Pages

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Objection! I Didn't Sign Up For This!



I'm a big fan of the scholar Daniel Elazar (z''l).  Yet I was always puzzled by his protestations that covenant is about kinship and consent (in fact, of the hundred or so books he wrote, one was entitled "Kinship and Consent").  "What consent?"  I wondered.  There's no consent to being born a Jew.  

And the proof that all Jews are now bound to the Torah of the Covenant regardless of consent is found here:

It is not with you alone that I am making this sworn covenant, but with whoever is standing here with us today before the LORD our God, and with whoever is not here with us today. (Deut. 29:13-14)

So it seems like this is saying that Jewish lineage is non-negotiable.  You can voice your "objection!" but it won't matter.  It's NOT by consent...

...or is it more complicated than that?

One thing that I don't understand is why the non-consent clause would be included in the New Covenant:

"For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to Himself" (Acts 2:39)

NB:  Both of these statements were made on Shavuot.

How can Yeshua be a birthright which belongs to "your children"?  Initiation into the New Covenant is not automatic but rather a personal choice...right?  If the children reject Yeshua then they're out of the club, right?  So why did Peter make this statement?  Was he confusing the New Covenant with the Old Covenant?  Hmm...

So these questions just occurred to me.  Hopefully you won't think me a heretic for asking.  I don't claim to know the answers (just a lot of the questions).

Shalom,

Peter

One of the Most Sobering Passages in the Entire Bible


Apologetics (Defense of the Faith) is Our Duty



Detailed Summary of David Flusser's "The Sage from Galilee"

Link

NOTE:  it requires you to scroll down a ways before the text comes into view.  Enjoy.

Monday, October 1, 2012

Covenantal Formulary

So I was reading James' blog today and I think I finally figured out why he can't see in Ephesians 2 that Paul says the gentiles belong to the plural covenants.  James has had to invent a brand new covenantal context/hermeneutic in order to hold to his view that gentiles are not obligated to follow the Mosaic Torah.  So I introduced him to the covenantal context.  Here's my comment from just a few minutes ago:

My Personal Doctrinal Statement



Sunday, September 30, 2012

Did Paul Appoint Rabbis to Lead First-Century Congregations?

We seem to take for granted this idea that there should be rabbis in modern Messianic synagogues.  What is the New Testament precedent for such a title?  We see that plural elders were appointed in local communities.  But where is the mention of the office of Rabbi?  Does anyone know?

How to Systematize Messianic Theology

So I was thinking about adding a doctrinal statement in the FAQs section and then I got a little sidetracked and started contemplating how to systematize Messianic Theology.  The problem is figuring out how to adapt the protestant systematic framework to a Jewish framework.  But here's my initial list:



Theology Proper (G-d)

Nomonology (Law)


Trinitology (Trinity)

Pneumatology (Ruach)

Christology (Moshiach)

Bibliology (Scripture)

Hamartiology (Sin)

Soteriology (Salvation)

Ecclesiology (Community)

Antropology (Man)

Israelology (Israel)

Anyone have any suggestions as to categories or how to order the categories?  There should be a category for covenant as well but I can't think of a suitable Greek term that would come close to...I'd say Britology (as in the Hebrew "brit" for covenant) but that sounds too much like Britain...




Complete Mitzvot Categorized by Topic

Link


Mitzvot That Apply Today (In Exile and In the Land)

Link

Friday, September 28, 2012

Carl Kinbar's Definition of Judaism (It's Interesting)

So I'm all for dialogue and learning from other people's points of view.  Carl Kinbar today gave an interesting definition for Judaism.  Here it is:


A Useful Discussion with Carl Kinbar

So today on James' blog I had a discussion with Carl.  He made the assertion that the Talmud is a mandatory authority based on "clear" rulings.  I disputed this and Gene naturally chimed in saying that I was arrogant to argue against Carl's opinion.

So I cited a link to something which, all reasonable minds will agree, PROVES that there is nothing "clear" about the Talmudic decision-making process:

See here.

Enjoy.

Responding to Frequently Asked Questions

So I was toying with the idea of including a FAQs section.  Here is something I just came up with.  Let me know if anything should be changed.  Then, after the changes are made, I'll add a FAQs tab at the top of the screen.

Here's what I just came up with after breakfast: