This morning, Nehemiah Gordon responded to that post, and I want to be fair in highlighting it here.
For the uninitiated, Nehemiah Gordon is a Karaite Jew who dialogs regularly with Christians and Messianics. He’s made appearances on God’s Learning Channel on American television. He has toured the United States with Christian pastors. He’s written a book about Yeshua and another on the Lord’s Prayer.
The Karaite religion is, to be certain, outside of normative Judaism. Karaite Jews reject the Talmudic writings as binding, they believe in the supreme authority of the Tenakh (Old Testament) alone, they reject most rabbinic tradition and reject the authority of rabbis. They’ve made efforts towards restoring the Torah-based calendar. Where modern Orthodox Jews may be spiritual descendants of the ancient Pharisees, some have suggested Karaites may be modern descendants of the Sadducees. What Protestants are to the Catholic Church, Karaites are to Rabbinic Judaism.
In any event, many Christians and some Messianics sympathize with Gordon’s causes, particularly on the sola scriptura concept, the idea that Scripture contains everything necessary to live a holy life.
The implication, however, that Nehemiah Gordon may be convincing Christians to abandon hope in Yeshua and convert to the Karaite religion has made waves recently.
This morning’s response from Nehemiah addresses some of this criticism:
Hi Judah,
For the record, I do not run the "Light of Israel" website you linked to. It was the website of my friend Mordechai Alfandari and its maintenance fell to me after he passed away. However, I decided to take a different direction from Mordechai years ago as I explained in my post "The Good News of Passover" here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/karaite_korner_news/message/534Here is what I wrote there on this subject:
"Over the years I've met Jews of both the rabbinical and Karaite persuasions who do feel called to convince people to embrace the Jewish faith. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this approach but it is the exception to the rule. One such exception was an old Karaite man in Jerusalem named Mordechai Alfandari. He once told me how Christian missionaries used to harass him on the subway in New York when he was a boy. He spent a great deal of his energies over the next 60 years engaged in Jewish apologetics. I consider Mordechai my mentor as he is the one who opened my eyes to speaking the name of God, which incidentally he pronounced Yihweh. When Mordechai passed away in 1999 I felt like it was expected of me to follow in his footsteps as a counter-missionary but my heart was never in it. The more time I spent speaking with Christians, the more I found I had in common with them. It seemed to me to be a colossal waste of time and energy arguing with them when there was so much we could learn from one another. I realized you can always find differences with people if you want to. God knows there are plenty of differences between me and other Jews and even between me and other Karaites. I decided I would focus my energies on what I have in common with people rather than the differences."
I hope this helps clarify the issue.
Nehemia Gordon
My take: Nehemiah Gordon and Karaite Judaism have some things to teach us, but we should take caution in regards to those teachings. As Messianic apologist J.K. McKee stated,
I think we should always remain skeptical of those who teach about Yeshua, but do not acknowledge Him as Savior. This is true of a range of teachers, be they Nehemia Gordon or Bart Ehrman. But skepticism (or even strong skepticism) need not imply hostility.
What’s your take?
2Co 6:14 Do not yoke yourselves together in a team with unbelievers. For how can righteousness and lawlessness be partners? What fellowship does light have with darkness?
ReplyDelete2Co 6:15 What harmony can there be between the Messiah and B'liya`al? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?
-The Independent Pen
I Thess 5:21 but test everything that is said. Hold on to what is good.(NLT)
ReplyDeleteI test my friends, enemies and even donkeys, if they talk to me.
I trust Nehemiah more because he tells us upfront what he is.
I trust the snakes amongst us less because they slither in as one of us and rarely show their true seeds.
Regardless, we must discern with any person pushing doctrine.
Corrections to the main post:
ReplyDeleteNo one among us believes that any modern Rabbi today has the authority of Hhaza"l (the Sages of the Talmudhim). The latter's authority existed as being THE institution, the Court, designated in the Tora to function. This existed from Mosha's time throughout the Prophets and onward. In fact, `Azra who re-instituted the Court after exile, and who made many decrees which are Rabbinic in origin, was backed by the Prophets who existed in that day. That all leaves a HUGE problem for Karaites and others who reject the idea of there existing an orally preserved understanding of the Tora throughout the generations. That just goes against the history of the people of Israel as well. And it is recorded within our tradition that there are some decrees that were made which weren't accepted at large by the people of Israel and therefore never became binding halakhic practice. Such as `Azra's decree in regards to a ba`al qari and reciting words of Toro.
