Monday, May 13, 2013

Should a Non-Jew Aspire to be a Pharisee Like Paul?




I'm not even going to try to be politically correct.  I'm not interested in censoring what is on my heart.  The fact is that "Pharisee" is not a bad word.  Paul was quite unashamed to be considered a Pharisee.  And what was it that Pharisees were known for?  Being zealous for Jewish traditions.

Contrary to popular opinion, Paul didn't stop being zealous for the traditions (Gal. 1).  We know this because of Acts 21:  there was a FALSE report that Paul was against the Torah AND Tradition.  So the  elders told Paul go to the Temple and prove that these reports were false.  Paul was STILL zealous for the traditions!  He was a Hebrew of the Hebrews!  (Not some sort of Hellenized Jew)

Furthermore!  Paul didn't have a problem with the Judaization of non-Jews (Gal. 2) but rather he specifically had a problem with Peter's hypocrisy.  Let me say that again:  Paul wasn't against Judaizing.  He WAS against the false teaching that non-Jews could only join G-d's people via ritual circumcision because this was a total distortion of the grace message of the gospel.

In fact, Paul commanded the non-Jews to put into practice EVERYTHING that they saw in him:

"Whatever you have seen in me, put it into practice" (Philippians 4:9)

Do I expect a backlash for writing this?  Sure.  I've given the other side some great ammunition here.  And I really don't care.  I care about the MAJORITY of the Messianic Movement who are just like me:  Jews and non-Jews who are zealous for the Torah and Tradition!  Do people like Gene even realize what's going on?  I've been contacted all week by a non-Jewish group who is eager to celebrate Shavuot this week!  Non-Jews! Praise G-d who is turning hearts to follow His Torah!

Thank you L-rd for Shavu'ot!  Thank you for including my brothers, who were not a people, in your People!  May you change hearts and strengthen the brotherhood at this time!


41 comments:

  1. "Do people like Gene even realize what's going on?"

    Of course, I ("we, the people"), do. However, there are two ways for Gentiles to view their relationship with Torah and the Jewish expression practice of it:

    1. With resentment toward the Jewish people and Judaism, claiming rights to both Torah and Jewish traditions and hurling accusations of racism toward Jews for not agreeing with certain beliefs and practices.

    2. In unity with the Jewish people and Judaism, approaching the Jewish space with reverence for its knowledge and perseverance and respect for its sacta, both learning from the Jewish community and partnering with it in bettering the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RE: "...approaching the Jewish space..."

      Glad to hear that you've rejected bilateral ecclesiology (a la Kinzer) and that you're now promoting that non-Jews leave church and partner with Jews in order to learn the Torah of Moses. That's great news, Gene!

      If only you believed that...

      Delete
    2. "That's great news, Gene!"

      Peter, I am glad that you can make lemonade from what, unfortunately, appears to be lemons to you.

      Delete
  2. Do people like Gene even realize what's going on?

    Of course not, or there would not be so much disagreement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zion, I've met Gentiles/Christians who love and practice Torah and do not harbor resentment toward Jews (Yeshua-followers/or not), do not seek "rights", or regularly denounce Messianic Jews / "Rabbinic" Judaism" for various real or imagined faults, and I've also met Gentiles/Christians who claimed to love and practice Torah, but are filled with resentment toward the community to whom the Torah was entrusted and seek to force their way in to build a "judaism" of their own.

      Delete
  3. 1. With resentment toward the Jewish people and Judaism, claiming rights to both Torah and Jewish traditions and hurling accusations of racism toward Jews for not agreeing with certain beliefs and practices.

    Based on what I have read before, I am assuming this is Gene's definition of anyone in a HR movement, thus opposed to the BE movement.

    2. In unity with the Jewish people and Judaism, approaching the Jewish space with reverence for its knowledge and perseverance and respect for its sacta, both learning from the Jewish community and partnering with it in bettering the world.

    This would describe what Gene views as the BE movement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought my words were clear already, Zion. There's nothing hidden between the lines that needed a special kind of interpretation.

      Delete
    2. Gene,

      Your words (fallacies) are very clear:

      (1) you employed the fallacy of false dichotomy in your first comment, saying that there are only two options with regard to non-Jewish relationship to the Torah. That is rather absurd;

      (2) you employed the fallacy of equivocation with regard to the latter choice of the two choices you presented in your false dichotomy. What in the world are we to make of your statements "in unity with" and "approaching the Jewish space" given that you promote B.E.--the view that non-Jews must stay in church (which, last time I checked, was not Jewish).


