The Role of The Gentile
at K'hilah Dagim Michkutz LaMayim
When Rabbi Jones assigned this task to
me of writing a policy statement defining the role of Gentiles at
K'hilah Dagim Michkutz LaMayim (The Congregation of Fish out of
Water) my wife suggested to me that “Gentiles should turn on the
lights”. Now some of you may have thought that funny. Others
among you may not have gotten the joke. The joke is to underscore
the truth that Jewish culture is and has been, ever since the time of
the first diaspora, an evolution of change resulting from the impact
of the culture of the people among whom the Jewish community find
itself as it interplays with synagogue as well as explicit rejection
of synagogue life. (Actually Biblically speaking, Ha-goyim were
always having some sort of cultural impact upon ha-Bnay Yisrael even
prior to the diaspora.) I referred to the “explicit rejection of
synagogue life” because some Jews have actually found the synagogue
distasteful or the rules and regulations associated with frumer
observance to be too burdensome to practice. Consequently, some
Jews, 'though educated in the Y'shoov's of Lithuania, Poland and
Russia went on, not to be religious, but reactionary Communists or
secular Zionists. Others intermarried and attempted to get lost
within the culture in which they found themselves. Hitler
demonstrated that that was far more difficult to accomplish than was
first anticipated.1
Jewish identity has even withstood
utter rejection of Torah observance. The Infamous “Trefa Banquet of
1883 put on by the more radical elements of the Reformed Jewish
Theological Seminary to shock more observant Jews by presenting them
with shrimp cocktail for dinner, highlights this point.2
Getting back to my wife's joke... still
others among you may have thought it offensive. That's because
observant non-Y'shua believing Jews have at times in history employed
“Shabbos Goyim” to perform necessary services deemed,
nevertheless, to be “work” and thus, activities that are
forbidden according to Rabbinic halacha for a Jew to be engaged in on
the Sabbath. Although the notion of a “Shabbos Goy” is a
contemporary inside joke among Jews of today, to illustrate the point
that culture evolves, the Jews of Russia at the dawn of the 20th
century, by virtue of their poverty and constant confrontation with
anti-Semitism wouldn't have even dreamed of the concept of a “Shabbos
Goy”. In this context The term “goy” as the one who performs
servile work on the Sabbath, has been and could be interpreted to be
pejorative. Yet it is the product of the outworking of what might be
regarded as a nit-picky Rabbinic halacha as it manifests itself in
culture. Truly it has served to keep the Jew distinct but not
necessarily in an admirable sort of way. But lest I digress,
Rabbinic halacha is not the topic of this policy statement but
certainly a worthy of a topic for discussion at another time.
The pejorative attitude referred to
however, must be forbidden in our fellowship. Within the confines of
K'hilah Dagim Michkutz LaMayim, Gentiles must be held in high esteem
. In fact, according to Rav Shaul's admonition each of us is to
regard one another as more important than him(her)self3.
That rule must hold regardless of our skills, ethnicity, knowledge or
background. In G-ds economy Jews are incomplete without Gentiles and
visa-verse. Arguably one of the greatest Jews who ever lived, David
HaMelech, who is unanimously regarded as a Jew if there ever was one,
nevertheless, happened to be the descendent of a number of Gentile
women. Ruth was adopted into Ha Mishpacha Yisrael in spite of the
fact that her ethnicity, that of being a Moabite, was recorded as one
of the most despised in Torah4. Another Gentile ancestor
of David HaMelech, by the name of Rahab was instrumental in helping
Yisrael, under the leadership of Yehoshua, to defeat Jericho. Going
back even further, in the ancestry of David HaMelech, Tamar, a
Canaanite, gave birth to Perez. David HaMelech, of course, was
declared by HaShem, Himself, to be the ancestral father of HaMoshiach
Y'shua. Clearly our righteous Messiah has a significant amount of
Gentile blood in Him!
Our people were not alone in the
wilderness after they'd left Egypt. They were accompanied by a
“mixed multitude”. Who knows the number of mixed marriages that
may have taken place during the ensuing 40 years?