Karaite Judaism leaves unanswered questions galore. In my perspective, it is no loss to me if the self-righteous unlearned are mixed up by afeiqorosim such as Karaites. I say self righteous unlearned because regardless of the person's behavior and intentions, a person who believes they can interpret HaShem's Tora on their own understanding and disregard His appointed authorities and system - that is the epitome of self righteousness. Not only do Messianics do this for a variety of reasons, but Karaites also, and in one of the biggest ways. Thus, Karaites are under the category of Afeiqorosim.
וְהָאֲפֵיקוֹרוֹסִין--מִצְוָה לְאַבְּדָן בַּיָּד, וּלְהוֹרִידָן עַד בְּאֵר שַׁחַת: מִפְּנֵי שְׁהֶן מְצֵרִין לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמְסִירִין אֶת הָעָם מֵאַחֲרֵי ה', כְּיֵשׁוּעַ הַנּוֹצְרִי וְתַלְמִידָיו, וְצַדּוּק וּבַיְתּוֹס וְתַלְמִידֵיהֶם--"שֵׁם רְשָׁעִים, יִרְקָב" (משלי י,ז).
And [those in the classification of] the Afeiqorosin--[it is a] misswo to abolish them by the hand, and to bring them down until the grave: Because they are troublers to Israel, and they stray the people away from HaShem. As Yeshu the Christian and his followers, and Ssaduq (father of the Sadducees) and Baytos (father of the Beothusians; both ancient groups who rejected the Oral Tora) and his followers--"the name of the wicked shall rot" (Mishlei/Proverbs 10:7)
^Mishne Tora
Afeiqorosim only inlcude Jews who believe such things. Goyim who believe in various things are not in the classification of afeiqoros. This is because those within Israel believing heretical and idolatrous things are a special danger - obviously, in that they are coming from part of the people of Israel.
Karaites say that the majority of religious Jews are wrong, and that their own personal interpretations of Tora are correct (even though they vary from one Karaite to another).
Messianics say that they are the perfect, godsent mixture of Christianity and Judaism, and that Jews are wrong because they only have Tora and HaShem ("only" - HAHA!) and that Christians are wrong because they only have Jesus. That each side is missing the other side, which if brought together would create the perfect religion which they are. And not all Messianics believe in or keep written Tora. And many do to various degrees, all of which are partial observances because they lack a whole aspect of Tora (like Karaites) that make it impossible for them to correctly carry out the commands of the Most High. Many of them are not even Jewish and are not obligated to the 613 and their details anyway.
Even Messianics who accept the Oral Tora, like the smarter folks at FFOZ and other organizations - even they violate it on the worst grounds and cannot fully embrace it because they realize that it does not permit their crap and it counts them as rebellious (if they are even Jewish to begin with).
>> The latter's authority existed as being THE institution, the Court, designated in the Tora to function.
ReplyDeleteThe Torah only prescribes judges, which Judaism interprets to be the Sanhedrin. However, that doesn't exist now, and hasn't for millenia. And many of the innovations and rulings of the sages, while they may have wisdom, were not from that God-approved court.
All we've been left with for the last few thousand years is sages with lots of opinion, some of them contradictory.
It is important to further understand that the Sanhedrin was not infallible; in fact, in the Rambam's famous 613 mitzvot list, he interpreted Lev. 4:13 as, "The Sanhedrin must bring an offering when it rules in error." Thus, even then it cannot be said that the rulings of Judaism are on the same level as God's own commandments. Judaism, for all its wisdom, does not have the authority to create new commandments.
"Judaism, for all its wisdom, does not have the authority to create new commandments."
ReplyDeleteAnd it doesn't. It simply interprets or protects (fences) existing commandments. Also, many Jewish practices that are thought of as "commandments" by outsiders are in fact NOT, and instead, they are simply customs that can vary from community to community and only obligate members of a particular community.
You're right. They are customs, not commandments.
ReplyDeleteI question why many of the customs involve prayers that suggest they're commandments:
"Blessed are you, L-rd our G-d, who has commanded us to [do something we're not actually commanded to do]."
"I question why many of the customs involve prayers that suggest they're commandments:
ReplyDelete"Blessed are you, L-rd our G-d, who has commanded us to [do something we're not actually commanded to do].""
No, these are official Jewish interpretation of commandments, not customs, therefore they ARE commandments that are binding on the Jewish people.
Example: Deuteronomy 5:12 "Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the L-RD your G-d commanded you."
What does keeping Sabbath holy/sanctified mean and how can exactly G-d has commanded it be kept holy? Jews know what that means through official Jewish interpretation of that commandment.
So, instead of the version you proposed, I propose this instead:
"Blessed are you, L-rd our G-d, who has commanded us to [keep something holy and special and by this special reverent act - fill in the blank - this is how we Jews do it]."
Ok, then, it's just like I said. Official interpretations from Judaism have become commandments.
ReplyDeleteIt's not right for humans to claim God said something he didn't actually say. You might say, "God said X in the Torah, and so we do Y." That would be acceptable.
If these traditions-turned-commandments were coming from the Sanhedrin, then your argument would hold more weight. However, even then, it would be dangerous to put words in God's mouth, considering the Sanhedrin was fallible.
Prayers like those ought to be, at the very least,
"Blessed are you, L-rd our G-d, who has commanded us to [keep the Sabbath holy], and for this we [kindle the sabbath lights]."
That would be acceptable.
In any case, I have my convictions, you have yours. If people wish to pray prayers that thank God for commanding something he didn't explicitly command, well, that's their judgment call, certainly we have bigger issues to deal with. :-)
"If people wish to pray prayers that thank God for commanding something he didn't explicitly command, well, that's their judgment call, certainly we have bigger issues to deal with. :-)"
ReplyDeleteFor sure! Most Christians (especially Evangelicals, in my experience) thank G-d for doing this or that for them, or orchestrating this or that event (church meeting, finding a sweet parking space at the mall, etc.) assuming it must have been been G-d behind that. Is it such a great difference between attributing certain actions directly to G-d vs attributing certain interpretations of commandments (really, a "how-to" on how to perform them) He actually handed down on Him as well? I don't think so.
You are right that both Jews and Christians bless God for something God didn't necessarily do.
ReplyDeleteThe problem isn't in the thanking God, of course. The problem is in Judaism's interpretations being recognized as commandments by themselves. That's where we differ, Gene, I don't think it's right for humans to put our interpretations, no matter how wise, on the same level as God's commands. This goes against the grain of your view that official Jewish interpretation of commandments are commandments that are binding on Jews.
Evangelicals don't do this for their devotion to sola scriptura. The Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, does do this, claiming they, too, have authority alone to interpret Scripture such that it's binding on the Jesus' disciples. In many ways, this parallels Judaism.
"That's where we differ, Gene, I don't think it's right for humans to put our interpretations, no matter how wise, on the same level as God's commands. "
ReplyDeleteJudah, but this is precisely what people who reject Judaim's halachic interpretations do themselves, except I think what they do, on closer inspection, is far more egregious and arrogant and the long-term repercussions of their beliefs for their communities are far worse. That is, instead of relying on established standards they rely on their own understanding (Proverbs 3:5) and observe their own private interpretation of Torah as if those were Torah themselves. This is why I think it's so deeply hypocritical for those folks to look down on Jewish communal interpretation of Torah as set by Jewish sages that has served and preserved the Jewish people for thousands of years.
Gene,
ReplyDeleteYou describe our position as one that looks down on Jewish tradition.
Our position is an acknowledment, one that should be plain to every disciple of Yeshua, that human beings are fallible and their judgments, no matter how wise and learned, must not be set on the same level as God's commandments.
That need not imply wholesale rejection of Jewish tradition.
OK, I'll jump in.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like the current debate (and we've been here before) is between whether individuals should interpret the Bible for themselves or whether people should depend on groups of teachers/Rabbis/Pastors/experts to do the interpretation based on accepted and (sometimes) centuries-old standards. Technically speaking, scripture almost never stands on its own. It almost always requires interpretation.
It's interesting that you compared the Catholic and Jewish traditions of depending on Priests (Catholics) or Rabbis (Jews) to interpret scripture, because wider Christianity has such a standard, too. It's just not formally recognized among the Protestant rank-and-file.