      Delete
    3. Gene,

      I can see why Boaz uses you during his conferences to re-orient One Law Believers. You are a master of rhetoric. People who are innocent of rhetoric haven't a chance against you.

      Delete
    4. "I can see why Boaz uses you during his conferences to re-orient One Law Believers."

      "Uses" me, right. Peter, my friend, no need to be cynical. I spoke once to a small group of OL guys and their hearts were already softed even before we met.

      I can think of few people who have done more to promote Torah for Gentiles than Boaz. He manages to do that without animosity or burning bridges, yet all sorts of abused has been and is being heaped on him.

      So, what are OL Gentiles being re-oriented towards? Away from Torah? Hardly! Segregation? There are not enough Jews to go around to segregate with all of the Gentiles and most congregations are already majority Gentile. No, rather it is to bring Torah to Christians and for non-Jewish disciples of Yeshua to have a loving relationship with the Jewish people for the first time in thousands of years.

      Delete
    5. "B.E.--the view that non-Jews must stay in church (which, last time I checked, was not Jewish)"

      That's not the BE view.

      http://dailyminyan.com/2011/01/24/bilateral-ecclesiology-infrequently-answered-questions/

      "Q. Does Bilateral Ecclesiology mean that Gentiles are not allowed to worship in Jewish congregations ?

      It means nothing of the sort. Instead, Bilateral Ecclesiology simply acknowledges that it is not G-d’s plan to homogenize the human species. G-d values the uniqueness of every human being He created, just as He values all the unique ways various peoples choose to worship Him. G-d values the worship of Christians in churches just as much as he values the Jewish worship in synagogues. That said, there have always been some Gentiles / Christians who felt a special bond with the Jewish people and who, respectfully and lovingly, came along side Jews to worship G-d in the synagogues. And there will always be.

      Delete
    6. Re: "He manages to do that without animosity or burning bridges"

      Is that a joke?

      Re: "So, what are OL Gentiles being re-oriented towards? Away from Torah? Hardly!"

      Gene, do you attend a church to learn about Torah? You DON'T? Well, why on earth not?

      Delete
    7. Gene,

      You don't even know what your side is teaching. Here's Kinzer:

      "There is one ekklesia, but it contains within it two distinct communal entities: a Jewish ekklesia (representing and serving as a bridge to Israel as a whole) and a Gentile ekklesia," (Postmissionary Messianic Judaism by Kinzer).

      He says "distinct" Gene! Would you care to redefine "distinct" since you've gone ahead and redefined bilateral ecclesiology?

      Delete
  4. Gene, when I came to America they told me that this is the land of opportunity and as long as I keep the law of the land, then the sky is the limit...The did not hide parts of the laws from me....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The did not hide parts of the laws from me...."

      What laws are being hidden? On the other hand, do you mean to tell me that every single "law of the land" applies to you, Dan?

      Delete
    2. Gene,

      Isaiah 56 says that only the Goyim who keep Shabbat (and the covenant) will be brought to the holy mountain so that the Temple will be called a House of Prayer for all ethnicities. BUT YOU TELL THEM NOT TO KEEP SHABBAT BECAUSE IT IS A SIGN COMMANDMENT! So, if you had your way, the Temple WOULD NEVER be a House of Prayer for all ethnicities.

      Delete
    3. NOTE: it says "ethnicities" in the Septuagint. This meaning isn't captured by the term "nations" unless one has studied classical political science.

      Delete
  5. "What laws are being hidden? On the other hand, do you mean to tell me that every single "law of the land" applies to you, Dan?"

    no, gene, not every Law in the Torah apply to me, but I am still searching so long, and hard to find where is the list for the Gentiles only.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dan, if you want to know which commandments apply specifically to Israel, just look up any commandment (or a section of commandments) that starts with G-d saying "Say to the children of Israel" and you'll know who G-d meant them for.

      Delete
    2. Dan, if you want to know which commandments apply specifically to Israel, just look up any commandment (or a section of commandments) that starts with G-d saying "Say to the children of Israel" and you'll know who G-d meant them for.

      Gene, in 1 Peter 2:9-10
      We have Peter calling gentiles a "chosen race", "priesthood", "holy nation"...etc etc.