Once in the land of promise, HaEretz,
there were always Gerim (strangers or sojourners) living among the
people. Moses had laid down certain laws concerning them. They were
required to observe Yom HaKippurim5. The burnt offerings
they performed were specifically to be conducted at the doorway of
ha-Mikdal (Presumably as a deterrent to idolatry)6. They
were to abstain from the consumption of blood7. They were
to abstain from sexual immorality8. They were to abstain
from consumption of meat that died of itself9. Despite
these particular rules and prohibitions, the needs of the ger
dwelling in Eretz Yisrael were to be met. Furthermore HaShem
specifically expresses a passionate love for ha-Ger10. A
Yisraeli can, if poor, sell himself to a ger however, if possible, it
is preferable that he be redeemed from the ger by his family. This
implies that ha-ger was able to acquire wealth while in haEretz11.
The children of gerim can be bought from their parents as slaves
and, rather than receiving freedom at the time of jubilee which was
required to be the case among the legitimate b'nai Yisrael, be kept
as slaves from one generation to the next12. The alien or
ger could offer sacrifice in the same manner as any Yisraeli13.
In essence, the same chukah that applies to the Yisraeli applies to
the ger14. He was to observe HaShabbos.15 He
was to observe Shavuoth and Sukkoth and to rid his home of chametz
during Pesach.16
The rights and privileges of ha-ger
differed from those of haYisraeli in at least two specific ways worth
mentioning here. The first way was that unlike haYisraeli, his
children could be sold into slavery throughout generations in
perpetuity. The second way was that he was not free to observe
Pesach. If he wanted to observe Pesach he had to submit to
circumcision. This would, in effect, make him Ben Yisrael17.
The reason for this unequal treatment
of ha-ger as opposed to the indigent Yisraeli, as far as slavery is
concerned, is because haYisraeli had once been a slave in Egypt but
had now been brought out of Egypt so that he can be a servant of
HaShem. Such was not the case with ha-ger18. Does this
rule apply to ha-ger today? Putting aside the obvious reality that
enslavement is not relevant in a culture where slavery is not
permissible, It ought not even be an issue in any Y'shua believing
environment even in countries where slavery is practiced. Paul
addressed this in his letter to Philemon, not commanding but pleading
with Philemon to treat his runaway slave, Onesimus, as a brother in
Messiah19. What may have been the case specifically for
the relationship between Onesimus and Philemon, however, can easily
be generalized to slavery as an institution. If indeed, Yisrael's
redemption from Egyptian slavery by means of the blood of the lamb on
the entrance to the home, was a foreshadowing of Messiah's blood shed
as an atonement for anyone who was to apply that blood to his heart,
than the Gentile (or ger) too, has now been bought with a price to
serve the Living G-d20. As was the case with haYisraeli
being exonerated from slavery by virtue of HaShem's redemption on his
behalf, so also should the Gentile who has been bought with the price
of the blood of the Messiah.
Concerning the need for ha-ger to be
circumcised in order to celebrate Pesach... does this apply to the
Gentile member of K'hilah Dagim Michkutz LaMayim? In other words,
should a Gentile, therefore, be circumcised in order to be allowed
access to this rite and privilege and thus enjoy full fellowship with
Jews as well as HaShem? The answer is definitively “NO”...
certainly not as a result of thinking that by doing so they are
fulfilling a commandment given to them by HaShem! Shaul warned
adamantly against this. In Galatians 5:2-3 he said
“Behold
I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be
of no benefit to you.
And
I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is
under obligation to keep the whole Law.”21
Circumcision actually predates Mosaic
law. The rite of circumcision was actually given to Avraham Avinu in
Genesis 17.
This
is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your
descendants
after you: every male among
you shall be circumcised.
And you
shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be
the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
And
every male among you who is eight days old shall be circumcised
throughout your generations, a servant who
is born in the house or who is bought with money from any foreigner,
who is not of your descendants. A
servant
who
is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall
surely be circumcised; thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an
everlasting covenant.22
The rite of circumcision was to be
conducted exclusively by males who were descended from Avraham Avinu
upon themselves and upon all the males in their households whether
they were natural born heirs or slaves. From the text it is clear
that this rite is not limited strictly to Jews but to Arabs as well.
However, it is clearly not to be conducted by Gentiles who are
specifically non-Semites.
