I hope that you will all take time to visit Derek's blog and engage in the discussion he has just opened up. He states his position:
"Main point: not all in Torah is given universally to all people. The text in focus here is Deuteronomy 14:21."
And then he asks for everyone to discuss and promises not to censor provided that everyone is polite. So go forth and be polite!
Peter,
ReplyDeleteGreat first post on Derek's blog. I want to make a brief comment but (for reasons of my own) wish to remain anonymous and can not do so on Derek's blog.
Those who are against One Law define it and then attack their definition (straw-man). I am One Law and am a Gentile. I don't stop being a Gentile when I become a fellow citizen with Israel. This seems to be lost on people who attack my (our) position.
As a Gentile - even as a fellow citizen - I have no claim in the Land. My joining to Israel does not give me any right to say I'm part of one of the tribes. This is the same for someone who 'converts' isn't it? Or do you get to pick a tribe for them to put on your conversion paperwork?
I see the problem more clearly after Derek has given us Deut 14:21 as the starting point. Ger is to be understood as Gentile/Non Israel when it relates to commandments I'm not supposed to do or things I can do because I'm a Ger.
Where Ger suggest I do the same things Israel does it is translated and understood as someone who 'converts.'
It reminds me of arguing with an Atheist/Evolutionist. They don't believe God exists so regardless of what I say - my argument must be wrong. Like young earth or old earth? It has to be old because none of this amazing stuff could appear out of nothing in such a short time. Regardless of what evidence is presented they are already decided.
I am a Ger - but which Ger am I? The one that falls under the same Torah as Israel or the one who can eat meat that is torn? Can Derek eat meat that is torn? Or does he just apply the verses that make him the other Ger?
I know what 'Rabbinic Case Law' says - so it seems I should just shut up and color like a foolish, school child, stop reading other peoples mail - eat my torn meat and be happy.... @Derek ;)
[Peter I don't mind you knowing who I am just not ready for blog Primetime exposure at this point]
"I don't stop being a Gentile when I become a fellow citizen with Israel. This seems to be lost on people who attack my (our) position."
DeletePeter, your stated position, on the other hand, is when a non-Jewish person comes to Yeshua, they are no longer Gentiles but Israelites. (besides your Two-House views, which is not shared by many One-Law folks, including Tim Hegg)
A Ger in Yeshua - I am afraid that Peter doesn't share your belief that Gentiles do not stop being Gentiles.
Ger in Yeshua,
DeleteIt's a blessing to hear from you. We have much to discuss, you and I, and it will probably take a long time to address every point you raised.
I would briefly like to talk about gentile status in New Covenant. You most likely won't have enforceable rights until Messiah returns. The only people who will respect your status right now are the Hebrew Roots people or independent Messianics. And there's not many of us.
However, in the world to come when Moshiach returns, you will have rights previously unknown to the ger. In the past, the ger could not own land and was therefore very poor and had to go on the public dole. The reason why he couldn't own land is because only a descendant of the tribes can own land in Israel. However, Ezekiel 47 says the gerim who belong to the New Covenant will have the right to own land in Israel.
Does this mean you have the enforceable right to own land in Israel right now? No, you must wait till Moshiach.
I would love to talk more with you but unfortunately I'm very sleep right now and need to drink some coffee. My three year old kept me up last night. It's the price one must pay for the privilege of having such a wonderful angel in one's life.
May you be strengthened, my friend. And I look forward to talking with you further.
Shalom,
Peter
Nice answer, Peter.
DeleteGer in Yeshua,
DeleteI just realized I failed to answer your main question: "Which Ger am I?"
Answer: There were two types of ger in Scripture, the ger-paroikos (i.e. non-covenanted) and the ger-proselyte (i.e covenanted). In Ephesians 2 Paul says to the gentiles that they are no longer "paroikos." Therefore, by process of elimination, you must be ger-proselyte.
Blessings to all the wonderful people commenting today. HaShem be praised!
Peter,
Delete"In the past, the ger could not own land and was therefore very poor and had to go on the public dole."
Would Caleb have been a ger?
Numbers 13:6
from the tribe of Judah, Caleb the son of Jephunneh;
Joshua 14:14
Therefore, Hebron became the inheritance of Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite until this day, because he followed the LORD God of Israel fully.
He was reckoned to be of the tribe of Judah, but his father was a non-Israelite, a Kenizzite. Joshua 14 states that he received the land because he followed the Elohim of Israel.
Any insights would be welcome.
Ezekiel 47:21-23
ReplyDeleteSo shall ye divide this land unto you according to the tribes of Israel. And it shall come to pass that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you and to the strangers that sojourn among you which shall beget children among you and they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel. And it shall come to pass that in what tribe the stranger sojourneth there shall ye give him his inheritance saith the Lord GOD.
Posted just for reference.
A few issues with the above.
DeleteFirst of all, you don't live among the Israelites and can't claim a sojourner status. Second, you don't live in the Land of Israel and can't claim a sojourner status. Third, you are no more qualified to be considered a "sojourner" than the many hundreds of millions of Christians world over. Fourthly, there will be many nations in the Messianic Kingdom. The nations will come yearly to Jerusalem to worship the King of Israel. "Come" means that they will live in their own lands. (Disclaimer: No scholars or dictionaries had to be used in the making of this simple comment).
Gene,
DeleteEven Abraham came from a different land; the fact that he originated in a pagan land doesn't mean that he stayed in a pagan land. Coming forward is what every proselyte who has ever lived has done. That's why the word itself, derived from proserchomai, means to come forward (i.e. "newcomer"). That's why Rabbinic Authority says of the proselyte that he has been brought near. That's why Paul says in Ephesians 2 that the gentiles have been brought near.
Gene, your real gripe is with Paul and Ephesians 2 which tells the New Covenant gerim that they are "politeia" in Israel. Your gripe is with the men of the Jerusalem Council who deemed that Peter was correct in that G-d had called "a people for His name" from out of the gentiles.
Peter - no gripes. Instead, I am upholding Christian/Gentile believers by reassuring them that they are valued and loved by G-d and do not need to become Israelites/Jews or anyone else other than what G-d has created them to be. They are spiritual brothers and sisters of the Jewish people (Israel), and most importantly, they are co-heir WITH the Jewish people/Israel (not as Israel and not instead of Israel as some erroneously teach) in the Kingdom of Heaven. I get emails from Christians who really appreciate the stance that I take in their defense.
DeleteGene,
DeleteYou confuse being Torah observant with being Jewish (Israel). I do not know where you got that impression. It does not hold up to the most basic of critical analysis.
Does the identity of the Jewish people? Of course not. Aren't there Jews that transgress the law and remain Jews?
Does the identity of the nation of Israel depend on their being Torah observant? Of course not. Today, Israel is a secular democracy and not a covenantial theocratic monarchy based on Torah. Is it still Israel? Of course it is.
So I have to ask you; does being Torah observant make the Gentile Jewish? No. But, according to scripture, it makes the Gentile believer 1) a citizen of Israel, 2)obedient to the commandments of Torah and 3) co-heirs with Y'shua. It doesn't matter that the current government of Israel won't recognize their citizenship. The King will.
But this citizenship issue brings us to another point. Your reassurances of Christian believers might be well intentioned, but they are based on a fallacy; Torah observance does not make anyone anything except obedient to the express will of Yah. Make no mistake. Our Father in heaven loves all His children. Even all those that die in their lawlessness. They are the reason He wept.
Christians I know personally observe Torah more completely than the One Law promoters than I know. They do so by visiting those in prison, by feeding the poor, by comforting the sick and dying, by taking care of the widows and orphans. That's the Torah observance for Gentiles that the One-Law promoters should focus on promoting, instead of pushing belt-loop tzitzit, alternative lunar calendars or telling Christians that they should circumcise themselves.
DeleteGene,
DeleteMuch of the world wants to attack Israel right now and you're going after those who wear "belt-loop tzitzit"?
"Much of the world wants to attack Israel right now and you're going after those who wear "belt-loop tzitzit"?
DeleteNot sure what one has to do with the other, Peter. In any case, by defending Christians I am defending Israel's best friends.
"First of all, you don't live among the Israelites and can't claim a sojourner status. Second, you don't live in the Land of Israel and can't claim a sojourner status. Third, you are no more qualified to be considered a "sojourner" than the many hundreds of millions of Christians world over."
DeleteGene does not live in Israel or among Israel as a body, so technically he is no different than you S. King.
Gene,
ReplyDelete>> I get emails from Christians who really appreciate the stance that I take in their defense. <<
Having started my walk in Christendom, and "crossed over" into MJ and Torah, I can assure you that this approval is largely misplaced. You are merely calling evil good, and good evil, and they appreciate your affirmation that rejecting the instruction of Hashem is acceptable.