      The point is, he is quoting Exodus 19:6 concerning gentiles, and the verse in Exodus 19:6 says:

      These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel.

      Since Peter applies a verse that directly applies to the sons of Israel to gentiles who now trust in the Messiah, where does your understanding come into this?

      Maybe one day you can correct Peter in the Kingdom to fit your understanding.

      Delete
    3. Zion, my friend, you've made a lot of assumptions about the First Epistle of Peter. Neither its authorship (most scholars today consider the work to be pseudographical) or its the target audience (which many scholars believe were assimilated Helenized Jews living in Diaspora that Peter as the Apostle to the Jews was trying to reach) is a settled thing. Far from it.

      And then read you read your assumptions back into the Tanakh.

      Delete
    4. Pardon my wording above - it's late and I am half-asleep:)

      Delete
    5. I think you are the one who makes the assumptions, because you don't have where to go...Shades of Mr. Leman.

      Tell me who your friends are...You know the rest...

      Delete
    6. Zion,

      Awesome catch, brother, with regard to Exodus 19:6. Written to the Sons of Israel! I love it. A whole new insight into 1 Peter 2. By the way, Gene is going to be very lonely in his view that 1 Peter is not addressed to goyim. To argue that 1 Peter is written not to goyim is to argue that Apostle Peter thought the Torah was an "empty way of life" (see 1 Peter 1:18). There's a host of other evidence that the addressees of 1 Peter were non-Jews.

      Delete
    7. Awesome catch, brother, with regard to Exodus 19:6. Written to the Sons of Israel! I love it. A whole new insight into 1 Peter 2. By the way, Gene is going to be very lonely in his view that 1 Peter is not addressed to goyim. To argue that 1 Peter is written not to goyim is to argue that Apostle Peter thought the Torah was an "empty way of life" (see 1 Peter 1:18). There's a host of other evidence that the addressees of 1 Peter were non-Jews.

      Thanks, I knew Gene was going to dodge, in the very verse in 1 Peter we see the audience:

      for you once were not a people, but now you are the people of God; you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

      It is obvious from this verse who the audience is. The reality of applying verses that were only spoken to the children of Israel and applying them to gentiles who are now in the Messiah are in a few other places in the Apostolic Writings, when I get a minute I will try to find all them.

      Delete
    8. "It is obvious from this verse who the audience is."

      Zion, it's only "obvious" if one reads the NT, indeed the whole Bible, through the historic supersessionist lens, where everything said and promised to the Jews actually applies to the "Church".

      Delete
    9. Zion, it's only "obvious" if one reads the NT, indeed the whole Bible, through the historic supersessionist lens, where everything said and promised to the Jews actually applies to the "Church".

      First of all, you have offered nothing to prove otherwise, second, there is no "Church", and if there is, then truly the scriptures support supersessionism. You don't have a problem with me, you have a problem with the scriptures.

      Try to deal with the scriptures, instead of building a strawman.

      Delete
  6. Now, now, Gene, switching words again? I am Looking for the list that says "for the GENTILES only....Unless of course you think that all are Children of Israel....then, welcomE to the OL Havurah....LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I believe there is too much hate on this dialog.
    I believe, both sides here presented are right on some points. Maybe this is because I am out of the american messianic movement.
    The way I see it there are a lot of ways of seeing what is going on, and of the gentiles getting closer to judaism.
    You have those who want to live Torah. Some with hate and resentment, yes. Others with only love. Some with respect for tradition, others only want the Written thing. Some believe everybody should follow Torah, others just don't. Some believe gentiles should be gentiles, some they are invited, but do not have to.
    What I don't see is the necessary grouping of any of these. Of course there are some tendencies, but, as a prove of the non-mainstream we have people like the guys from Bet HaDerech in canada and the Jerusalem COuncil and Messianic 613 who believe in the (imperative)inclusion of the gentile (as full Torah observant) and a strong tradicional observance,
    What I believe: Torah is the way of living for G-d, all of it, for everyone. We should NOT reinvent the wheel and start creating ways of living Torah apart from tradition. However, tradition is not perfect, and there are at least two traditions that should be heard: rabbanites(orthodox, not conservative and reform) and karaites (the real ones, not the messianic karaites) when it comes to living Torah.
    I believe there should be more tolerance twoards people, and ideas should be fought. I don't believe people in EC are bad, although I disagree with them, for me they are just wrong. Just as I don't think HR people are jewish haters (although some are), but I do disagree with the Torah they live, where kashrut is basically not eating pork and shrimp - doesnt matter where you eat and how it was processed and cooked - as long as it is not shrimp or pork.
    I do believe both are being used by HaShem. EC has the potential to bring jews to Yeshua and HR has the potential to bring christians to Torah.
    I do believe it would be more productive to spend more time and energy on understanding how to live Torah and the Gospel - as well on understanding Scriptures - than on this war I see. Ok, we get it, we disagree - and dialogue should always exist, I am not saying things should not be discussed, they should, and I love to discuss them, but I don't believe in this war.