Some time ago, you quoted from a CNN story called Actually, that's not in the Bible. Here's my favorite quote from that article (it's at the very end of the story):
“It is a great Protestant tradition for anyone - milkmaid, cobbler, or innkeeper - to be able to pick up the Bible and read for herself. No need for a highly trained scholar or cleric to walk a lay person through the text,” says Craig Hazen, director of the Christian Apologetics program at Biola University in Southern California.
But often the milkmaid, the cobbler - and the NFL coach - start creating biblical passages without the guidance of biblical experts, he says.
“You can see this manifest today in living room Bible studies across North America where lovely Christian people, with no training whatsoever, drink decaf, eat brownies and ask each other, ‘What does this text mean to you?’’’ Hazen says.
“Not only do they get the interpretation wrong, but very often end up quoting verses that really aren’t there.”
When Hazen says "Not only do they get the interpretation wrong" he implies that it's possible for an individual to misinterpret the Bible, and based on what else he says, it seems like interpreting the Bible based on what "feels right" isn't an acceptable standard.
Certainly food for thought. Should individuals go around "shooting from the hip" so to speak, in trying to figure out what God really meant when He said "such-and-thus"?
Of course, the counter-example is the Catholic Church coming to some really bad conclusions themselves, including theology that led to the Crusades, the Inquisition, salvation-for-money, among other things.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, Judaism has, over the centuries, come to some bad conclusions as well.
While the CNN article points to some dumb-but-harmless interpretations by individuals, I can point to dumb-and-dangerous interpretations by big religious groups.
All that said, our position is one that doesn't "shoot from the hip", rather, it puts Jewish and Christian tradition in their proper place: a reference point, firmly below Scripture, not a requirement for faithful living. After all, they're just traditions, invented by people. It's not as if God authored the Talmud or the Catechism.
"I think we should always remain skeptical of those who teach about Yeshua, but do not acknowledge Him as Savior. This is true of a range of teachers...." --J.K. McKee
ReplyDeleteThat ~range~ should include mainline Christianity who preach a *false concept* of who the Messiah is, and do not follow The Way (for their traditions are more egregious that those which got the Pharisees soundly chastised [see Matthew 5:20].
Yak
"Technically speaking, scripture almost never stands on its own. It almost always requires interpretation." --James
ReplyDeleteYes. And the best Bible-study tool (for interpretation) is to allow Scripture to interpret Scripture.
"But often the milkmaid, the cobbler - and the NFL coach - start creating biblical passages without the guidance of biblical experts, he says.
"“You can see this manifest today in living room Bible studies across North America where lovely Christian people, with no training whatsoever, drink decaf, eat brownies and ask each other, ‘What does this text mean to you?’’’ Hazen says.
"“Not only do they get the interpretation wrong, but very often end up quoting verses that really aren’t there.”" -- 'Actually, that's not in the Bible' CNN
This is called "SYI Bible study" (i.e. share your ignorance BS) --hat tip to Rev Swindoll
Yak
Why are not the inspired Scriptures enough? Why do we need some extra interpretation from people with agendas?
ReplyDeletePaul did not think so. He said:"...that from childhood you have known the sacred writing which are Able to give you the wisdom that leads to saluation through faith which in Messiah Yeshua (2 Tim. 3:15).
No mention of the talmud or Mishnah or the Oral Torah here is there?
"All Schriptures are inspired by God and profotsble for teaching for reproof. for correction for training in righteousness that the manof god may be adequate, equipped for every good work (3:16-17) No Talmud or Mishnah od any man written rules.
Sometim all we need is a little deeper insight into Scripture.
"Likewise, Judaism has, over the centuries, come to some bad conclusions as well."
ReplyDeleteAnd that is coming from your opinion based on what? Someone who doesn't know the system of halakha nor how Judaism has worked during and after the times of the Sanhedrin can make a comment like that?
You're basing your view on a rough overview of very general things. And you state your opinion, based outside of an understand of and outside of a life lived in Judaism; and that is very problematic.
It all comes back to you setting yourself up as prime interpreter of the Torah. You think you can read the Tanakh in translation, and from that, decide that the "Rabbis" (whether you mean Sages of the Sanhedrin or later Rabbinic leaders is unclear) are in error. Even though they were authorized by the Prophets of their times and had been in succession since Sinai. I hope you see how problematic that is, and agree to change your ways.
Why are not the inspired Scriptures enough? Why do we need some extra interpretation from people with agendas?