The death and resurrection of Messiah
Y'shua, just as it freed ha-ger from perpetual slavery within the
context of the Jewish boundary (case in point ha-eretz, the land), by
virtue of His having purchased the Gentile, has likewise eliminated
the need for the Gentile to be circumcised in order to observe
ha-Pesach and inherit equal status in the kingdom of Ha-Shem as
Jews.23
This places the new ger... the Gentile,
on a totally equal footing with the Jew. Both are free from slavery
to sin24. Both are free to enjoy unfettered fellowship
with one another and with HaShem. And all of this was accomplished
by Messiah having purchased both Jew and Gentile with His blood.
This, however, created a new dynamic
among those who might be defined as HaK'hilat HaAm HaShem (The
assembly of the people of God, or the ekklesia). As a result of this
phenomenon debate has arisen over the next two millenia. Is HaShem
through with the Jews? Are Jews and Gentiles supposed to become one
“new man” and form some sort of amalgam called the Church?
When Judaizers came to Antioch
demanding that Gentiles who had come to believe in Y'shua be
circumcised, they were arguing that Gentiles, in order to fulfill
their new found faith, had to become Jews. Yaakov and the rest of
the ziknay b'Y'rushalayim, after pouring over the scriptures and
hearing the testimonies of Shaul and Cephas with regard to their
experiences with Gentiles receiving faith in Y'shua, concluded that
the only things required of Gentiles was that they “abstain
from things
contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is
strangled and from blood”25.
These four stipulations were included among the demands upon
ha-gerim in Yisrael that we'd already looked at in Vayik'ra.
In
order to emphasize the reality of this equality before HaShem, Shaul
makes a number of assertions which can and have been historically
misunderstood. For example, he says “Circumcision is nothing, and
uncircumcision is nothing but obeying the commandments of God is
everything”.26
He also says “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor
uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is
faith working through love.” 27
Elsewhere he says “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is
neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you
are all one in Messiah Y'shua”.28
Such texts are used
by supersessionists to support their presumption that Jewishness is
no longer necessary and the church is now one giant amalgam of the
people of God. Dr. David Rudolph, in his dissertation “A Jew to
the Jews”Contours in Pauline Flexibility in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23”,
argues that Shaul's writing style must be considered. He argues that
Paul uses hyperbole. In other words saying “circumcision is
nothing” is not to be taken literally but is language common to
Shaul when he compares one thing to another It also happens to be a
very Jewish means for communicating. In other words, compared to
salvation in Y'shua, circumcision is nothing. However that doesn't
mean that it is to literally imply that it is nothing.29
Dr. Rudolph also argues that Shaul's use of the word for “one”
in Galatians 3:28 can also have a definition similar to the Hebrew
equivalent of echod.30
Also, although Dr. Rudolph refers to Shaul's mentioning “male and
female” in the same breath as “Jew or Gentile”31
in Galatians 3:28 such a phraseology, at face value, renders the
assumption that the common interpretation, namely that there is
neither Jew nor Gentile, utterly preposterous for drawing any
definitive conclusions. It is important to note that what Shaul is
saying in these texts is that before HaShem, all are equal before
Him. We are saved by the same means. HaShem's love for us is so
boundless that while each of us individually was yet a sinner,
Messiah died for us.32
The rewards and privileges that we have before G-d are all the same.
A
paradox seems to exist with regard to 1 Corinthians 7:19.
“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the
keeping of the commandments of HaShem”. This text in particular
bears mentioning. Obviously circumcision is most definitely a
command of G-d given specifically to physical descendants of Avraham
and it was to be conducted in perpetuity33.
To the Jew it is an important command. Shaul's audience, here,
however, is primarily Gentiles and he is continuously trying to
dissuade them from the temptation of being circumcised. Why is it so
important that Gentiles not be circumcised if Shaul strongly
identified, himself, as a Jew? Furthermore why did he circumcise
Timothy in Acts 16 if he wanted to discourage circumcision?
Yet,
if Shaul is to be taken at face value at least one commandment of G-d
is “nothing”...irrelevant. To the Jew how can it be nothing on
the one hand, and yet Yaakov in the Book of Acts insists that
Gentiles not be required to practice circumcision unlike the Jew who
is required to do so? And if Jews are required to do so, does that
not follow, according to traditional supersessionist exegesis that
Cepha and Shaul and Timothy and all the other Sh'lichim were, in
fact, not Christians? Nothing could be more preposterous.