    Just to finish, I believe the first step is to lose the hard feelings. OL's are not always trying to robb jews from Torah. Just as EC are not excluding non-jews. They disagree on some basic beliefs, but agree on the major ones: Torah is still valid (on one level or another), Yeshua is Messiah, G-d has not rejected the jewish people, the NT as a jewish text just as the belief in Yeshua.

    Shalom, my brothers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GOOD LORD I WROTE A BIBLE, sorry ahsukhsaukas

      Delete
    2. Matheus,

      What is "EC"? Also, just curious, from which country are you writing?



      Delete
    3. Matheus,

      Re: "both sides are right on some points"

      On which points do you agree with bilateral ecclesiology? On which points do you agree with Divine Invitation? Those doctrines are completely evil: (1) bilateralism is racial segregation, something not taught by Paul (see Galatians 2); (2) Divine Invitation teaches that non-Jews are excluded from citizenship in Israel and forbidden from practicing the sign commands such as Shabbat (the non-observance of which would result in a complete reversal of Isaiah 56 and a complete reversal of Yeshua's quote from that passage about the Temple being a House of Prayer for all ethnicities).

      To support either of those doctrines, in any way, is evil. And not just a small evil like telling a "white lie"; this is INVIDIOUS evil.

      Delete
    4. Everyone,

      Just a brief word about "hate". Hate is not necessarily a bad thing. E.G., you can't love good unless you hate evil.

      Delete
    5. "To support either of those doctrines, in any way, is evil. And not just a small evil like telling a "white lie"; this is INVIDIOUS evil."

      In that case, it's good to be bad:)

      Delete
    6. Im sorry, Peter, I meant BE(Billateral Eclesiology), it was late here - I speak from Brazil.
      I don't agree with any of those points: I already said: for me the gentile is a complete part of Israel. I do however like the way people from BE see the "Oral Torah", the halacha and all of those rabbinical material: we should learn from tradition how to live and interpret Torah. I know this is NOT a part of BE or Divine Invitation theology, but they usally, for what I have seen, come together.

      Now, about the hate stuff, We should hate evil, but we should love everyone, specially people with whom we have so much in common. Messiah loved and forgived those who got him in the cross - not that he said that what they were doing was right, he was pretty much against hurting or even cursing people - I believe this is our exemple.

      Chag Sameach

      Delete
    7. Gilmar, Santos, Santos, Zito, Belini, Orlando, Garincha, Didi, Vava,Pele, Zagalo...

      The best soccer team ever assembled...

      Delete
    8. I'm younger than that! I only heard of it. I did however saw Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Kaká, Cafu, Roberto Carlos, Marcos, etc :D

      Delete
    9. I was 16 at that time. One year younger than Pele. and still rooting for the Selecau Brasileira...

      Delete
  8. "In that case, it's good to be bad:)"

    An old USSR phrase. And look what happened to them....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "An old USSR phrase."

      In which alternate universe, Dan?

      Dan, in USSR they referred to Israel "apartheid, racists and Zionist occupiers". They painted it as evil at every turn, while treating their own minorities, including and especially Jews, like crap. So, in that sense, it's good to be bad, because what others label "evil", is actually good and right.

      Delete
  9. Gene, so how different it is me applying this to you? Warning you that what happened to them can actually happen to you, if you not going to be careful.

    All I ask from you is that you really study what OL teaches and that you should not attach every crazy doctrine out there to OL. because we can do the same thing to Mj UMJC style. If we supposed to have a sincere dialog, then we need to correct on the issue, and it seems to me that you just attack without studying the subject beforehand.

    ReplyDelete