the divinity of Yeshua.
ReplyDeletelet's keep believers with believers. from there we can separate rich from poor...etc
any kind of mixture is dangerous.
ok...I'm off to go start a religious compound.
"Certainly in many Christian churches across the world, where the official doctrinal position is that Jesus is Divine, there are many constituents who think that He was just a good moral teacher. "
ReplyDeleteIn contrast to the "good moral teacher" view (which signifies non-committal or general indifference), within the mainstream Jewish thought it's certainly possible (in fact standard, with exception of some meshichist groups) to be committed to and be super excited about a Messiah who is an agent of G-d, sent by G-d, can do many great wondrous things by G-d's power (miracles), but not divine or G-d himself. I do wonder if is there an explicit litmus test in NT about what exact things one must believe about the nature of Messiah or Trinity to be saved or to be part of a community of believers?
"i also believe that the church should close it's doors to people who do not believing in the divinity of Yeshua. "
ReplyDeleteI think that's in essence of what Judah is saying here. Or, may be he doesn't really believe that himself (certainly, he wouldn't keep "unbelievers" away from his congregation, right?), but it sure looks good when it can be made to appear that Kinzer doesn't really care about Yeshua or his divine nature.
I know from my personal interactions with various Messianic Jews that even if the leadership of a Messianic Jewish congregation adheres to Yeshua being Divine, there are likely to be a number of people who (strongly) disagree with it. They are certainly free to have congregations and assemblies where a Divine Messiah is a bigger issue.
ReplyDeleteLike it or not for some people, there are Messianic Jews for whom the nature of Yeshua is not as big as an issue as it might be for others. But this is also true for many Christians throughout history as well. My own position is stated pretty clearly in Romans 10:9, where an affirmation of Yeshua's Divine Lordship is essential for salvation.
Judah's intention was to inform others as to what one Messianic Jewish leader thinks. We should be sure that there are people who will see things another way.
At the congregation I attend, we seem to focus mostly on our own relationship with our Creator and not so much these ideas as to who is a Jew and what should Jews do and what should non Jews do. That seems to be something between each person and G-d and it seems besides the point to sit around drafting up doctrinal statements dividing this person from that person. To me it also sits outside of what I see as the point of Scripture.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it seems like anyone can come to attend congregational services and events and believe whatever they want, but to be a member is something different. Members are involved in teaching and directly representing the congregation. As such, there are some things that are rather core to the faith and other things that are "agree to disagree" items. Disagreement on core items would be enough to reject membership. The divinity of Messiah would be one of the things that would be core to the faith and those that do not prescribe to such I would think would not be eligible for membership. Things in the agree to disagree column I would not think would prevent one from membership. I guess examples of that would be things like some practices and their relevance to our culture today (maybe things like strictness to kosher regulations and traditions as well as thing like speaking in tongues).
I guess the key question is what "exclude from our midst" means. Does that mean not allow those that reject the divinity to attend services? If so, then I disagree with a position that they should be excluded from our midst. Those who are outside the faith we have can attend all they want. If it refers to membership in the congregation, then I would say that it is a point of separation from membership.
"Members are involved in teaching and directly representing the congregation."
ReplyDeleteMost members in congregations are NOT teacher material, and besides - shouldn't the discernment of the leader or leaders come into play when appointing people to such positions?
Most mainstream synagogues' membership systems do not make members sign on the dotted line of a long doctrinal statement. I believe that ANY Jew who wishes to become a member of an MJ synagogue should be allowed (assuming that there's even a membership system in place to begin with). This is wholly different matter than making that person a teacher or a spokesman for a synagogue.
Many churches and congregations DO NOT HAVE A MEMBERSHIP SYSTEM at all - how do they deal with unbelieving people in their midst and preventing them from misrepresenting the congregation? Quite simply - they lead their congregation and direct what happens in them.
These are religious challenges across the board. Congregations are free to to require adherence to a statement of belief, or refuse membership--or not. I think that it is appropriate to refuse membership on this basis, but others do not. And, even if one were to agree to such a statement of belief or purose, no one can monitor another person's thoughts, which can certainly change.
