Can a person live in a lifestyle of sin and still expect to be forgiven?
One of the biggest fallacies that exists today is that "grace" covers all sins. This "grace" being presented is not reconciliation with G-d, but a license to live in open rebellion to His teachings. There is true Grace, and there is false "grace", often referred to as easy grace or "greasy grace".
In 1st Yochanan (John) Chapter 3 we see what true Grace is:
1Jn 3:1 See what love the Father has lavished on us in letting us be called God's children! For that is what we are. The reason the world does not know us is that it has not known him.
1Jn 3:2 Dear friends, we are God's children now; and it has not yet been made clear what we will become. We do know that when he appears, we will be like him; because we will see him as he really is.
1Jn 3:3 And everyone who has this hope in him continues purifying himself, since God is pure.
1Jn 3:4 Everyone who keeps sinning is violating Torah - indeed, sin is violation of Torah.
1Jn 3:5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and that there is no sin in him.
1Jn 3:6 So no one who remains united with him continues sinning; everyone who does continue sinning has neither seen him nor known him.
1Jn 3:7 Children, don't let anyone deceive you - it is the person that keeps on doing what is right who is righteous, just as God is righteous.
1Jn 3:8 The person who keeps on sinning is from the Adversary, because from the very beginning the Adversary has kept on sinning. It was for this very reason that the Son of God appeared, to destroy these doings of the Adversary.
1Jn 3:9 No one who has God as his Father keeps on sinning, because the seed planted by God remains in him. That is, he cannot continue sinning, because he has God as his Father.
1Jn 3:10 Here is how one can distinguish clearly between God's children and those of the Adversary: everyone who does not continue doing what is right is not from God. Likewise, anyone who fails to keep loving his brother is not from God.
As we see above, it is abundently clear, sin is defined as a violation of Torah, both the original commands given at Sinai and the words of Messiah. Anyone who continues to live in sin is not from the Father, nor do they have the Son.
G-d redeemed us at a huge cost, not so we could live in sin and rebellion, but to live in the image of His Son.
Does that mean a person is lost every time they sin? No, we have a High Priest who makes intercession for us continually, even Yeshua the Messiah. What is does mean is that we must confess and repent (turn away from that sin). If we do not, that sin stays on us and defiles us.
A life of continuous sin, to the point where we no longer repent, is a sign that the Ruach (Spirit) has left (or was never there) and that G-d is no longer striving with us to cleanse us. In that case, it is likely the person has been given over to their sin and is not covered by the blood of Messiah. Is that person then capable of being redeemed? Only Adonai can answer that question.
Kefa (Peter) says "work out your salvation with fear and trembling". This does not mean that we are saved by works, but that we need to objectively ascertain are we walking in G-d's light, or are we deceiving ourselves.
Shalom - Rabbi Gavri'el
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
False Teachers, the Internet & Distribution of materials
The Synagogue leadership strives very hard to prevent false teachings from entering the Congregation. That is one reason we carefully determine who can be in leadership and who can address the Congregation.
Leadership has an extra accountability before G-d for the members of the Congregation. If we teach falsely, or allow false teachers to teach, we are guilty for the damage caused by that teaching. In effect, we have "blood on our hands" as if we taught falsely.
To that end, great caution and discernment must be used in allowing persons to address the Congregation, especially in matters such as a prophetic word, and other manifestations of the Ruach.
While leadership believes these gifts are valid today, we also agree that many use them for their own glory, not for Adonai's, and thus are not from G-d.
Another area of concern is the preponderance of false teaching available in both books, and especially on the Internet. For every good site, there are 10 bad sites.
Likewise, there are known groups who promote doctrines that Leadership believes are contrary to scripture, an example is the group from the Sunday debate, who said we were not saved because we follow Torah. Other groups including some Black Hebrew groups that reject the Jewish people, claiming they are the only true Jews.
There are additional groups who teach doctrines stating, in effect, that everyone saved is really a Jew or from a lost tribe (No Gentiles?). Others state G-d has forsaken our Jewish Brothers and that they are cursed (No Jews). Many today teach the Church has replaced Isra'el and that G-d will not redeem His people. All views we believe are contrary to Scripture..
Because of these wide spread teachings that are so prevalent today, we must respectfully ask that no materials be given out (electronic or paper) that have not been approved in advance. No one would want to be the cause of making a weaker brother stumble. So please respect these rules.
Additionally, the Congregation is not a place to solicit for a persons own personal ministry. If you have a ministry that G-d has placed on your heart, please work with leadership to see if it is consistent with the vision and purpose of the Synagogue.
Shalom, Rabbi Gavri'el & the Leadership of Congregation Beth Ha'MAshiach
Leadership has an extra accountability before G-d for the members of the Congregation. If we teach falsely, or allow false teachers to teach, we are guilty for the damage caused by that teaching. In effect, we have "blood on our hands" as if we taught falsely.
To that end, great caution and discernment must be used in allowing persons to address the Congregation, especially in matters such as a prophetic word, and other manifestations of the Ruach.
While leadership believes these gifts are valid today, we also agree that many use them for their own glory, not for Adonai's, and thus are not from G-d.
Another area of concern is the preponderance of false teaching available in both books, and especially on the Internet. For every good site, there are 10 bad sites.
Likewise, there are known groups who promote doctrines that Leadership believes are contrary to scripture, an example is the group from the Sunday debate, who said we were not saved because we follow Torah. Other groups including some Black Hebrew groups that reject the Jewish people, claiming they are the only true Jews.
There are additional groups who teach doctrines stating, in effect, that everyone saved is really a Jew or from a lost tribe (No Gentiles?). Others state G-d has forsaken our Jewish Brothers and that they are cursed (No Jews). Many today teach the Church has replaced Isra'el and that G-d will not redeem His people. All views we believe are contrary to Scripture..
Because of these wide spread teachings that are so prevalent today, we must respectfully ask that no materials be given out (electronic or paper) that have not been approved in advance. No one would want to be the cause of making a weaker brother stumble. So please respect these rules.
Additionally, the Congregation is not a place to solicit for a persons own personal ministry. If you have a ministry that G-d has placed on your heart, please work with leadership to see if it is consistent with the vision and purpose of the Synagogue.
Shalom, Rabbi Gavri'el & the Leadership of Congregation Beth Ha'MAshiach
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Why is the Shema recited every Shabbat?
Why is the Shema recited every Shabbat?
The Shema was repeated by Yeshua and is the summary of our faith; both as Jews and those claiming Messiah as their savior.
Hear O Isra'el (both Jews and grafted-in Believers), the L-RD our G-D is One!
Contrary to the widely held misconception world-wide that there are three gods, there is in fact only one. Yeshua in the flesh was fully man, in the Spirit, fully G-D, not a god, but the G-D. That G-D can both indwell (live inside) Yeshua and also in Heaven confuses many; but should not, after all, He lives in each of use through His Ruach Ha'Kodesh!
If you don't agree that many think we believe in 3 gods, just ask unsaved Jews or Moslem's, or any of the 5 billion people who are not believers.
Judaism of Yeshua's time was the only monotheistic religion. Had Antiochus succeeded in wiping out Judaism, monotheism would have been totally supplanted by polytheism.
Yeshua stated that He agreed fully there is only one G-D. Further more Yeshua included the Shema as part of the summary of commandments in Mark 12:29-30.
The Shema is what makes Isra'el, and by extension what makes Christianity.
If there where no Isra'el, there would be no Scriptures.
If there where no Isra'el, there would be no Messiah.
If there were no Messiah, there would be no Believers, Messianic or Christian.
Thus the Shema is critical, and we as Believers, and Messianic Jew's, also repeat it daily!
Shalom - Rabbi Gavri'el
The Shema was repeated by Yeshua and is the summary of our faith; both as Jews and those claiming Messiah as their savior.
Hear O Isra'el (both Jews and grafted-in Believers), the L-RD our G-D is One!
Contrary to the widely held misconception world-wide that there are three gods, there is in fact only one. Yeshua in the flesh was fully man, in the Spirit, fully G-D, not a god, but the G-D. That G-D can both indwell (live inside) Yeshua and also in Heaven confuses many; but should not, after all, He lives in each of use through His Ruach Ha'Kodesh!
If you don't agree that many think we believe in 3 gods, just ask unsaved Jews or Moslem's, or any of the 5 billion people who are not believers.
Judaism of Yeshua's time was the only monotheistic religion. Had Antiochus succeeded in wiping out Judaism, monotheism would have been totally supplanted by polytheism.
Yeshua stated that He agreed fully there is only one G-D. Further more Yeshua included the Shema as part of the summary of commandments in Mark 12:29-30.
The Shema is what makes Isra'el, and by extension what makes Christianity.
If there where no Isra'el, there would be no Scriptures.
If there where no Isra'el, there would be no Messiah.
If there were no Messiah, there would be no Believers, Messianic or Christian.
Thus the Shema is critical, and we as Believers, and Messianic Jew's, also repeat it daily!
Shalom - Rabbi Gavri'el
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Is it appropriate to give First Fruit Offerings on Shabbat?
Is it appropriate to give First Fruit Offerings on Shabbat?
As many of you know, we do not collect a tithe, as today there is no functional Levites or Priests to support. It is often ironic how many today say "we are not under the Law (Torah)", but still collect a Tithe, which was only for the Levites, who then gave 10% of the 10% to the Priests (Sons of Aaron).
While many may say the preacher now functions as a Priest, this cannot be in any protestant denomination, and as is clearly taught, all believers are now Cohenim (Priests) of ADONAI. Thus using that logic, we all could collect the Tithe (please don't try this at home).
Alternately, there is a totally Scriptural offering that should be made by all believers, and is still totally functional today, the First Fruits Offering. This offering was a gift to ADONAI, which was especially Holy. Since the First Fruits where an offering, it made the remaining 90% Holy and promised ADONAI's blessing upon it.
Now back to the original question, is it permissible to give an offering on Shabbat? The answer is yes. Why? Offerings are a free-will expressions of a person's thanksgiving and joy for all that ADONAI has done and will do. As such, the Rabbis agreed that free will offerings could be brought into the Temple on Shabbat.
We follow the same Halacha in that modern day First Fruits offerings are acceptable on Shabbat.
Shalom - Rabbi Gavri'el
As many of you know, we do not collect a tithe, as today there is no functional Levites or Priests to support. It is often ironic how many today say "we are not under the Law (Torah)", but still collect a Tithe, which was only for the Levites, who then gave 10% of the 10% to the Priests (Sons of Aaron).
While many may say the preacher now functions as a Priest, this cannot be in any protestant denomination, and as is clearly taught, all believers are now Cohenim (Priests) of ADONAI. Thus using that logic, we all could collect the Tithe (please don't try this at home).
Alternately, there is a totally Scriptural offering that should be made by all believers, and is still totally functional today, the First Fruits Offering. This offering was a gift to ADONAI, which was especially Holy. Since the First Fruits where an offering, it made the remaining 90% Holy and promised ADONAI's blessing upon it.
Now back to the original question, is it permissible to give an offering on Shabbat? The answer is yes. Why? Offerings are a free-will expressions of a person's thanksgiving and joy for all that ADONAI has done and will do. As such, the Rabbis agreed that free will offerings could be brought into the Temple on Shabbat.
We follow the same Halacha in that modern day First Fruits offerings are acceptable on Shabbat.
Shalom - Rabbi Gavri'el
Thursday, June 15, 2006
The Name of God, Pt. 3: Ineffable?
Shalom,
This is another good article by Micha'el on the name of G-d. Enjoy!
Blessings in Messiah
The Name of God, Pt. 3: Ineffable?
When I was growing up, I was told that the Name of God is ineffable--that is, unpronounceable--due to being written without any vowels. Of course, what the person telling me this didn't say (and probably didn't know) was that much of written Hebrew lacks vowels. That is to say, the vowels are inferred by the reader. The result is much the same as the way some people today write English in shorthand; for example:
My name is Michael, and I live in Atlanta.
My nm s Mchl, nd I lv n 'Tlnth.
More difficult to read, certainly, but hardly unpronounceable--though there might arise a debate about whether "Mchl" should be pronounced Michael, Machil, Mochul, etc. One might also debate whether the "y" in "my" is meant as a vowel (as indeed it is) or a consonant, so that the first word of the sentence could be rendered my, may, mya, etc.
The Masorites added vowel-marks to the text of the Tanakh in order to provide guides for those less familiar with the Biblical text than a native-born Hebrew speaker who grew up hearing the text read aloud, for which we owe them a tremendous thank-you. (However, it should be noted that because the vowel-marks are a late addition, as indeed are the spaces between the letters, we have to be careful in how we lean upon them.)
In any case, this shows that the lack of vowels would not make it impossible to correctly pronounce a word. Moreover, many Hebrew letters can be either a consonant or a vowel, and this is the case with all of the letters of the Name YHVH.
yod = either a y or an i
heh = a small breath, just like the name of the letter
vav = either a v (consonant) or a u or o (vowel)
We can be certain that the popular English pronunciation Jehovah is not correct. First of all, the yod is never pronounced like an English j. Secondly, this pronunciation came about because of the custom of substituting Adonai (Master, or Lord) for YHVH when reading the text aloud--the Masoretic scribes inserted the vowel-marks for Adonai (a-o-e) into the letters of YHVH, which resulted in an amalgamation of the two (YaHoVeH). Thirdly, Yahoveh in Hebrew would be broken into Yah and hoveh; the latter word means "a ruin" and "disaster" (Strong's #1943)--in other words, it's like saying "Yah is a ruin and disaster"!
The two most likely and popular pronunciations are Yahweh and Yahveh, the main point of contention being whether the vav should be pronounced as a consonant and a vowel. Proponents of the former view lean on Josephus, who stated that the Name written on the High Priest's turban was comprised of "four vowels" (Wars. 5:5:7, ref. Exo. 28:36-37). The early Church fathers seem to have preferred this reading:
It was in connection with magic that the Tetragrammaton was introduced into the magic papyri and, in all probability, into the writings of the Church Fathers, these two sources containing the following forms, written in Greek letters: (1) "Iaoouee," "Iaoue," "Iabe,"; (2) "Iao," "Iaho," "Iae"; (3) "Aia"; (4) "Ia." It is evident that (1) represents , (2) , (3) , and (4) . The three forms quoted under (1) are merely three ways of writing the same word, though "Iabe" is designated as the Samaritan pronunciation. (The Jewish Encyclopedia, Tetragrammaton)
The Samaritan pronunciation, mentioned above, favors the pronunciation as Yahveh, as a b-sound may be easily derived from an original v-sound. It has the advantage of having come from an area geographically and linguistically close to Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the bulk of the early testimony and scholarly study is on the side of Yahweh. I myself am not 100% sure, though I tend to use Yahveh right now, with the slightest of skips, not quite a breath, on the first heh, making it Yah'veh. (A good friend has told me that his uncle, who is a native Aramaic speaker, also pronounces the first heh, saying, "The heh is the breath of life; it should be pronounced!")
This study has, of course, been extremely brief. Those readers interested in a more in-depth study will find a longer article and a link to an e-book here. I don't agree with all of its conclusions, but the chapters dealing with the pronunciation of the Name were of immense interest and help to me.
A final caveat, which has already been said, but bears repeating: We have to walk a tightrope here. We want God's Name to be known and used in proper reverence, but we never want it to become common. Nor do we want it to be a stumbling block for anyone. For this reason, Beth HaMashiach uses the traditional circumlocution ADONAI in prayer and liturgy, and even omits the vowels from L-rd and G-d, lest a Jewish visitor think we are being too light with the Name.
But at the same time, let us remember to bless the Name of YHVH.
Shalom.
This is another good article by Micha'el on the name of G-d. Enjoy!
Blessings in Messiah
The Name of God, Pt. 3: Ineffable?
When I was growing up, I was told that the Name of God is ineffable--that is, unpronounceable--due to being written without any vowels. Of course, what the person telling me this didn't say (and probably didn't know) was that much of written Hebrew lacks vowels. That is to say, the vowels are inferred by the reader. The result is much the same as the way some people today write English in shorthand; for example:
My name is Michael, and I live in Atlanta.
My nm s Mchl, nd I lv n 'Tlnth.
More difficult to read, certainly, but hardly unpronounceable--though there might arise a debate about whether "Mchl" should be pronounced Michael, Machil, Mochul, etc. One might also debate whether the "y" in "my" is meant as a vowel (as indeed it is) or a consonant, so that the first word of the sentence could be rendered my, may, mya, etc.
The Masorites added vowel-marks to the text of the Tanakh in order to provide guides for those less familiar with the Biblical text than a native-born Hebrew speaker who grew up hearing the text read aloud, for which we owe them a tremendous thank-you. (However, it should be noted that because the vowel-marks are a late addition, as indeed are the spaces between the letters, we have to be careful in how we lean upon them.)
In any case, this shows that the lack of vowels would not make it impossible to correctly pronounce a word. Moreover, many Hebrew letters can be either a consonant or a vowel, and this is the case with all of the letters of the Name YHVH.
yod = either a y or an i
heh = a small breath, just like the name of the letter
vav = either a v (consonant) or a u or o (vowel)
We can be certain that the popular English pronunciation Jehovah is not correct. First of all, the yod is never pronounced like an English j. Secondly, this pronunciation came about because of the custom of substituting Adonai (Master, or Lord) for YHVH when reading the text aloud--the Masoretic scribes inserted the vowel-marks for Adonai (a-o-e) into the letters of YHVH, which resulted in an amalgamation of the two (YaHoVeH). Thirdly, Yahoveh in Hebrew would be broken into Yah and hoveh; the latter word means "a ruin" and "disaster" (Strong's #1943)--in other words, it's like saying "Yah is a ruin and disaster"!
The two most likely and popular pronunciations are Yahweh and Yahveh, the main point of contention being whether the vav should be pronounced as a consonant and a vowel. Proponents of the former view lean on Josephus, who stated that the Name written on the High Priest's turban was comprised of "four vowels" (Wars. 5:5:7, ref. Exo. 28:36-37). The early Church fathers seem to have preferred this reading:
It was in connection with magic that the Tetragrammaton was introduced into the magic papyri and, in all probability, into the writings of the Church Fathers, these two sources containing the following forms, written in Greek letters: (1) "Iaoouee," "Iaoue," "Iabe,"; (2) "Iao," "Iaho," "Iae"; (3) "Aia"; (4) "Ia." It is evident that (1) represents , (2) , (3) , and (4) . The three forms quoted under (1) are merely three ways of writing the same word, though "Iabe" is designated as the Samaritan pronunciation. (The Jewish Encyclopedia, Tetragrammaton)
The Samaritan pronunciation, mentioned above, favors the pronunciation as Yahveh, as a b-sound may be easily derived from an original v-sound. It has the advantage of having come from an area geographically and linguistically close to Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the bulk of the early testimony and scholarly study is on the side of Yahweh. I myself am not 100% sure, though I tend to use Yahveh right now, with the slightest of skips, not quite a breath, on the first heh, making it Yah'veh. (A good friend has told me that his uncle, who is a native Aramaic speaker, also pronounces the first heh, saying, "The heh is the breath of life; it should be pronounced!")
This study has, of course, been extremely brief. Those readers interested in a more in-depth study will find a longer article and a link to an e-book here. I don't agree with all of its conclusions, but the chapters dealing with the pronunciation of the Name were of immense interest and help to me.
A final caveat, which has already been said, but bears repeating: We have to walk a tightrope here. We want God's Name to be known and used in proper reverence, but we never want it to become common. Nor do we want it to be a stumbling block for anyone. For this reason, Beth HaMashiach uses the traditional circumlocution ADONAI in prayer and liturgy, and even omits the vowels from L-rd and G-d, lest a Jewish visitor think we are being too light with the Name.
But at the same time, let us remember to bless the Name of YHVH.
Shalom.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
The Names of God, Pt. 2: The Reverence of God's Name
Shalom,
The 2nd part of Michaels article on the name of G-d.
The Names of God, Pt. 2: The Reverence of God's Name
If the Scriptures command us to "publish the name of YHVH," how then did the custom of avoiding it come about? It was not through some priestly conspiracy, as I've seen some suggest, but out of a deep sense of reverence.
First, let's step back from the speaking of God's Name to the writing of it. Why is it many observant Jews even refrain from writing "Lord" and "God," but render them "L-rd" and "G-d" instead? (I've even seen a few Messianics take this to an extreme, writing "M-ss--h" instead of Messiah.)
The answer is found in Deu. 12:2-4:
Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree: And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. Ye shall not do so unto YHVH your God.
To understand why a Jew will not write the Name, or even a title, of God, you have to look at this passage like a rabbi. Remember that the rabbis both seek to keep the most literal interpretation of a command possible as well as observe its drash. For example, when an Orthodox Jew wears teffilin (phylacteries) in prayer, it's to keep the command to wear God's Word on his hand and between his eyes literally (Deu. 6:8). Therefore, when they see a command to destroy the names of the pagan gods, but not to do the same to the Name of YHVH, the observant Jew likewise takes that command very literally. If you write YHVH--or indeed, any Name or title belonging to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob--on a piece of paper, and then either erase the Name or allow the paper to be destroyed, to the Jew you are destroying the Name of God.
What then of speaking the Name of God? Forbidding this practice came out of two separate issues. The first is the command that he who blasphemes (slanders) the Name of YHVH must be put to death (Lev. 24:16). Again, think like a rabbi: The noblest pursuit in their minds is to put a fence around the Torah--that is, to erect commands beyond what the Torah commands so that one will not accidentally sin. For example, to create a specified "Sabbath's day journey" that one isn't supposed to walk beyond (about half a mile). If one were forced to walk just a little more than the prescribed journey, one wouldn't have sinned against the Sabbath by working. The same principle applies here: The simplest way to avoid accidentally blaspheming the Name is to avoid using it altogether.
The second issue is that the pagans in the first century (and the neo-pagans of today) used the names of their gods in magical rites, and the Jews didn't want them to use YHVH's Name the same way. This is why, for example, the book of Esther only contains the Name in four hidden acrostics, and then only in the original Hebrew: It was a safeguard against the Persians, among whom the book was published (likely in their own language) learning and misusing God's Name.
This resulted in an increasing sacredness in the use of the Name of YHVH. First, it was restricted from common use, with one substituting Adonai (Lord), Avinu (Our Father) and other circumlocutions instead. By about two centuries before Yeshua's birth, this practice had been enshrined in what some call the ineffable (Unspeakable) Name doctrine. The use of the Name became restricted to the priests, and then to the Cohen HaGadol (the High Priest), and then only on Yom Kippur. Edersheim notes that where once the practice was to say the Name aloud on Yom Kippur, when it became known that the Name was being used for magic, the Cohen HaGadol began muttering it under his breath, until the very pronunciation was lost from the common mind.
In my previous entry, I showed that the Bible does actually command us to make YHVH's Name known. This of course means more than just the syllables--it means His reputation, His honor, who He is--but it includes the syllables. But now I'm going to issue a caution: Yeshua and His Apostles were very careful about using YHVH's Name. Yeshua most commonly referred to Him as "My Father," and the NT uses Kurios (Lord) and Theos (God) rather than transliterating YHVH into Greek. Therefore, we too should exercise the greatest of caution in actually speaking God's Name, doing so only in worship, prayer, instruction, or another reverent context.
We want God's Name to be known, not for it to become common.
Shalom.
The 2nd part of Michaels article on the name of G-d.
The Names of God, Pt. 2: The Reverence of God's Name
If the Scriptures command us to "publish the name of YHVH," how then did the custom of avoiding it come about? It was not through some priestly conspiracy, as I've seen some suggest, but out of a deep sense of reverence.
First, let's step back from the speaking of God's Name to the writing of it. Why is it many observant Jews even refrain from writing "Lord" and "God," but render them "L-rd" and "G-d" instead? (I've even seen a few Messianics take this to an extreme, writing "M-ss--h" instead of Messiah.)
The answer is found in Deu. 12:2-4:
Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree: And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. Ye shall not do so unto YHVH your God.
To understand why a Jew will not write the Name, or even a title, of God, you have to look at this passage like a rabbi. Remember that the rabbis both seek to keep the most literal interpretation of a command possible as well as observe its drash. For example, when an Orthodox Jew wears teffilin (phylacteries) in prayer, it's to keep the command to wear God's Word on his hand and between his eyes literally (Deu. 6:8). Therefore, when they see a command to destroy the names of the pagan gods, but not to do the same to the Name of YHVH, the observant Jew likewise takes that command very literally. If you write YHVH--or indeed, any Name or title belonging to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob--on a piece of paper, and then either erase the Name or allow the paper to be destroyed, to the Jew you are destroying the Name of God.
What then of speaking the Name of God? Forbidding this practice came out of two separate issues. The first is the command that he who blasphemes (slanders) the Name of YHVH must be put to death (Lev. 24:16). Again, think like a rabbi: The noblest pursuit in their minds is to put a fence around the Torah--that is, to erect commands beyond what the Torah commands so that one will not accidentally sin. For example, to create a specified "Sabbath's day journey" that one isn't supposed to walk beyond (about half a mile). If one were forced to walk just a little more than the prescribed journey, one wouldn't have sinned against the Sabbath by working. The same principle applies here: The simplest way to avoid accidentally blaspheming the Name is to avoid using it altogether.
The second issue is that the pagans in the first century (and the neo-pagans of today) used the names of their gods in magical rites, and the Jews didn't want them to use YHVH's Name the same way. This is why, for example, the book of Esther only contains the Name in four hidden acrostics, and then only in the original Hebrew: It was a safeguard against the Persians, among whom the book was published (likely in their own language) learning and misusing God's Name.
This resulted in an increasing sacredness in the use of the Name of YHVH. First, it was restricted from common use, with one substituting Adonai (Lord), Avinu (Our Father) and other circumlocutions instead. By about two centuries before Yeshua's birth, this practice had been enshrined in what some call the ineffable (Unspeakable) Name doctrine. The use of the Name became restricted to the priests, and then to the Cohen HaGadol (the High Priest), and then only on Yom Kippur. Edersheim notes that where once the practice was to say the Name aloud on Yom Kippur, when it became known that the Name was being used for magic, the Cohen HaGadol began muttering it under his breath, until the very pronunciation was lost from the common mind.
In my previous entry, I showed that the Bible does actually command us to make YHVH's Name known. This of course means more than just the syllables--it means His reputation, His honor, who He is--but it includes the syllables. But now I'm going to issue a caution: Yeshua and His Apostles were very careful about using YHVH's Name. Yeshua most commonly referred to Him as "My Father," and the NT uses Kurios (Lord) and Theos (God) rather than transliterating YHVH into Greek. Therefore, we too should exercise the greatest of caution in actually speaking God's Name, doing so only in worship, prayer, instruction, or another reverent context.
We want God's Name to be known, not for it to become common.
Shalom.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
The Names of God, Pt. 1: Can We Speak God's Name?
Shalom,
Michael wrote this excellent article on the name of G-d.
The Names of God, Pt. 1: Can We Speak God's Name?
This is a piece I've meant to do for a while, and it seems apropos to do it now as a follow-up to talking about the names we use for ourselves.
By now, readers may have noticed my tendency to use the KJV, but to usually replace "Jesus" with "Yeshua" and sometimes replace "the LORD" with "YHVH." The reason I prefer Yeshua to Jesus is very simple: First, it emphasizes His Jewishness. Second, "Yeshua" means "Salvation" in Hebrew, and the longer form, "Y'hoshua," means "Yah is Salvation." "Jesus" doesn't carry that meaning--or any meaning, for that matter--in any language, and I want to preserve the importance of the Messiah's Name. Thirdly, while there is nothing wrong, per se, with saying "Jesus"--God knows your heart, and He knows whose Name you're praying in--it's not a particularly good transliteration of our Master's Name either, having gone from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to German before reaching it's English form.
What about the proper Name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as He revealed it to Moshe, Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh (hereafter rendered as YHVH)? Should it be used, and if so, how should it be pronounced?
The Jewish tradition is to never pronounce the Tetragramaton--or rather, that only the High Priest may say it, and only then on Yom Kippur. I'll go into the origin of that tradition another time. For now, suffice to say that when a person reading from the Tanakh came to the Name, he would substitute "ADONAI" (Heb. for "Lord"), which is where our own custom of writing "the LORD" in place of God's Name in our English translations comes from. Some translations of the Tanakh, recognizing the link between YHVH and God's declaration to Moshe, "I AM that I AM" ("Ehyeh asher Ehyeh"), use "the Eternal" instead.
Interestingly, over time ADONAI became too holy to be used in anything but direct reading from the Scripture, and HaShem (the Name) was substituted instead. One wonders what will have to be substituted when HaShem becomes too holy. My siddur (Jewish prayer book) uses a double-yod in place of God's Name rather than write YHVH, Adonai, or HaShem.
But is there any Biblical basis for eschewing the Name of God? None at all. YHVH appears 6519 times in the Tanakh--many of them direct quotes from human beings. For example, shortly after the fall, Havah (Eve) says upon the birth of her son Cain, "I have gotten a man from YHVH" (Gen. 4:1). Moshe continually told Israel, "This is what YHVH has commanded . . ." David used YHVH's Name reapeatedly in his Psalms, which were meant to be sung aloud.
No, clearly Scripture permits saying God's proper Name, YHVH, provided that we do so with reverence. It is something greatly to be lamented, then, that both the Jewish and Christian communities have eschewed using it almost to the point of destroying it from history altogether.
I don't think that there's anything wrong with saying "God" and "the Lord" (any more than there was anything wrong with the Apostles writing "Theos" and "Kurios" in the NT) out of a sense of reverence. (For that matter, while I do not join in the custom, I have no problem with those who omit the vowels of L-rd and G-d for the sake of reverence.) My concern is that those terms have become so generalized today that one can never tell if someone means "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" when they say "God," or if they mean Allah, the Brahman, a deist god, or what. Many Christians sidestep this potential confusion or inaccuracy by saying "Jesus," but that risks confusing the Trinity. I would that we knew for certain how to pronounce YHVH and would do so--with all reverence and awe--even if there were no other reason.
Moreover, I think Scripture encourages, if not commands us, to make God's Name known:
Deuteronomy 32:3-4
Because I will publish the name of YHVH: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
2 Samuel 22:50
Therefore I will give thanks unto thee, O YHVH, among the heathen, and I will sing praises unto thy name.
Psalm 34:3
O magnify YHVH with me, and let us exalt his name together.
Over the next few articles, I'm going to discuss how the practice of never saying YHVH came about, whether we know the pronounciation today, and how we should avoid misusig it. Until then,
Shalom.
Michael wrote this excellent article on the name of G-d.
The Names of God, Pt. 1: Can We Speak God's Name?
This is a piece I've meant to do for a while, and it seems apropos to do it now as a follow-up to talking about the names we use for ourselves.
By now, readers may have noticed my tendency to use the KJV, but to usually replace "Jesus" with "Yeshua" and sometimes replace "the LORD" with "YHVH." The reason I prefer Yeshua to Jesus is very simple: First, it emphasizes His Jewishness. Second, "Yeshua" means "Salvation" in Hebrew, and the longer form, "Y'hoshua," means "Yah is Salvation." "Jesus" doesn't carry that meaning--or any meaning, for that matter--in any language, and I want to preserve the importance of the Messiah's Name. Thirdly, while there is nothing wrong, per se, with saying "Jesus"--God knows your heart, and He knows whose Name you're praying in--it's not a particularly good transliteration of our Master's Name either, having gone from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to German before reaching it's English form.
What about the proper Name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as He revealed it to Moshe, Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh (hereafter rendered as YHVH)? Should it be used, and if so, how should it be pronounced?
The Jewish tradition is to never pronounce the Tetragramaton--or rather, that only the High Priest may say it, and only then on Yom Kippur. I'll go into the origin of that tradition another time. For now, suffice to say that when a person reading from the Tanakh came to the Name, he would substitute "ADONAI" (Heb. for "Lord"), which is where our own custom of writing "the LORD" in place of God's Name in our English translations comes from. Some translations of the Tanakh, recognizing the link between YHVH and God's declaration to Moshe, "I AM that I AM" ("Ehyeh asher Ehyeh"), use "the Eternal" instead.
Interestingly, over time ADONAI became too holy to be used in anything but direct reading from the Scripture, and HaShem (the Name) was substituted instead. One wonders what will have to be substituted when HaShem becomes too holy. My siddur (Jewish prayer book) uses a double-yod in place of God's Name rather than write YHVH, Adonai, or HaShem.
But is there any Biblical basis for eschewing the Name of God? None at all. YHVH appears 6519 times in the Tanakh--many of them direct quotes from human beings. For example, shortly after the fall, Havah (Eve) says upon the birth of her son Cain, "I have gotten a man from YHVH" (Gen. 4:1). Moshe continually told Israel, "This is what YHVH has commanded . . ." David used YHVH's Name reapeatedly in his Psalms, which were meant to be sung aloud.
No, clearly Scripture permits saying God's proper Name, YHVH, provided that we do so with reverence. It is something greatly to be lamented, then, that both the Jewish and Christian communities have eschewed using it almost to the point of destroying it from history altogether.
I don't think that there's anything wrong with saying "God" and "the Lord" (any more than there was anything wrong with the Apostles writing "Theos" and "Kurios" in the NT) out of a sense of reverence. (For that matter, while I do not join in the custom, I have no problem with those who omit the vowels of L-rd and G-d for the sake of reverence.) My concern is that those terms have become so generalized today that one can never tell if someone means "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" when they say "God," or if they mean Allah, the Brahman, a deist god, or what. Many Christians sidestep this potential confusion or inaccuracy by saying "Jesus," but that risks confusing the Trinity. I would that we knew for certain how to pronounce YHVH and would do so--with all reverence and awe--even if there were no other reason.
Moreover, I think Scripture encourages, if not commands us, to make God's Name known:
Deuteronomy 32:3-4
Because I will publish the name of YHVH: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
2 Samuel 22:50
Therefore I will give thanks unto thee, O YHVH, among the heathen, and I will sing praises unto thy name.
Psalm 34:3
O magnify YHVH with me, and let us exalt his name together.
Over the next few articles, I'm going to discuss how the practice of never saying YHVH came about, whether we know the pronounciation today, and how we should avoid misusig it. Until then,
Shalom.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Whats in a name?
Shalom,
Many in the Congregation have noticed that I am using Gavri'el (my hebrew name) more and in correspondence. You may be wondering why, so I thought it was appropriate to explain.
In English, a name is treated as merely a name, but in many cultures, a name is much more, it has meaning! For example, we use Yeshua instead of Jesus, why, because Yeshua was His original name and it means literally "Salvation"!
Taking from my Grandmothers heritage (Sephardic from Spain), Gavri'el is my given Hebrew name. Choosing to use Gavri'el reflects more than a "change of name", but a "change of identity". Why a change, because it correctly reflects the identity G-d revealed to me on our recent trip to Israel, and upon our return.
One personal note I would like to share. While we were in the Praise and Worship before going into the prison 3 weeks ago, G-d told me clearly in my Spirit, "you are Gavri'el". He repeated this 3 times. He has futher confirmed that by affirming my place amongst His people.
He has completed my identity!
Note:Gavri'el means messanger of G-d.
Many in the Congregation have noticed that I am using Gavri'el (my hebrew name) more and in correspondence. You may be wondering why, so I thought it was appropriate to explain.
In English, a name is treated as merely a name, but in many cultures, a name is much more, it has meaning! For example, we use Yeshua instead of Jesus, why, because Yeshua was His original name and it means literally "Salvation"!
Taking from my Grandmothers heritage (Sephardic from Spain), Gavri'el is my given Hebrew name. Choosing to use Gavri'el reflects more than a "change of name", but a "change of identity". Why a change, because it correctly reflects the identity G-d revealed to me on our recent trip to Israel, and upon our return.
One personal note I would like to share. While we were in the Praise and Worship before going into the prison 3 weeks ago, G-d told me clearly in my Spirit, "you are Gavri'el". He repeated this 3 times. He has futher confirmed that by affirming my place amongst His people.
He has completed my identity!
Note:Gavri'el means messanger of G-d.
Banning Jews from believing in Messiah?
Shalom,
The council of Nicea II did just that!
Nicea II, in the eighth century, officially banned Jewish life in Jesus. All who continued to practice circumcision, Sabbath observance or other Hebrew rites were to be banned from the Church. Many think that the first Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. precluded Jews from Jewish life in Jesus. However, there is no canon of this council explicitly dealing with this issue. Apparently, many have confused Nicea I and Nicea II. Only universal councils were universally received and became binding to the whole Church. Regional councils, such as Toledo, Elvira, Antioch and Laodocia making such decisions against Jewish life in Yeshua had influence, but did not become universal law. Nicea II provides us with universal law. The text translated from the Latin follows:
"Because those from the Hebrew religion have been deceived, they seem to mock Christ as God, pretending to become Christians, but they deny him as they openly and secretly keep the Sabbath and follow other practices in the manner of the Jews. We determine that they are not to be received into communion, nor into prayer, nor in the Church, but the Hebrews are manifestly according to their own religion: their children are not to be baptized; nor is a slave to be purchased or acquired. But if anyone of them will convert out of a sincere faith and heart and will make a profession of faith with all his heart, disclosing their customs and practices so that others might be exposed and corrected, he is to be received and baptized, and also his children; but indeed we decree that they are to be observed so that they depart from Hebrew practices, otherwise they are not to be admitted at all."
Article excerpt from "Anti-Messianic Judaism in the Church", by Dan Juster, used by permission.
The council of Nicea II did just that!
Nicea II, in the eighth century, officially banned Jewish life in Jesus. All who continued to practice circumcision, Sabbath observance or other Hebrew rites were to be banned from the Church. Many think that the first Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. precluded Jews from Jewish life in Jesus. However, there is no canon of this council explicitly dealing with this issue. Apparently, many have confused Nicea I and Nicea II. Only universal councils were universally received and became binding to the whole Church. Regional councils, such as Toledo, Elvira, Antioch and Laodocia making such decisions against Jewish life in Yeshua had influence, but did not become universal law. Nicea II provides us with universal law. The text translated from the Latin follows:
"Because those from the Hebrew religion have been deceived, they seem to mock Christ as God, pretending to become Christians, but they deny him as they openly and secretly keep the Sabbath and follow other practices in the manner of the Jews. We determine that they are not to be received into communion, nor into prayer, nor in the Church, but the Hebrews are manifestly according to their own religion: their children are not to be baptized; nor is a slave to be purchased or acquired. But if anyone of them will convert out of a sincere faith and heart and will make a profession of faith with all his heart, disclosing their customs and practices so that others might be exposed and corrected, he is to be received and baptized, and also his children; but indeed we decree that they are to be observed so that they depart from Hebrew practices, otherwise they are not to be admitted at all."
Article excerpt from "Anti-Messianic Judaism in the Church", by Dan Juster, used by permission.
Who is a Jew
Shalom,
One question commonly asked is, Who is a Jew?
Obviously, this is a question that has been debated for centuries. One cannot be considered Jewish strictly on the basis of religion, because most Jewish people today are not religious. The same applies to any definition of a Jew based on culture, as well. According to Rabbinic Judaism, to be considered a Jew, one must have Jewish parents and in particular a Jewish mother.
This rabbinic definition is not Biblically correct. The Scriptural definition of a Jew is three-fold: First of all, we are a nation and a people; to be considered Jewish one must be a physical descendant of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 12:1-3). Secondly, the Biblical lineage is patrilineal, i.e. carried through the father, not matrilineal or carried through the mother (for example, Moses had a Gentile wife and King David’s great grandmother was Ruth, the Moabite, yet their children were all considered Jewish).
Finally, the Scriptures indicate that if either parent is Jewish or if a grandparent is Jewish (i.e., if there is a significant Jewish heritage), one can identify himself or herself as being Jewish and can claim himself as a part of God’s Chosen People.
Blessings Gavri'el
One question commonly asked is, Who is a Jew?
Obviously, this is a question that has been debated for centuries. One cannot be considered Jewish strictly on the basis of religion, because most Jewish people today are not religious. The same applies to any definition of a Jew based on culture, as well. According to Rabbinic Judaism, to be considered a Jew, one must have Jewish parents and in particular a Jewish mother.
This rabbinic definition is not Biblically correct. The Scriptural definition of a Jew is three-fold: First of all, we are a nation and a people; to be considered Jewish one must be a physical descendant of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 12:1-3). Secondly, the Biblical lineage is patrilineal, i.e. carried through the father, not matrilineal or carried through the mother (for example, Moses had a Gentile wife and King David’s great grandmother was Ruth, the Moabite, yet their children were all considered Jewish).
Finally, the Scriptures indicate that if either parent is Jewish or if a grandparent is Jewish (i.e., if there is a significant Jewish heritage), one can identify himself or herself as being Jewish and can claim himself as a part of God’s Chosen People.
Blessings Gavri'el
Monday, May 08, 2006
Pictures from the Holy Land (Israel)
Shalom,
We recently returned from a 15 day trip to the Holy Land. During that time we travelded the route of the Exodus, from Egypt, through the Sinai, to Jordan, finally arriving in Ertz Yisrael, the land of Israel. Pictures may be found at http://www.cbhm.org/ExodusTour2006.htm
We recently returned from a 15 day trip to the Holy Land. During that time we travelded the route of the Exodus, from Egypt, through the Sinai, to Jordan, finally arriving in Ertz Yisrael, the land of Israel. Pictures may be found at http://www.cbhm.org/ExodusTour2006.htm
What is the difference between Messianic Judaism and Rabbinic Judaism?
Shalom,
We often get asked What is the difference between Rabbinic (Talmudic) and Messianic Judaism.
Rabbinic Judaism is a Judaism centered around the teachings and writings of Rabbis. Its formation began over 1,900 years ago when the Second Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. Before then, "Judaism" was centered around the Temple and the sacrificial system according to the Torah (the Law or the five books of Moses). After the destruction of the Temple the Rabbis reorganized Judaism, adding many new laws, rules and traditions. Today, their writings and commentaries (Talmud, Midrash, ect) form the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism.
Rabbinic Judaism consists of several branches: Orthodox (very traditional), Chassidic (Ultra-Orthodox), Conservative (middle of the road), Reform (liberal) and Reconstructionist (very liberal). Some are still looking for the Messiah to come in the form of a Man, while others are looking for a Messianic Age.
Messianic Judaism differs in that we rely totally on the Scriptures. Our faith is the Judaism of the Bible (Biblical Judaism) and is centered around the Messiah. We in Messianic Judaism believe that Yeshua is the promised Messiah and that we don't have to go through the Sages or the Rabbis to know God. We have access to God because of the great atoning work of the Messiah Yeshua, who has fulfilled us as Jewish believers (Mt. 5:17-19).
Messianic Judaism formation began with around 30 AD with all of the first believers. All 12 of the first disciples where Jewish as well as Yeshua himself. This makes Messianic Judaism about 40 older than that of Rabbinic Judaism.
Blessings
We often get asked What is the difference between Rabbinic (Talmudic) and Messianic Judaism.
Rabbinic Judaism is a Judaism centered around the teachings and writings of Rabbis. Its formation began over 1,900 years ago when the Second Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. Before then, "Judaism" was centered around the Temple and the sacrificial system according to the Torah (the Law or the five books of Moses). After the destruction of the Temple the Rabbis reorganized Judaism, adding many new laws, rules and traditions. Today, their writings and commentaries (Talmud, Midrash, ect) form the foundation of Rabbinic Judaism.
Rabbinic Judaism consists of several branches: Orthodox (very traditional), Chassidic (Ultra-Orthodox), Conservative (middle of the road), Reform (liberal) and Reconstructionist (very liberal). Some are still looking for the Messiah to come in the form of a Man, while others are looking for a Messianic Age.
Messianic Judaism differs in that we rely totally on the Scriptures. Our faith is the Judaism of the Bible (Biblical Judaism) and is centered around the Messiah. We in Messianic Judaism believe that Yeshua is the promised Messiah and that we don't have to go through the Sages or the Rabbis to know God. We have access to God because of the great atoning work of the Messiah Yeshua, who has fulfilled us as Jewish believers (Mt. 5:17-19).
Messianic Judaism formation began with around 30 AD with all of the first believers. All 12 of the first disciples where Jewish as well as Yeshua himself. This makes Messianic Judaism about 40 older than that of Rabbinic Judaism.
Blessings
Israel's population surpasses 7 million
Shalom,
On the eve of Israel’s 58th Independence Day, figures were released showing that Israel’s population has surpassed the 7 million mark. At 7,026,000, the number of residents is 8.7 times larger than it was when the state was established. Israel had 806,000 citizens in 1948, and half of them still live here. According to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 80 percent of Israelis (5,639,000) are Jewish and 20 percent (1,387,000) are Arab.
Blessings
On the eve of Israel’s 58th Independence Day, figures were released showing that Israel’s population has surpassed the 7 million mark. At 7,026,000, the number of residents is 8.7 times larger than it was when the state was established. Israel had 806,000 citizens in 1948, and half of them still live here. According to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 80 percent of Israelis (5,639,000) are Jewish and 20 percent (1,387,000) are Arab.
Blessings
Shabbat is the 4th Commandment.
Shalom
We often get asked why we worship on Friday night & Saturday. Below sums it up nicely.
1. Shabbat is the 4th Commandment.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Exodus 20:11
There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from His. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest.
Hebrews 4:9-11
We know that Yeshua celebrated Shabbat. Yeshua, speaking of himself said, "the son of man is Lord even of Shabbat." If Yeshua is your Lord, you should honor Shabbat and if you observe Shabbat, the Lord of Shabbat, Yeshua, should be your Lord.
Matthew 12:8
2. Shabbat is for the family
We believe it is important for families to celebrate Shabbat together and keep God at the center of their celebration. Children see their parents actively worshiping Adonai and ”Walking the Talk". It is important for children see their parents worship God, as they grow in their spiritual life as well. Use this as an opportunity to invite family and friends who want to know more about Shabbat.
Blessings in Messiah
We often get asked why we worship on Friday night & Saturday. Below sums it up nicely.
1. Shabbat is the 4th Commandment.
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Exodus 20:11
There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from His. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest.
Hebrews 4:9-11
We know that Yeshua celebrated Shabbat. Yeshua, speaking of himself said, "the son of man is Lord even of Shabbat." If Yeshua is your Lord, you should honor Shabbat and if you observe Shabbat, the Lord of Shabbat, Yeshua, should be your Lord.
Matthew 12:8
2. Shabbat is for the family
We believe it is important for families to celebrate Shabbat together and keep God at the center of their celebration. Children see their parents actively worshiping Adonai and ”Walking the Talk". It is important for children see their parents worship God, as they grow in their spiritual life as well. Use this as an opportunity to invite family and friends who want to know more about Shabbat.
Blessings in Messiah
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Tefillin (Phylacteries) in Worship
Shalom,
Michael prepared a good article on Tefillin. Blessings
Compliments of Michael Bugg Assoc. Messianic Congregational Leader -
I got a question today about using tefillin, more commonly called (among Gentiles) phylacteries, in worship. Tefillin are the leather bands with small leather boxes which contain scrolls with passages from the Torah (most commonly Deu. 6:4) that Orthodox and Hasidic Jews wear in prayer.
There's nothing wrong with using tefillin in worship. Whlie Yeshua criticized those who made their tefillin over-large to show off their "piety" (Mat. 23:5), He did not condemn the practice itself and even paired it off with the Biblical practice of wearing tzitzit, or fringes.
The tradition comes from Deu. 6:6, 8, in which YHVH commands, "And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart . . . And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes." Certainly, wearing tefillin is a very literal way of fulfilling this command. However, as I explained in the post on living a symbolic life, it's not the whole fulfillment.
In Exo. 13:16, YHVH commands Israel to keep the Passover every year, saying, "And it shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes: for by strength of hand the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt." Therefore, we must interpret Deu. 6 in the light of the previous command in Exo. 13, and conclude that what God is saying that we must do symbollic acts ("bind them for a sign upon thine hand") and view symbollic things ("they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes") to remind us of God's commands and all that He in His boundless grace has done for us.
Literally binding the tefillin to one's hand and head certainly qualifies as keeping this command in both a very literal and yet also a symbolic way. However, it is not the only, or even the primary, means by which we are to keep this commandment, nor should it be considered a requirement. When we keep the Passover, we keep the command. When we celebrate the Lord's Supper, we keep the command. When we put on a talit and look on the tzitzit, we keep the command. When we are baptized, we keep the command. All of these things involve doing and looking upon physical symbols of the spiritual reality that we are a part of, and serve to keep God's Word frontmost in our mind.
Therefore, while a Messianic Jew or former Gentile may use tefillin as a part of his (or her, but that's another subject) worship, he is not required to, nor should he do so simply to show off how holy or Torah-observant he is.
Shalom.
Michael prepared a good article on Tefillin. Blessings
Compliments of Michael Bugg Assoc. Messianic Congregational Leader -
I got a question today about using tefillin, more commonly called (among Gentiles) phylacteries, in worship. Tefillin are the leather bands with small leather boxes which contain scrolls with passages from the Torah (most commonly Deu. 6:4) that Orthodox and Hasidic Jews wear in prayer.
There's nothing wrong with using tefillin in worship. Whlie Yeshua criticized those who made their tefillin over-large to show off their "piety" (Mat. 23:5), He did not condemn the practice itself and even paired it off with the Biblical practice of wearing tzitzit, or fringes.
The tradition comes from Deu. 6:6, 8, in which YHVH commands, "And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart . . . And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes." Certainly, wearing tefillin is a very literal way of fulfilling this command. However, as I explained in the post on living a symbolic life, it's not the whole fulfillment.
In Exo. 13:16, YHVH commands Israel to keep the Passover every year, saying, "And it shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for frontlets between thine eyes: for by strength of hand the LORD brought us forth out of Egypt." Therefore, we must interpret Deu. 6 in the light of the previous command in Exo. 13, and conclude that what God is saying that we must do symbollic acts ("bind them for a sign upon thine hand") and view symbollic things ("they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes") to remind us of God's commands and all that He in His boundless grace has done for us.
Literally binding the tefillin to one's hand and head certainly qualifies as keeping this command in both a very literal and yet also a symbolic way. However, it is not the only, or even the primary, means by which we are to keep this commandment, nor should it be considered a requirement. When we keep the Passover, we keep the command. When we celebrate the Lord's Supper, we keep the command. When we put on a talit and look on the tzitzit, we keep the command. When we are baptized, we keep the command. All of these things involve doing and looking upon physical symbols of the spiritual reality that we are a part of, and serve to keep God's Word frontmost in our mind.
Therefore, while a Messianic Jew or former Gentile may use tefillin as a part of his (or her, but that's another subject) worship, he is not required to, nor should he do so simply to show off how holy or Torah-observant he is.
Shalom.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Ancient Evidence of Messianic Jewish Beliefs
Shalom,
While doing some research I found some early quotes from Early Christian Leaders on Messianic Jews and thought I would share them.
Jerome (4th Cent CE.) - "...who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law." (Jerome; on. Is. 8:14).
Epiphanius (4th Cent CE.) - "But these sectarians... did not call themselves Christians--but "Nazarenes," ... However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do... They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion-- except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that G-d is one that his son is Y'shua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the... Writings... are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law--circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest-- they are not in accord with Christians.... they are nothing but Jews.... They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
Note some key points:
1. As late as the 4th century (and even later), Messianic Judaism was a valid form of belief. This dispels the idea that the Messianic movement is just a creation of the church to "trick" Jews.
2. Observance of the Torah (here called entire Law).
3. Attitude of Epiphanius towards Torah - He says fettered by the Law. The anti-Torah bias of the Church is that old.
As we can see, Messianic Judaism has existed from the beginning, and is clearly being practiced in the 4th century, as these writings show. While Messianic Jews will be persacuted by the Church, and by other Jews, for the next 1600 years, we now see G-d's plan unfolding with the reemergance of the Movement. No longer in hiding, but growing, Like Yochanan "one crying in the Wilderness...Make the way straight" for the L-rd is coming.
Blessings
While doing some research I found some early quotes from Early Christian Leaders on Messianic Jews and thought I would share them.
Jerome (4th Cent CE.) - "...who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law." (Jerome; on. Is. 8:14).
Epiphanius (4th Cent CE.) - "But these sectarians... did not call themselves Christians--but "Nazarenes," ... However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do... They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion-- except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that G-d is one that his son is Y'shua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the... Writings... are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law--circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest-- they are not in accord with Christians.... they are nothing but Jews.... They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.
(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)
Note some key points:
1. As late as the 4th century (and even later), Messianic Judaism was a valid form of belief. This dispels the idea that the Messianic movement is just a creation of the church to "trick" Jews.
2. Observance of the Torah (here called entire Law).
3. Attitude of Epiphanius towards Torah - He says fettered by the Law. The anti-Torah bias of the Church is that old.
As we can see, Messianic Judaism has existed from the beginning, and is clearly being practiced in the 4th century, as these writings show. While Messianic Jews will be persacuted by the Church, and by other Jews, for the next 1600 years, we now see G-d's plan unfolding with the reemergance of the Movement. No longer in hiding, but growing, Like Yochanan "one crying in the Wilderness...Make the way straight" for the L-rd is coming.
Blessings
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
How did Rabbinic Judaism come into being?
Shalom,
Just how did Rabbinic Judaism, the current dominate for of Judaism, come into being? Is it the only form of Judaism today?
Judaism of the first century was expressed in many flavors, including that of the Tzadakim (centered on the Temple service), Pharisaic (centered around Halacha), Zealots (a Zionist movement wanting freedom from Rome), Messianic (believers that Yeshua of Nazareth is Messiah, and Essenes (an almost monastic sect, from whom we get the Dead Sea Scrolls). These and other sects lived and competed in Jewish culture during the 1st century until the destruction of the temple, and subsequent diaspora.
Three groups, the Tzadakim, Zealots & Essenes, ceased to be a force in Judaism after the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE. This left 2 primary groups both of which succeeded in establishing themselves outside of Jerusalem, and subsequently being spared from destruction by the Romans. The Messianics, thorough a miracle of G-d (in my estimation), were able to escape Jerusalem (which later brought about accusations of being traitors by some Jewish authorities) when the Romans surrounding the city split their lines (recorded in Josephus). The Messianic’s heeding their Messiah’s words, fled the city. The Pharisee had significant numbers outside Jerusalem, and thus were able to continue on.
After the destruction of Jerusalem, the 2 groups grew increasingly apart, until, in 90 CE, at Yavneh, the Pharisee’s added the 19th benediction to the Amidah, forcing Messianics to curse themselves if they wished to stay in the Synagogue. The split continued, and was made greater in 132-135 CE in the 2nd revolt, where Rabbi Akiva names Simon bar Koshba to be Messiah. This resulted in a greater polarization. Messianics would, over the next 200 years become overshadowed as Gentiles came to dominate the movement.
Pharisee’s succeeded in evolving Judaism from a Temple based movement to a Synagogue based movement. Sacrifices were replaced with Prayer, Charity & Repentance. As the Diaspora grew, this system gained dominance. The Talmud, with the Oral Law and Rabbinic rulings (Halacha) were compiled and governance was established. The rulings of the Rabbi’s became supreme, to the point that Oral Torah and Rabbinic writings were treated on the level of Torah.
Great Sage’s like Rashi, RamBam, RamBan, etc. compiled volumes that added to the Rabbinic interpretation and strengthened what became Modern Judaism.
Is Rabbinic Judaism the only form today? Most certainly not, even with non-Messianic Judaism, there are groups like the Karaite who reject Oral Torah & the Talmud. The largest group of Jew’s today are not Orthodox, but secular, many atheist, who do not even believe in the G-d of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob. One of the fastest growing forms of Judaism is Messianic, Those who believe Yeshua is the Messiah. Currently Messianic Jews worldwide number about 500,000 or 2-3% of the total Jewish World population.
It is important to note that the Orthodox do not accept Messianic Jews as Jews. They also reject other expressions of faith such as the Karaites, and even Conservative and Reformed Jewish conversions are not recognized in Israel.
Blessings
Just how did Rabbinic Judaism, the current dominate for of Judaism, come into being? Is it the only form of Judaism today?
Judaism of the first century was expressed in many flavors, including that of the Tzadakim (centered on the Temple service), Pharisaic (centered around Halacha), Zealots (a Zionist movement wanting freedom from Rome), Messianic (believers that Yeshua of Nazareth is Messiah, and Essenes (an almost monastic sect, from whom we get the Dead Sea Scrolls). These and other sects lived and competed in Jewish culture during the 1st century until the destruction of the temple, and subsequent diaspora.
Three groups, the Tzadakim, Zealots & Essenes, ceased to be a force in Judaism after the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE. This left 2 primary groups both of which succeeded in establishing themselves outside of Jerusalem, and subsequently being spared from destruction by the Romans. The Messianics, thorough a miracle of G-d (in my estimation), were able to escape Jerusalem (which later brought about accusations of being traitors by some Jewish authorities) when the Romans surrounding the city split their lines (recorded in Josephus). The Messianic’s heeding their Messiah’s words, fled the city. The Pharisee had significant numbers outside Jerusalem, and thus were able to continue on.
After the destruction of Jerusalem, the 2 groups grew increasingly apart, until, in 90 CE, at Yavneh, the Pharisee’s added the 19th benediction to the Amidah, forcing Messianics to curse themselves if they wished to stay in the Synagogue. The split continued, and was made greater in 132-135 CE in the 2nd revolt, where Rabbi Akiva names Simon bar Koshba to be Messiah. This resulted in a greater polarization. Messianics would, over the next 200 years become overshadowed as Gentiles came to dominate the movement.
Pharisee’s succeeded in evolving Judaism from a Temple based movement to a Synagogue based movement. Sacrifices were replaced with Prayer, Charity & Repentance. As the Diaspora grew, this system gained dominance. The Talmud, with the Oral Law and Rabbinic rulings (Halacha) were compiled and governance was established. The rulings of the Rabbi’s became supreme, to the point that Oral Torah and Rabbinic writings were treated on the level of Torah.
Great Sage’s like Rashi, RamBam, RamBan, etc. compiled volumes that added to the Rabbinic interpretation and strengthened what became Modern Judaism.
Is Rabbinic Judaism the only form today? Most certainly not, even with non-Messianic Judaism, there are groups like the Karaite who reject Oral Torah & the Talmud. The largest group of Jew’s today are not Orthodox, but secular, many atheist, who do not even believe in the G-d of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob. One of the fastest growing forms of Judaism is Messianic, Those who believe Yeshua is the Messiah. Currently Messianic Jews worldwide number about 500,000 or 2-3% of the total Jewish World population.
It is important to note that the Orthodox do not accept Messianic Jews as Jews. They also reject other expressions of faith such as the Karaites, and even Conservative and Reformed Jewish conversions are not recognized in Israel.
Blessings
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
When the Rabbi's stray from the truth
Shalom,
I'd like to begin by saying that I have great respect for the Rabbi's & Sage's of our people. Having said that, we must remember that they are men, not G-d, and are capable of error. While many in the Jewish community want to treat Rabbinical decisions as equal to the Word or G-d, we do not agree with that level of authority. We see the Rabbi's and Sages as learned, wise men, providing commentary on scripture. We also view the Oral Torah as Commentary, not having the weight of G-d breathed scripture. This is very similar to how Protestants view the Catacism.
Rabbinical statements which stray:
1. In 132 CE, Rabbi Akiva named Simon Bar Koshba (son of a liar) the Messiah, renaming him Bar Kochba (son of a star). The result, in 135 CE the revolt ended, 1000's were killed, Jerusalem was destroyed and rebuilt as a Pagan city.
2. RamBam in His 13 articles of Faith declared G-d yachid, not echad. Yachid means the only one, not one as scripture states. Why the big deal, this was done to counter the concept of Messiah as G-d. Echad means simple one, and is used in B'rsheet to say Adam & Eve became one. Thus two became one flesh.
Rabbinic statements have tremendous impact in the Jewish Community. We must be knowledable enough to know the origins of these statements, and show, using Hebrew texts, the problems they create.
Blessings in Messiah
I'd like to begin by saying that I have great respect for the Rabbi's & Sage's of our people. Having said that, we must remember that they are men, not G-d, and are capable of error. While many in the Jewish community want to treat Rabbinical decisions as equal to the Word or G-d, we do not agree with that level of authority. We see the Rabbi's and Sages as learned, wise men, providing commentary on scripture. We also view the Oral Torah as Commentary, not having the weight of G-d breathed scripture. This is very similar to how Protestants view the Catacism.
Rabbinical statements which stray:
1. In 132 CE, Rabbi Akiva named Simon Bar Koshba (son of a liar) the Messiah, renaming him Bar Kochba (son of a star). The result, in 135 CE the revolt ended, 1000's were killed, Jerusalem was destroyed and rebuilt as a Pagan city.
2. RamBam in His 13 articles of Faith declared G-d yachid, not echad. Yachid means the only one, not one as scripture states. Why the big deal, this was done to counter the concept of Messiah as G-d. Echad means simple one, and is used in B'rsheet to say Adam & Eve became one. Thus two became one flesh.
Rabbinic statements have tremendous impact in the Jewish Community. We must be knowledable enough to know the origins of these statements, and show, using Hebrew texts, the problems they create.
Blessings in Messiah
Monday, April 10, 2006
Why was the Temple destroyed in 70 CE
Shalom,
While traveling in Israel, we had the privialge of visiting the "Rabbinic Tunnel" that runs under the Moslem Quarter, right next to the Temple mount. This is the same tunnel that sparked the intafada in the 90's when Moslem extremists claimed it had gone under the dome of the rock (it did not, as no part is under the Temple Mount).
During the tour, we were privilaged to see the closest spot to the Holy of Holies that Jews are allowed to visit. Our guide, a bright eyed young Israeli woman, explained that the Rabbi's taught the first Temple had been destroyed because of unjustice & idolitry. She proceeded to tell a story of why the second Temple was destroyed.
The paraphrased story is that a man held a huge feast, inviting everyone to come. His best friends invitation was mistakenly delivered to his enemy, who showed up at the feast. The man saw his enemy, and went to have him thrown out. The man, not wishing to be shamed, begged to not be thrown out, even offering to pay for the entire feast, but instaed he was shamed, and cast out. Thus hate was the cause of the destruction of the second Temple.
It is ironic that the Rabbi's have come up with an simple explanation for why the Temple was destroyed, ignoring the fact that the Talmud clearly teaches that the Yom Kippur sacrifices were not acepted by G-d for 40 years before the destruction (Yoma 39b). What happended 40 years before? The Messiah came, and offered Himself as a perfect sacrifice, thus a mere goat would no longer suffice.
It was not hate that destroyed the Temple, it was that it was not longer needed, as a more perfect sacrifice had been made.
Blessings in Messiah
While traveling in Israel, we had the privialge of visiting the "Rabbinic Tunnel" that runs under the Moslem Quarter, right next to the Temple mount. This is the same tunnel that sparked the intafada in the 90's when Moslem extremists claimed it had gone under the dome of the rock (it did not, as no part is under the Temple Mount).
During the tour, we were privilaged to see the closest spot to the Holy of Holies that Jews are allowed to visit. Our guide, a bright eyed young Israeli woman, explained that the Rabbi's taught the first Temple had been destroyed because of unjustice & idolitry. She proceeded to tell a story of why the second Temple was destroyed.
The paraphrased story is that a man held a huge feast, inviting everyone to come. His best friends invitation was mistakenly delivered to his enemy, who showed up at the feast. The man saw his enemy, and went to have him thrown out. The man, not wishing to be shamed, begged to not be thrown out, even offering to pay for the entire feast, but instaed he was shamed, and cast out. Thus hate was the cause of the destruction of the second Temple.
It is ironic that the Rabbi's have come up with an simple explanation for why the Temple was destroyed, ignoring the fact that the Talmud clearly teaches that the Yom Kippur sacrifices were not acepted by G-d for 40 years before the destruction (Yoma 39b). What happended 40 years before? The Messiah came, and offered Himself as a perfect sacrifice, thus a mere goat would no longer suffice.
It was not hate that destroyed the Temple, it was that it was not longer needed, as a more perfect sacrifice had been made.
Blessings in Messiah
Sunday, April 09, 2006
Mercy & Grace
Shalom,
I currently am reading "Rabbi & Redeemer" by David Mishkin (see www.mtolivepress.com to order). This walk through the book of John gives good insight on the Jewishness of the scriptures and explains the cultural and historical context of the writings. If als0 does an excellent job of helping us see Yeshua as He claimed to be, the Son of G-d.
One key point made is the difference between Grace & Mercy, I'd like to share this here:
Grace is getting what we do not deserve, namely eternal life, the ability to live according to Torah, and have G-d's Spirit dwelling inside of each of us granting the strength to overcome.
Mercy is not getting what we do deserve, punishment and eternal seperation from G-d.
Thus G-d, through mercy, forgives our sins, and through Grace gives us eternal life and the ability to walk according to His will.
What a beautiful concept, not only forgiveness, but tha ability to walk as "Children of the King". This is what was meant when G-d said He would give us a new heart, and write His Torah on our heart!
Blessings
I currently am reading "Rabbi & Redeemer" by David Mishkin (see www.mtolivepress.com to order). This walk through the book of John gives good insight on the Jewishness of the scriptures and explains the cultural and historical context of the writings. If als0 does an excellent job of helping us see Yeshua as He claimed to be, the Son of G-d.
One key point made is the difference between Grace & Mercy, I'd like to share this here:
Grace is getting what we do not deserve, namely eternal life, the ability to live according to Torah, and have G-d's Spirit dwelling inside of each of us granting the strength to overcome.
Mercy is not getting what we do deserve, punishment and eternal seperation from G-d.
Thus G-d, through mercy, forgives our sins, and through Grace gives us eternal life and the ability to walk according to His will.
What a beautiful concept, not only forgiveness, but tha ability to walk as "Children of the King". This is what was meant when G-d said He would give us a new heart, and write His Torah on our heart!
Blessings
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