"You are merely calling evil good, and good evil, and they appreciate your affirmation that rejecting the instruction of Hashem is acceptable."
DeleteDavid, I am afraid that you are the one who's got this backwards. What these Christians are reacting to are the rampant paganoidism and just general attitude of disdain toward all things "Christian" expressed by some of the One-Law promoters that they come across, both online and offline. Also, the Christians who wrote to me were not "anti-Torah", but instead are very much interested in how Torah applies to them as Gentiles (that's why they are reading my blog in the first place). They are simply not interested in the hatred promoted toward them by the One Law organizations.
Gene,
DeleteChildren are very interested in candy bars. But that doesn't mean that candy bars are good for them. On the contrary, despite the small amount of nutrients in the candy bar, the sugar will lower their immune system and increase their risk of cavities. In the same way, your teaching that gentiles are praiseworthy who reject a fully Torah observant identity and praxis, tastes sweet and enticing to many a novice but, in reality, accelerates yetzer hara, amplifies cognitive dissonance, and ends in confusion, misery, and cynicism for anything related to Yeshua.
Peter, One Law Gentiles do not possess a "full Torah observant identity". They are too laser-focusing on Jewish sign commandments for that, while their overall lifestyle is little different from your average Evangelical. The whole thing is skin deep. On the whole, the OL movement is not so much about Torah, as it is about "equal rights" with the Jews.
DeleteGene,
ReplyDelete"Christians I know personally observe Torah more completely than the One Law promoters than I know. They do so by visiting those in prison, by feeding the poor, by comforting the sick and dying, by taking care of the widows and orphans. That's the Torah observance for Gentiles that the One-Law promoters should focus on promoting, instead of pushing belt-loop tzitzit, alternative lunar calendars or telling Christians that they should circumcise themselves."
You are talking from ignorance like you always do, or you are just throwing flames like you always do...
This is not what OL teaches. But then, how about rabbinic teaching that we don't need a blue thread on the tzitzit, or we should have separate dishes for meat and dairy...You see, two can play the game.....
Well....Like I said before, You can take gene out of the Galut, but you cannot take the Galut out of Gene...
ReplyDeleteI am a "OL promoter" and my Christian friends are not as nearly paranoid like the nice Jewish boy Gene....
"Like I said before, You can take gene out of the Galut, but you cannot take the Galut out of Gene..."
DeleteDan, tell me again why did you leave Israel and have chosen to stay in the Galut (exile outside of Israel) for the last 40 years? You like Galut, Dan. You l-o-v-e it. Once you stop loving it so much, come back and chide me for supposedly having a galut-mindset. Until then, farmakh dos moyl!
Gene,
ReplyDeleteFor a bright guy like you hold yourself, you don't understand that I am speaking of you fafoylte mentality....
I posted this on Derek's blog, not realizing, he disabled comments, so I thought I would post it here, as it points out a large contradiction in his theology and views towards One Law.
ReplyDelete“But maybe you can help me with something, Dan. How does the One Law (One Torah) view escape from the problem of eliminating the uniqueness of Israel as the priestly people, the light through whom God shines to all the nations who are his children along with Israel? After all, the One Law view must in some way take what God personally covenanted with Israel at Sinai and say, “Now in Messiah this is no longer personal between God and Israel, but has become God’s way with all nations.”
I mean, aside from disagreeing with One Law for numerous reasons of biblical theology, I also am disappointed with the way it flattens out and eliminates the personal, unique election of Israel by universalizing the Torah.”
@ Derek – Then technically “proselytes”, you included, would be also diminishing Israel’s unique election and calling.. Do you see the contradiction… Israel and God are not hindered by numbers of people coming in, not in the least or God would have never allowed for a mixed multitude.
The scriptures talk about a time when the Torah will go to the nations, will that be the nail on the head that destroys Israel’s uniqueness, not in the least, it will enhance it.
Zion,
DeleteWell said. We should all devote some time today to pray for Derek and Gene, that G-d will move upon their hearts. They need to know that we are not seeking to diminish Judah. And we do not wish to "Judaize", to make gentiles into Jews, but rather to help them realize that they should stand along with Judah, their brother and learn the way of Torah from him. Judah has a place in the kahal; and gentiles have a place as members of Israel, as Israelites. We are all brothers and we should all be studying Torah together as a family.
Well, Peter, I certainly would appreciate any prayers that I can get.
DeleteSince Derek is a Proselyte can he eat unclean foods?