ReplyDeleteAnd, we can add to this that many denominations have a discipline that is expected to be followed, which can get frequently disregarded or outright rejected at the local level (i.e., allowing gays and lesbians to become members).
I know many do not like the idea that it ultimately comes down to the individual and God--but in many cases, given various communal challenges, it can.
"I know many do not like the idea that it ultimately comes down to the individual and God--but in many cases, given various communal challenges, it can."
ReplyDelete100% agree - I would argue that this is especially true within the context of a Jewish Messianic community welcoming those few Jews who dare to enter our doors. The communal challenges there are unlike those of any church or congregation. I personally know of Jews who are part of an MJ synagogue who do not believe in Yeshua (secular Jews who never have) but find that the community they joined (usually through a relative or a friend) is the only place where they feel most at home - as Jews! Should we make them sign on the dotted line or show them the door?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Judaism in general (the non-Messianic kind) doesn't believe that the Messiah must be God. In fact, Judaism considers Christianity to be a sort of "idol-worship" because they (we?) worship a human being and not God (the Father). I've even heard of a few Messianic congregations in Israel who have faith in Yeshua as the Messiah, but do not believe in his divinity, viewing Yeshua in a way more consistent with "mainstream" Judaism.
ReplyDeleteAll that said, I feel like this debate is taking place out of context. All we have to work with is an excerpt from something Kinzer said at the Hashivenu conference. Is it possible to get the full text for reference?
Again, the point here is not whether we should welcome people who reject Yeshua's divinity. That's an issue in debate (Hashivenu.org hosts a paper in rebuttle to Kinzer's view, for example.)
ReplyDeleteThis post served 2 purposes:
-To make Messianic folks aware of what one of our leaders believe.
-To draw attention to an amusing observation: Yeshua-rejecting Messianics may be acceptable by one MJTI leader, but Yeshua-faithful One Law and Two House Messianics may not be acceptable, and may not even be considered "Messianic" by another MJTI leader's standards.
"To draw attention to an amusing observation: Yeshua-rejecting Messianics may be acceptable by one MJTI leader, but Yeshua-faithful One Law and Two House Messianics may not be acceptable, and may not even be considered "Messianic" by another MJTI leader's standards."
ReplyDeleteJudah, your observation is flawed because Kinzer is talking about Jews specifically entering a Jewish community, not about "messianics" (by which you mean Gentiles/Christians who are part of OL/TH). It's them, not anyone else, who Kinzer is speaking about. This is made clear from Derek's description of Kinzer's paper:
"Jews are born; Christians enter by believing. A Jew is a Jew by existing; a Christian by believing. The Jewish people are one people, unique; the Church is a people from many peoples, universal."
I know it's hard to grasp if one doesn't consider Jews and Israel any different than anyone else.
"Jews are born; Christians enter by believing. A Jew is a Jew by existing; a Christian by believing. The Jewish people are one people, unique; the Church is a people from many peoples, universal."
ReplyDeleteI asked this question on Derek's blog but I think it just blew past everyone there. I understand where you're going with this Gene, but is a Jew's faith (or lack thereof) in God completely irrelevant? In order for a Gentile to be accepted into the community of faith, they must profess said-faith. All a Jewish person has to do is be born Jewish. Does that mean faith has no place in normative Judaism at all? If not, then why does God matter?
Replace "Messianic" with "Messianic Jew", and the same thing holds.
ReplyDelete"All a Jewish person has to do is be born Jewish. Does that mean faith has no place in normative Judaism at all? If not, then why does God matter?"
ReplyDeleteNo, of course not - a Jew needs faith in G-d and Messiah like anyone else - that's the plan of G-d for Israel. BUT, if G-d excluded Jews from Israel on that basis alone, all Jews would be gone long ago. Instead, a Jew has something else - a coventantal obligation that hits him/her the moment of birth. This obligation not only includes "blessings", but also great persecution. That's why a Jew is hated, persecuted and hated just for being born one - unlike any other faith.
"Replace "Messianic" with "Messianic Jew", and the same thing holds."
ReplyDeleteNope, sorry.
No, of course not - a Jew needs faith in G-d and Messiah like anyone else - that's the plan of G-d for Israel. BUT, if G-d excluded Jews from Israel on that basis alone, all Jews would be gone long ago.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't suggesting excluding Jews from Israel. If faith was required, no secular Jews (the majority of the Jewish population of Israel today) would be able to make Aliyah.
I was specifically referring to the community of faith. The way Derek originally worded that part of today's missive seemed to give the impression (I'm sure without him intending to) that faith was only a requirement for non-Jews and that Jews "got in free", so to speak, regardless of the state of their faith.
Incidentally, I have seen a Jewish Buddhist being given an Aliyah and reading from the Torah in a synagogue. It's also true that, even if a Jew is an atheist and completely rejects God, he or she is still Jewish. If a Christian rejects Christ, he or she has not relationship with God at that point.
Put that way, we non-Jews do seem to be the weak link in the chain. More's the pity
No one in Messianic Judaism upholds the divinity of Yeshua as clearly and authoritatively as Mark Kinzer. This post and especially J.K. McKee's comment that Yeshua's divinity is not central for Kinzer is as wrong and unjust as any accusation I have seen made on a blog anywhere.
ReplyDeleteI shouldn't have to have these kindergarten arguments with you all, but let me speak clearly: if a pastor said, "we should not exclude people who don't believe in the infallibility of the Bible from our church," would you then say: "The infallibility of the Bible is not a central value for this pastor"?
But please, Judah and J.K., since you are casting doubts on a just and righteous man, do write your article explaining the divinity of Yeshua and let the world decide who has a better grasp of the subject.
Derek Leman
James:
ReplyDeleteA Jew does not have to believe in God to be a Jew. A Jew does not cease to be a Jew for believing in Buddhism. Jewishness is by birth. That is scripture.
I don't understand what is difficult about this concept.
A Christian must believe in God and Jesus. A person who abandons faith in Jesus is no longer a Christian.
The question who is a Jew is very different from the question who is a Christian.
Romans 11:25-29 ought to clear this up for those who may have doubts.
Derek Leman
Mr. Leman,
ReplyDeleteWhat the publications I have read from Dr. Kinzer, I know that he is a very well-spoken and researched gentleman. I am sure for him personally, the Divinity of Yeshua is an important issue. But for all of the people within the faith community of his sector of Messianic Judaism, and for what he seems to be facilitating, I remain skeptical.
Time, of course, will be the ultimate factor with whether any such suspicions prove true or not. I remain eager to read Dr. Kinzer's papers on the subject.
Derek, re-read my comment. There was nothing inconsistent with a "Jew being a Jew" in anything I said. I was actually agreeing with you and was using those examples to make a point.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the major reasons I'm dropping "Messianic Judaism" (and anything related) like an angry rattlesnake. The endless bickering, chip-on-the-shoulder attitudes, and general practice of taking pot shots at anyone who is even perceived as disagreeing with a stated position.
I realize the nature of text-only communications is rife with misunderstanding, but you could have at least tried to give me the benefit of the doubt.
You say you promote "community". Good luck with that.
James:
ReplyDeleteI definitely did not mean to sound so angry with you. I wasn't. It must be that I was concerned that the "who is a Jew" question was being confused with the "should Jews have faith" question.
I apologize for my snideness and rudeness of tone to you. I actually did not mean to sound so snippy.
Derek
Derek, no one is saying Kinzer rejects Yeshua's divinity. Read the post again.
ReplyDeleteJudah, I love your comment on the "intellectuals"....
ReplyDeleteMat 11:25 It was at that time that Yeshua said, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you concealed these things from the sophisticated and educated and revealed them to ordinary folks.
Thanks - Jesse
Jesse:
ReplyDeleteCheck your New Testament and you will find something is true. Let me know if you disagree.
Paul was an intellectual.
Derek Leman
I apologize for my snideness and rudeness of tone to you. I actually did not mean to sound so snippy.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that, Derek. Like I said, the text-only nature of our communications make misunderstandings more common than we'd like them to be.
I had an interesting class tonight. There are two Jewish members of the my congregation's board who are in my class. One is very One Law while the other, I discovered tonight, is more in line with the Gentiles being obligated to the Acts 15 letter but "allowed" to do more if they (we) choose. It made for a very lively discussion. I felt for the first time in awhile, that there was room for the congregation to grow.
Anyway, off topic, but I thought I'd share.
Good night.
Jesse,
ReplyDeleteThat's a good one. Another one is 1st Corintians 1, from Paul the Intellectual, after being divinely knocked off his high horse:
Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him.
Having scholars is important. We need leaders trained in theology, language, biblical studies, like Leman, McKee, Dauermann.
It's just, sometimes, intellectuals tend to intellectualize everything. :-) And they often lose touch with the common folk, the mundane needs of the regular people.
(...And they're gonna crucify me for saying that. :-))
Judah,
ReplyDeleteI don't crucify you by any means for regcognizing the limitations in various "intellectuals." History demonstrates that there are aristocratic intellectuals who lord their studies and credentials over others, and then intellectuals who promote a meritocracy, wanting to promote an ethic of hard work and high achievement in everybody.
One of the most inspiring quotations I have ever heard in my life was spoken by Gordon Brown when he entered into Downing Street on 27 June 2007 and he said:
"...I want the best of chances for everyone. That is my mission—that if we can fulfil the potential and realise the talents of all our people then I am absolutely sure that Britain can be the great global success story of this century."
It should be no surprise that Brown's father was a minister. Let us be servants of the Body of Messiah who can similarly stimulate every man and woman to do good deeds and aim excelsior in the Lord!
17 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Torah and boast in G-d, 18 and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Torah, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Torah the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, 21 you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the Torah, through your breaking the Torah, do you dishonor G-d? 24 For “THE NAME OF G-D IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU,” just as it is written.
ReplyDelete25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Torah but if you are a transgressor of the Torah, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Torah, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Torah will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Torah and circumcision are a transgressor of the Torah? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from G-d. - Rom.2:17-29
Note: in context of what was being talked about.
I'm not saying that circumcision is nothing, because there is benefit for Scripture says so. We must read context. Talking about those who are of the faith and who is not! And no I'm not saying that Gentiles who obey Torah are Jews... That has to do with DNA not faith.
Judah,
ReplyDeleteI don't see in your original posting where you get the conclusion that the MJTI "argues Messianics who deny Yeshua’s divinity are OK, but Yeshua-faithful Messianics who broaden the application of Torah, or who broaden the composition of Israel, are Not-OK." The quote from the MJTI doesn't mention the later half of your conclusion.
Be that as it may, I know from personal experience that there are people in the Messianic community who feel that the One-Law or Two-House controversy is much more important than the Deity of Yeshua.
I, on the other hand, can't think of any issue that is more important than the Deity "question."
If Yeshua is God, and one refuses to worship Him, it is blasphemy. If Yeshua is not God, and one does worship Him, it is idoletry.
In both cases, the penalty under the Torah is death. This is serious business.
There is no similer penalty for believing that non-Jews should obey the Torah.
It's just, sometimes, intellectuals tend to intellectualize everything. :-) And they often lose touch with the common folk, the mundane needs of the regular people.
ReplyDeleteThat's been my concern about some of these scholarly papers as well. While J.K. McKee says there are intellectuals who promote a meritocracy, wanting to promote an ethic of hard work and high achievement in everybody, part of the problem is the language of the message. Kinzer may be very well educated, but he only seems to be able to write to an audience with a university level education. The whole world of faith isn't made up of Ph.Ds
I've known writers like Kinzer who could only communicate with a rather limited audience, but I've also known writers of equal education and intelligence who were able to transmit the same information to a much wider group, all because they could adapt themselves to be able to write to that wider group.
The MJTI needs to find a writer with the ability to project a "broader voice".
"Kinzer may be very well educated, but he only seems to be able to write to an audience with a university level education. The whole world of faith isn't made up of Ph.Ds"
ReplyDeleteJames, Yeshua mostly spoke to the public in cryptic parables that he later had to explain to his disciples (who mostly didn't get it) in private. I suppose he too could be criticized for being "too intellectual" for his audience (and may be he was!). In fact, he was asked to say things "plainly"!
However, what I don't get is the whole "Kinzer... could only communicate with a rather limited audience." I've read his works, but I've never had any issues understanding the points Kinzer makes - and English is not even my first language!
True, Kinzer doesn't write Sunday sermons that small children can grasp. It's up to the teachers, like yourself, to "translate" difficult things of theology to the level of the called "masses".
Paul too was accused of "intellectualism" by those who couldn't take his message. Remember this bit:
"At this point Festus interrupted Paul's defense. "You are out of your mind, Paul!" he shouted. "Your great learning is driving you insane." (Acts 26:24)
What was Paul's reply to this:
"I am not insane, most excellent Festus," Paul replied. "What I am saying is true and reasonable."
Shalom,
ReplyDeleteI believe that Deity of Moshiach is the most doctrine if not right there with the most important doctrine in Scripture! I think that many in the Messianic movement are denying the Deity of Yeshua is because they want to be accepted really bad by the Orthadox community (non believers).
Now I would really want to be accepted by the Orthadox community also but are we to do that at the expense of denying the Deity of Yeshua? That's a compromise that can't be made, at least for me!
How can the Eternal Word of G-d that came down from Heaven be anything less?
James, Yeshua mostly spoke to the public in cryptic parables that he later had to explain to his disciples (who mostly didn't get it) in private. I suppose he too could be criticized for being "too intellectual" for his audience (and may be he was!). In fact, he was asked to say things "plainly"!
ReplyDeleteYeshua had a reason for speaking cryptically. It wasn't as if he was unconscious of what he was doing. He deliberately hid the full meaning of his messages from the masses. I don't think that is Kinzer's intent here.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to be mean to Kinzer and I'm not saying he has to write for kindergartners, but he writes scholarly papers. That's what he does well. But can he, or anyone in authority in the MJTI, take the same material and communicate it to a wider audience?
Gene, I'm a professional writer and I work with software developers every day. I have to take what they've produced and write documentation that is appropriate to other developers who work for our customers. I also have to take that same information and rewrite it so it's understandable to the CEOs and other decision makers for those same customers (and most of these decision makers don't have the same technical understanding as their IT staff).
There are many, many people of faith who could benefit from the information being presented by MJTI, but who won't get past the first 10 pages because the information was written for a more erudite audience.
Gene, I know English isn't your first language and I'm always amazed at people who are bilingual. It's certainly not one of my gifts. I know you are intelligent and educated and are able to comprehend all this material. However, we have a tendency to believe people everywhere are just like us, and they're not. It's important to try to see a piece of documentation from points of view that aren't always our own.
Having a background in both writing and psychology helps me understand the art of communication and how we can limit our message by how we present it. Sometimes, it's important to limit your audience because of the needs of your audience. If Kinzer intends to deliver his message only to educated and scholarly people, then his message is worded correctly. That also means that "everyone else" isn't expected to receive any of Kinzer's information, or at least not from his documentation.
In a nutshell, that's the issue I have with these scholarly papers. I'm not personally criticizing Kinzer, I'm merely pointing out the boundaries that contain and limit his message. Again, if his intent is to limit his data, that's fine. We just need to be clear that what he presents isn't for general consumption.
Some people can only handle a Honda or Toyota...others need the Cadillac...
ReplyDelete"Sometimes, it's important to limit your audience because of the needs of your audience. If Kinzer intends to deliver his message only to educated and scholarly people, then his message is worded correctly."
ReplyDeleteWhich would be fine - after all, it is the leaders who DO interact with the "masses" (I don't like this word) who will have to actually implement the practical aspects of the theology and explain it to lay people.
Besides, both you and I wrote on Bilateral Ecclesiology, in the way, I believe, that is easier for most folks to grasp. In fact, if you search for "Bilateral Ecclesiology" on Google, both of our blogs are on the first page of search results!
Besides, both you and I wrote on Bilateral Ecclesiology, in the way, I believe, that is easier for most folks to grasp. In fact, if you search for "Bilateral Ecclesiology" on Google, both of our blogs are on the first page of search results!
ReplyDeleteWe're famous! :D
Just kidding.
I believe that Deity of Moshiach is the most doctrine if not right there with the most important doctrine in Scripture! I think that many in the Messianic movement are denying the Deity of Yeshua is because they want to be accepted really bad by the Orthadox community (non believers).
Now I would really want to be accepted by the Orthadox community also but are we to do that at the expense of denying the Deity of Yeshua? That's a compromise that can't be made, at least for me!
Since the "Deity issue" has taken on a life of it's own yet again, I thought I'd blog on it today: The Deity Problem.
Judah, Mark Kinzer is one of my VERY close friends, and in all fairness, you have completely mis-characterized his position, and it borders on Lashon Hara. Kinzer was NOT arguing as you say. I was at the forum, I have had many conversations with Kinzer personally, and what he was arguing for is that Messianic Jewish congregations not exclude Jewish non-Yeshua believers from our midst, in a continuity of peoplehood. He holds to the divinity of Yeshua, but realizes that Yeshua is Messiah not just of Jews who believe in Him, but also of those who do not. That is not how you are mis-characterizing him.
ReplyDeleteJudah, I appreciate you... but if you are going to go on a witch hunt, realize that you are slandering someone of high moral and ethical integrity, and the Lord will require it of you. I'm honestly saying this out of concern, not accusation.
Michael
"...and what he was arguing for is that Messianic Jewish congregations not exclude Jewish non-Yeshua believers from our midst, in a continuity of peoplehood."
ReplyDeleteArguments about the differences between Jews and Christians aside, is this really so different than allowing "seekers" (non-believing people "exploring" Christianity but who have not made a "decision for Christ") to attend a church with Christians?
In other words, if a non-Messianic Jew wanted to "check out" Messianic Judaism, would you keep him or her from entering the synagogue until they became Messianic?
"In other words, if a non-Messianic Jew wanted to "check out" Messianic Judaism, would you keep him or her from entering the synagogue until they became Messianic?"
ReplyDeleteI think the reason behind Judah's post about Kinzer is twofold:
1. To cast doubt on Kinzer's commitment to Yeshua (to make him seem that he's willing to minimize Yeshua or an importan part of who he is to be accepted by mainstream Judaism).
2. To make a comparison between Messianic Jews' rejection of One-Law and Two-House theologies and acceptance of Jews who do not hold to Yeshua's divinity. Judah is asking why reject OL/TH beliefs but embrace those (Judah forgets to mention that "those" are Jews) who don't even believe in Yeshua!
Not necessarily in the above order.
I think I got that, Gene.
ReplyDeleteIn my small congregation, we sometimes get many guests from all walks of life and theological perspectives. All of them are welcome, but that doesn't mean all of them will stay.
We are upfront about what we believe and we teach out of those beliefs. People can either choose to accept our beliefs and join us or, if we're not a good fit, they can go elsewhere. It's been rare that we've had to ask anyone to leave, but it happens every so often, if they're particularly disruptive.
Accept everyone into the house of God (people coming completely out of left field won't even approach, so you almost never have to deal with them). The vast majority of folks who have theologies at odds with the congregation's beliefs and values won't stay. Why not accept non-believing Jews and even the occasional OL or TH person into an MJ synagogue (and keep in mind, most OL/TH people won't choose to enter a BE organized group)?
Slander?At the very least such an accusation is hyperbole, more likely slander itself. To "slander" is to falsely accuse, to lie in order to damage another's reputation. The narrow limits of slander normally make those that accuse others of slander guilty of the crime themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe fact remains that Mr. Kinzer's quotes are not provided to us in a vacuum. They come as no surprise to many of us.
Actually, Kinzer's quotes are provided in a vacuum. I mentioned this before but didn't get a response. We have some quotes to something he said recently as posted in the body of Judah's blog, but we don't have the context of the entire document or recording. It would be helpful to know the "whole picture", so to speak.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't a vacuum because we have previously heard similar things. Kesher Journal has had hints of this thinking.
ReplyDeleteWhen questioned, there is apparent backtracking. Words like "deity" and "divinity" are employed, when direct questions appear to be answered. Yet the words mean different things to different people. The fact is, there are serious questions as to BE's commitment to "I and the Father are One" understanding - at least among their so-called "elites."
If you doubt that, dig deeper when you pose a question such as, "Do you believe in the deity of Yeshua?"
"Yes" can mean something different than you think.