It
must be understood that to the Jew, nothing is more important than
his identity as a Jew. Most Gentiles have no identity to give up in
order to establish a relationship with G-d through Y'shua. A Muslim
may give up being a Muslim but he still has a nationality to fall
back on. He might still be a Persian or an Arab. On the other hand,
many Jews are of the opinion that if they were to come to believe in
Messiah Y'shua they would give up their identity. Church history has
not failed at communicating this canard to the Jewish people. From
the 1st
Counsel of Nicea where Easter was officially established as the
replacement for Passover, to the 2nd
Counsel of Nicea where Jews who wanted to identify with their Messiah
were required to utterly denude themselves of any trappings of their
tradition or identity34
the church has blatantly insisted upon taking stances that have
served to rebuild the wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as
well as Jew and his own Messiah.
Despite
the apparent fact that being a Jew or being a Gentile “is nothing”
Paul still identified himself in more than one instance as a Jew.35
Furthermore why did
he circumcise Timothy36
and not Titus?37
There was a noticeable distinct difference between the two. Timothy
was the son of a Jewish mother. Titus was Greek. He had no Jewish
blood in him. Paul, while discussing the issue of marriage to
illustrate a point that those who are married should stay married
makes an aside statement that “those who are uncircumcised should
remain uncircumcised and those who are circumcised should remain
circumcised”38.
It
is evident that despite the reality that the body of Moshiach is “one
new man” there is, nevertheless, an imperative to maintain a
distinction between Jew and Gentile. However the existence of this
distinction is becoming less and less obvious within the
Messianic-Jewish community. Jacob Fronczak, in his essay entitled
“Jew and Gentile – Blurring the Distinction” notes that
Gentiles, in their process of attempting to live a frumer life-style
prove to be offensive to many Jewish believers by “treading on
their turf” so to speak.39
Fronczak points to two schools of thought concerning this problem.
One is held by Mark Kinzer who, based upon Matthew 23:1-3a argues
that the Am Haaretz are to adhere to the teachings of the Rabbis who
are the official interpreters of Torah.40
Fronczak
opines that if, as advocated by Kinzer, Jews establish a
separate wing of the ekklesia in which they are free to carry out
their covanental obligations as a uniquely Jewish body this would
solve the problem of distinguishing between Jew and Gentile”41
However, this would not be beneficial at all if Gentiles were
not allowed to continue to attend such congregations. Furthermore,
what is or should be acceptable rabbinically halachic practices are
still an issue fo debate.
On the other end of this spectrum is
Michael Brown who argues that “if we listen and learn well [to
Rabbinic Judaism], we will no longer have our faith!” Both
scholars have a point. It is our opinion that Rabbinic dictates have
played an invaluable role in the survival and culture of the Jewish
people throughout the Millenia. Nevertheless, they are not
haBisurah. They must be held onto loosely and especially Gentiles
who might wish to indulge to excess be discouraged.
The ekklesiology of K'hilah Dagim
Michkutz LaMayim therefore begins with a line in the sand. A Jew is
by definition, someone with at least one Jewish parent who was
accordingly raised by at least one Jewish guardian or parent. Anyone
else, by this definition, is a Gentile. One might boast of having
Jewish ancestry. One might be entirely Jewish but may have been
adopted by Gentiles. Sadly, one might yearn to thus be identified as
a Jew. A point that must be driven home at K'hilah Dagim Michkutz
LaMayim is what Rav Shaul said... “Circumcision
is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing but obeying the
commandments of God is everything.” Giving heed to this admonition
requires humility. Being Jewish, therefore, is no status to which
one ought to aspire. By so aspiring, the Gentile places this as an
idol before Moshiach. Furthermore, there is a utilitarian reason for
this which will soon be addressed.
Earlier
we made reference to ha-ger. Even as there was ha-ger in
Eretz-Yisrael at the time of Y'hoshua, HaMishpotim v HaMalachim,
there are gerim today in the Ekklesia. They are the Messianic Jews
who, repelled by excessively frumer activities particularly of
Gentiles, avoid the Messianic Synagogue in deference to the “Church”
or the synagogue where halacha may or may not be encouraged to
varying degrees (depending upon denomination) but where belief in
Y'shua is discouraged. In most Messianic Synagogues one sees
Gentiles trying to educate Jews concerning what it means to be
Jewish. Hence, a Messianic Jew walking into a Messianic Synagogue
for the first time or perhaps occasionally perceives that effort is
being made for him to feel like a guest. He is not a guest. The
Messianic Synagogue should be his home!
Now,
exactly why was this specific line in the sand chosen? First of all,
the need for the definition of the line has changed. Ezra and
Nehemiah had a line in the sand. It was based solely on lineage
irregardless of faith or relationship to HaShem. At the time of the
return from exile Ezra commanded the “sending away of non-Jewish
wives. 42 As
a result of Hellenism, changes were made to Judaism so as to enable
it to adapt it to the new world view posited by the cultural
renaissance of the time. Techniques of exegesis were employed so as
to harmonize scripture with a Hellenistic world view as much as was
possible.43
Consequently even as Hellenism sought converts, Jewishness had now
become a religion which sought it's own converts whom Ha B'rit
hadasha calls “Proselytes”. Many early Proselytes probably
became Jews simply adopting a Jewish life-style.44
Although the definition of a Jew was still relatively distinct,
Hellenism had converted it into a religion and the lines of
definition between Jew and Gentile had grown significantly less
defined. After the destruction of Beit HaMikdosh in 70 CE, the
definition of a Jew changed again. One's Jewish identity now had
become a function of one's maternal parentage. Jews stayed married
primarily within the community for the next 1500 years or so.
Persecution as well as the door being shut to the “Christian”
alternative helped to encourage this pattern. With prosperity and
religious freedom, particularly in America, came intermarriage.
Various denominations and schools of thought treated this growing
phenomenon of intermarriage in different ways. All, however, have
relied on some sort of a “conversion” in order to provide
legitimacy to the marriage as being Jewish. On the other hand, there
also is the phenomenon of the utterly secular Jew who marries a
Gentile outside of one of the accepted religious communities. By
definition, that individual is a Jew. He would probably be
universally accepted as such by every branch of Judaism. Even if he
allegedly became a Buddhist, he would still be a Jew... perhaps a
“bad Jew”, but a Jew nonetheless. Hence, apart from Hassidism,
most of the rest of the Jewish world is growing more and more hazy as
far a definition is concerned. This phenomenon might play well into
Mark Kinzer's line of thought which calls upon the more frumer and
separated lifestyle as the means by which Jewish cohesiveness can be
maintained.
Secondly,
Conversion is not an option for the Messianic community. Contrary to
the opinions of some “Messianic Rabbis”45
an individual has already done as much converting as needed when He
or she came to faith in Messiah. Furthermore, Jewishness and Judaism
is treated as if it were some sort of honor. Being Jewish is no
accomplishment. It just is. The derivation of the concept of
conversion is t'shuva which does not mean changing one's religion.
It implies repentance and turning one's life from attempting to live
as one desires to seeking to live as G-d desires. Furthermore, just
as taking on Jewish halachic practice became a fruit of Proselytizing
during the Hellenistic period, Gentiles at K'hilah Dagim Michkutz
LaMayim face the danger of exchanging their faith in Y'shua for
Judaism and it's traditions which cannot save. Also, if Y'shua's
declaration in Matthew 23:1-3a is, in fact, relevant today (It could
have been relevant only for those in Y'shua's time) that declaration
was given to Jews not to Gentiles.
Thirdly, the choice of this definition
for a line in the sand is based on history and scripture. As we've
already noted, King David was descended from Gentile women yet he was
identified strongly as a Jew. Coincidentally, even as the definition
of a Jew changed with Hellenization and the definition was to become
a genealogical tie through the mother, Shaul recognized Timothy to be
a Jew by virtue of the fact that he had a Jewish mother. Perhaps
Timothy's parents had not acknowledged this reality or thought it to
be important. Nevertheless, Shaul thought it important enough to
have Timothy circumcised. He also saw this as a witness “on
account of the Jews in the region.46 Strictly by virtue
of his birth, Timothy could rightly be circumcised whereas Titus
could not.