ReplyDeleteZion... according to what authority? Oh, I see, you are just being facetious and snide.
DeleteNo, I am not joking, I am asking, can Derek eat the unclean food referenced in Deut. 14:21?
DeleteAnyone is welcome to answer.
Zion,
DeleteWe are all, as Yeshua's children, obligated to avoid anything treif. The milk and meat thing is a whole other issue...
Agreed, I was referring to the animal found dead, which is unclean to eat. But it can be sold to a alien, so does Derek qualify as the alien to eat the animal found dead? Why or why not?
DeleteWith a few exception, a convert to Judaism is obligated to same commandments as a born Jew. Zion, since you reject "Judaism of the rabbis" nor are you a convert to it, you are not subject to its
DeleteZion,
DeleteNo one in the kahal of Yeshua qualifies to eat treifness. Note that the word in Deuteronomy 14:21 in the Septuagint is paroikos. Paul tells the gentiles in Ephesians 2 that they are no longer paroikos. So regardless of whatever rituals one has performed on himself, the fact remains that Believers in Yeshua attain a citizenship status and cannot be reckoned as a non-proselyte, non-covenantal Ger. Keep in mind that the word Ger doesn't have a set meaning. It literally means someone who doesn't own land and is just sojourning. So think of it like the translators behind the Septuagint: it all comes down to whether you are included in or excluded from the Sinaitic Covenant. All gerim in Yeshua's kahal are included in that covenant or else Paul could not say that in Ephesians 2 that the gentiles are no longer strangers to the covenants. Yeshua is the Passover Lamb through which one becomes a citizen in Adat Yisrael. If the Passover lambs of old meant citizenship then how much more does the true Passover Lamb mean citizenship for those who partake in Him?
Peter,
DeleteGreat points, completely agree, the verse is clearly referencing gentiles who are not in covenant with God, even Gene agrees, as he states the proselyte (the covenant gentile) is to keep the Law as a Jew, example: Derek being a covenant gentile.
As you stated though, in Messiah, gentiles have been brought into the covenant, and thus responsible to the Laws, meaning gentiles in Messiah are not the gentiles described in Deut 14:21.
So then we are back to the question, how does one enter covenant with God, Gene concludes that only the "Judaism of the rabbis", determines if one can be in covenant with God, and we conclude that God determines it, and has established it in His word. Gene advocates for Acts 15:1, while we agree with the Jerusalem Council, it is quite a large difference here. I asked this question specifically to deal with the verse in question, and it has succeeded in revealing more than I thought.
Zion,
DeleteI think Gene admits that gentiles are members of the New Covenant but he explains that the Torah applies differently to Jews and gentiles. I wouldn't say that Gene agrees with the position in Acts 15:1. He clearly believes that gentiles are saved through Yeshua and he vehemently disagrees with the view that gentiles should be circumcised according to Mosaic custom. Gene's distortion is a bit more subtle.
Gene seems to think that the covenants are somehow bifurcated, that gentiles belong to New Covenant but not to Sinaitic Covenant. I've not heard him delineate the precise contours of his position but this much I have inferred from the things he has stated.
If I'm understanding Gene correctly then he feels that a gentile can only become a citizen with equal duties (ezrachim shevi chovot) by submitting to circumcision. So, from my perspective, Gene's error is failing to understand that the principle that all members of the covenant have full citizenship duties (i.e. full Torah obligation).
"I think Gene admits that gentiles are members of the New Covenant but he explains that the Torah applies differently to Jews and gentiles. I wouldn't say that Gene agrees with the position in Acts 15:1. He clearly believes that gentiles are saved through Yeshua and he vehemently disagrees with the view that gentiles should be circumcised according to Mosaic custom. Gene's distortion is a bit more subtle. "
DeleteWell you might be correct about Gene's stance, but it is hypocritical, as he believes that the "Judaism of the rabbis" is the correct method, which is also seen in Acts 15:1, so in order for him to not contradict himself, he would have to agree with the Pharisees in Acts 15:1. So this would need to be clarified for me.
laws.
ReplyDeleteNicely done. thanks for this.
ReplyDeleteNice to see someone else here with a legal background. Welcome! : )
DeletePeter... this is most likely what's called "comment spam". I get those all the time. I just delete them. You can identify that type of spam when they promote a site that's unrelated to the topic, when they use keywords in their nickname (like this guy does), and when they add nothing to the discussion apart from a few generic words of "appreciation".
Delete