Rick, I meant that the current quotes Judah posted on his blog are extracted from a particular document. All I'm saying is that I'd like to read the whole document. Nothing more complicated than that.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the deity of Yeshua is concerned, I've posted a little something on my blog and am playing (you should pardon the expression) "devil's advocate" with interesting results.
The deity issue isn't just a matter of intellectual and scholarly debate, but one of high emotions as well. Regardless of whether or not a person believes the Messiah must be God, it doesn't make them "evil" for having that opinion. Virtually all observant (non-Messianic) Jews on earth don't believe that the coming Messiah is going to be God.
Are they bad?
Michael,
ReplyDeleteThanks for being concerned about me.
I was drawing attention to an interesting observation: Yeshua-faithful Jews like Dan Benzvi (and half-Jews like myself) are frowned upon in MJTI circles because of our views on Torah and Israel, but Yeshua-denying Jews are to be welcomed. My post was drawing attention to this. My post did not claim Kinzer rejects Yeshua in any way.
If you are still concerned, feel free to contact me, I'm willing to listen.
@James, I completely agree with you. I know and love not just a few who do not think Messiah can be G-d.
ReplyDeleteWhat concerns me is folks saying one thing within their circle, then crafting different language for those outside.
Shabbat Shalom
B"H
What concerns me is folks saying one thing within their circle, then crafting different language for those outside.
ReplyDeleteI can agree with you there, Rick. Especially if organization is one which is trying to educate others in the ways of God, they have a responsibility to be transparent (unlike the Government) and express their actual, official stance. FFOZ did this abundantly when they changed their theological position and it cost them dearly.
I, on the other hand, seem to be all too upfront with my opinions and especially my questions. Of course, on my "Searching" blog, I only represent myself and my primary student is me.
I, on the other hand, seem to be all too upfront with my opinions and especially my questions.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how that could be possible. There are far too many people in Messianic Judaism that are playing language games in order to keep from voicing their real position. I see FFOZ's shift in a different way. I saw their shift long before they made it public, in the way they split hairs in their use of words. I see the same issue in the so-called "deity" issue. Fearful of losing support, some are far too careful with what they say regarding the issue.
I appreciate your candidness. Maybe the difference is you have no financial risk either way?
Rick Spurlock:
ReplyDeleteI haven't been on here for a few days and this morning I find that you have been saying for days that Kinzer does not believe in the divinity of Yeshua, that he says one thing in public statements but backtracks and states it differently in more private venues.
Not true.
Please prove your accusation or retract it and publicly apologize.
If you fail to do one or the other, we will know to take all your future comments as completely lacking in integrity.
Derek Leman
you have been saying for days that Kinzer does not believe in the divinity of Yeshua, that he says one thing in public statements but backtracks and states it differently in more private venues.
ReplyDeleteNonsense. I did not accuse Mr. Kinzer of anything. I do not know, nor do I care what he "believes."
I am not interested in creedal declarations myself; but some in BE make statements regarding "deity" and "divinity" that are interpreted by others as ontological and creedal when they are not necessarily intended that way. In some cases it is deceptive, in others a matter of hermeneutics. My comments were merely a caution that the words do not mean the same thing to all people. BE walks a tightrope trying to maintain a viable relationship with “trinitarian” Christianity while trying to find compatible language with traditional Judaism.
@James,
ReplyDeleteHere is what I was speaking of when I said that Judah was not quoting Mr. Kinzer in a vacuum.
Burrough Park Symposium 2010
There are also "negative boundary" discussions in the 2008 Kesher Journal.
"I was drawing attention to an interesting observation: Yeshua-faithful Jews like Dan Benzvi (and half-Jews like myself) are frowned upon in MJTI circles because of our views on Torah and Israel, but Yeshua-denying Jews are to be welcomed."
ReplyDeleteHimango, I am not familiar with your background at all and just caught this in one of your last posts. You classify yourself as a "half-jew". I am curious how you define that statement and how you ended up coining yourself one since even the most structured in the MJ movement (MJTI/MJRC) accept both patrilineal/matrilineal (directly verifiable that is)?
Did you guys miss this?
ReplyDelete"Jews are born;"
Than how can the writer Derek be a Jew?
We learn something new every day from these so-called scholars, don't we?....