Finally, as alluded to in Acts 16:2,
“on account of the Jews in the area”, Timothy was circumcised.
By virtue of the fact that Judaism changes and Jewishness changes
with the ebb and flow of culture, politics, economy and the like
through history, most Jews who no longer comprise the strictly
religious community, and in fact, may have only a vague understanding
that there might be a God, cannot be rigorously defined by
Rabbinically ordained halacha. This halacha has, indeed impacted the
culture of all Jews in one way or another whether we are cognizant of
it or not. Indeed it has helped the Jew to survive history.
Nevertheless, it is not rabbinic halacha that defines the Jew. Above
all, it is his genes. Subsequently the Gentile will have a tendency
to assume to the contrary that it is Rabbinic halacha that is
decisively Jewish by definition, have little or no empathy for
authentic Jewish life and attempt to teach the Jew what it means to
be Jewish as Jacob Fronczak so
accommodatingly pointed out. This is offensive to most Jews.
On the other hand, the Jew according to our definition, has his pulse
in one way or another upon the ever-evolving Jewish culture around
him by virtue of his experience. Either he grew up in it or has at
least one parent who grew up in it who influenced him by living it.
It is this Jew who would better understand how to make liturgy
palatable for the Jew who might attend K'hilah
Dagim Michkutz LaMayim as well as the culture of the congregation as
a whole. There is great debate within the Messianic Jewish community
concerning what liturgy and observances are appropriate. This debate
is liable to continue for a long time. However, it is this Jew who
is best suited for determining that. Shaul warned Timothy about the
dangers of enlisting a “new convert” for a position of
leadership.47
Nevertheless, such a
one should be listened to. He or she is the most likely to have
their finger on the cultural pulse of the local Jewish community.
Gentiles should be willing to relinquish high profile roles for Jews
who are qualified. That doesn't mean that a Gentile can't be an
elder or preach and teach on occasion. Undoubtedly such a one has a
whole lot to contribute. But deference should be given to Jews in
those capacities. What K'hilah Dagim Michkutz LaMayim needs is
Gentiles who have the attitude of Jonathan who knew that it was not
he but David who was HaShem's anointed.
A
biblical note to support the notion of primacy of Jewish leadership
and high-profile roles, again can be found in Torah. The role of the
Kohen was determined strictly by birth. It was a desirable role
because it could be lucrative especially if one corrupted it such as
was the case with the sons of Eli.48
No one could play that role except a Kohen. Likewise the
high-profile roles within the Messianic congregation should, if at
all possible be held by Jews and Jews should determine the relevance
of specific liturgical practices. It must also be noted that liturgy
can easily be mistaken for piety and righteousness. The new believer
or the unbelieving Jewish visitor can, accordingly get the wrong
impression of what it means to have a genuine halacha with Y'shua,
mistaking religious observance for genuine mitzvotai and ts'dakah.
As
implied earlier, it is dangerous for Gentiles to engage excessively
in traditional liturgy and practice. It is incumbent upon the
leadership of the congregation to prayerfully discern, with the
feedback of the other Jews in the congregation, what is of value and
what is far-fetched. Undoubtedly this will serve as a platform for
lively debate but with prayer and a spirit of accommodation, after
the dust settles, agreement can be reached. The final product should
be modeled by the Gentile elders as examples for the Gentiles to
follow and it should take the path of a less frumer practice not more
frumer. The vision described in the next paragraph should be able to
serve as motivation for the Gentile to maintain his distinctiveness
because he need to know the importance of his distinctiveness as a
Gentile.
There's
an interesting and certainly controversial but noteworthy outcome
that results from the line in the sand proposed in this policy
statement. It more adequately falls in line with what it seems Shaul
meant by the “body of Messiah” consisting of many parts.49
Imagine, if you will, two different arteries a Jewish artery and a
Gentile artery each flowing towards a juncture in a main artery
called marriage where some unite as Jew and Gentile, having Jewish
offspring (according to our definition which has been determined
Biblically). Others unite as two Jews, likewise having Jewish
offspring. Others unite as Gentiles whose offspring remains as such.
Eventually, according to this paradigm, anyone and everyone has an
opportunity for his or her offspring to be Jewish. The identity of
the body is maintained as new Jews, with each generation assume
high-profile positions and sustenance is given to the body as Jews,
by the grace of HaShem join the fold by receiving Y'shua. Even
Gentiles will have an opportunity to kvell as they proudly look upon
their son and declare “My son the Jew”.
Pamela
Eisenbaum made an interesting point in her essay “Is Paul the
father of Mysogeny or Anti-Semitsm? She wrote:
Just as in marriage, where people
come together ritually in order to create a new family. Christ's
sacrifice inaugurated the unity of Jew and Greek. “No longer Jew or
Greek” does not, however, mean that Jew and Greek are no longer
distinct from one another, so long as the paradigm of “male and
female” operates in our reading of this text. The enactment of
marriage does not deny the essential difference between woman and
man; on the contrary, their complementarity has traditionally been
viewed as essential to the creation of the family. Marriage binds
the man and woman in a new kind of relationship that entails a
reprioritizing of loyalties so that they can build a common life.
Similarly, Jew and Gentile coming
together in harmony while remaining distinct is the goal of Paul's
mission.50
She noted that perhaps Shaul saw
his role as facilitating G-d's desire to turn mankind into a family
by which peace could be established.
While
Judaism has historically attempted to maintain purity of the Jewish
identity through essentially intra-marriage, perhaps
Messianic-Judaism, by maintaining a line in the sand concerning our
definition of the Jew, can hold onto it's unique identity which more
approximately resembles the culture of the evolving non-believing
Jewish community while including all members of its “body” as
family, literally. It is interesting to speculate that this may, in
fact, be the dynamic during the millennium. After all, Hosea said:
Yet
the number of Ha B'nay Yisrael will be like the sand of the
sea,
which cannot be measured or numbered; and in the place where it is said to them,
“You are not My people,” it will be said to them, “You are the sons of the living God.” and the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel will be gathered together, and they will appoint for themselves one leader,and they will go up from the land,
For great will be the day of Jezreel.51
which cannot be measured or numbered; and in the place where it is said to them,
“You are not My people,” it will be said to them, “You are the sons of the living God.” and the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel will be gathered together, and they will appoint for themselves one leader,and they will go up from the land,
For great will be the day of Jezreel.51
When
one is a part of a group of people that he does not merely reckon but
knows to be family, he is most certainly less likely to feel like a
fish out of water.
- “The Dawn of the Century 1900 – 1910” Faith & Fate film series, Berel Wein Destiny Series
- Philippians 2:3
- Deuteronomy 23:3
- Vayik'ra 16:29
- Vayik'ra 17:9 The theme of abstinence from idolatry is also stipulated in Lev. 20:2
- Vayik'ra 17:10
- Vayik'ra 18
- Vayik'ra 17:15
- D'varim 10:18
- Vayik'ra 25:47 ff
- Ibid
- BaMid'bar 15:14
- BaMid'bar 15:15
- Sh'mos 20:10, 23:12
- D'varim 16:1-22
- Sh'mot 12:48
- Vayik'ra 25:42
- Philemon 10-16
- 1 Corinthians 6:20. 7:23
- Galatians 5:2-3
- B'reyshis 17:10-13
- Galatians 3:28
- Romans 6:17
- Acts 15:20
- 1 Corinthians 7:19
- Galatians 5:6
- Galatians 3:28
- Rudolph, David “A Jew to the Jews – Contours in Pauline Flexibility in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23”, p.29.
- Ibid p. 31.
- Ibid p. 31.
- Romans 5:8
- B'reyshis 17:10-13
- e.g. Romans 9:2, Gal 2:15, Philippeans 3:4-6
- Acts 16:2
- Galatians 2:3
- 1 Corinthians 7:18-20
- Ibid
- Ibid
- Skarsaune, Oskar; In the Shadow of the Temple – Jewish Influences on Early Christianity, Intervarsity Press; Downers Grove, IL ; 2002. p. 39
- Ibid p. 36
- Ibid p. 40
- Acts 16:2
- 1 Tiimothy 3:6
- 1 Samuel 2:5-8
- Ephesians 2:11-16
- Eisenbaum, Pamela; Is Paul the father of Mysogeny or Anti-Semitsm?; Cross Currents Winter 2000 – 2001 p. 521
- Hosea 1:10-11