ReplyDeleteDan, we're all people with "agendas". There's no such thing as a completely objective human being. Even with the best of motives, we'll insert our personalities, beliefs, and biases into every situation. We'd like to think that "scripture interprets scripture" but who interprets the interpetation?
Example: OL and "strict" (BE) MJ both interpret various parts of the Bible to say that (OL) both Jews and Gentiles are obligated to the exact same 613 commandments and that Jews and Gentiles (MJ/BE) have different covenant responsibilities to God. Assuming they can't both be right, then one or both parties are imposing their interpretation over the Biblical text.
Example: The traditional Christian interpretation of Galatians is that Paul was killing the Torah dead for both Jews and Gentiles and that grace replaced the law. MJ and its various flavors interpret Galatians to say that the Torah is not dead and, if you read Lancaster's (FFOZ) recent book on Galatians, he interprets it as saying the Torah is for Jews but not for Gentiles.
Why isn't the Bible enough? Because people read it and interpret it. Imagining that we can just pick a Bible up and read it in English and immediately, based on our own emotions and perspectives, understand exactly what God was saying 100% of the time is a little naive.
As far as authorities go, we all (hopefullyl) determine some authority or school of thought that guides us in terms of what the Bible means. Judaism has a tradition whereby the wisdom of the sages carries authority (although if you read their opinions carefully, you'll see that they hold Biblical authority higher than Rabbinic authority). This is an alien concept to most Christians and make no mistake, the perspective of most OL/MJs is fundamentally a Christian perspective. That's why people like Dauermann and Gene are so difficult for the rest of us to understand.
Guys,
ReplyDeleteAs this discussion is wandering far off-topic, rehashing stuff we've covered numerous times, I'd like to use this opportunity to bow out of the discussion.
Have a good shabbat.
The real question that should be asked is why Nehemia Gordon is frequently involved with an opportunistic scoundrel like Michael Rood.
ReplyDeleteJames, Thanks for the summery of the last 5 years and thanks for discovering America.
ReplyDeleteJudah, DITO! I am out of here too. Have a great Shabbat.
Those who read/hear the Word carnally, don't get it [ref Matthew 13:10-15].
ReplyDeleteThose with spiritual eyes to see the Truth and those with spiritual ears to hear the Truth get it [ref Matthew 13:16].
It you put the opinions of the apostate on the same level as the true and faithful believer, you get confusion. Throw out the bad, hold fast to that which is good [ref 1 Thessalonians 5:22] (according to the sound doctrine of Scripture [Titus 1:9; 2:1, 5]).
Yak
Yak,
ReplyDeleteI assume your idea of "apostate" includes authentic Judaism, which never accepted your views, a truly apostate religion, which is completely connected to and is the womb which birthed Christianity. Christianity, which is the greatest antisemitic and idolatrous force to ever have existed in the last two thousand years. Nice "discernment".
@ Ama"n
ReplyDeleteTo paraphrase Forrest Gump: ~Apostate is as apostate does!~
Yak
Yak, you oppose authentic Judaism and the ancient tradition which exist today. So I don't see how you're reasoning that you're not 'apostate'.
ReplyDeleteI like Rabbi3000's comment the best.
ReplyDeleteHo humm, all this talk around the water cooler.
Nickel Creek said best:
"with all this deception, it's hard not to wander away"
Shalom
@ Ama"n
ReplyDeleteYou wrote: "I assume your idea of 'apostate' includes authentic Judaism, which never accepted your views, a truly apostate religion..."
Yikes! That is your assumption, not what I wrote. That makes it a moot point.
"never accepted your views" -- what's that about? I asserted above that my views are "the sound doctrine of Scripture." Why would a believer take issue with that?!
And now I know that my religion is "truly apostate"! I have not espoused a ~religion.~
Ama"n you have amazing discernment.
Not to mention that I did NOT claim to be pro-mainline Christianity.
It just reads like you do not like the Bible. Bless you, Ama"n.
Yak
Yak, you're a clown. I'm a believer in HaShem and Torah. Meaning I don't believe in the nude testament nor cheese-ass. I guess you missed where I was coming from.
ReplyDeleteAma"n, watch your speech, or you're gone.
ReplyDeleteI will not provide a forum for hateful or mocking speech. Your opponents here have spoken to you with respect; do likewise.