FROM THE MIND OF A CHRISTIAN JEW #4— DIFFICULT PASSAGES

 

From the Mind of a Christian Jew #4

Difficult Passages

by Daniel Juster (1986) DIFFICULT PASSAGES Jewish life is a glorious call that witnesses to great truths about God. By being loyal to his heritage a Jew maximizes the opportunity to share his faith with other loyal Jews who would otherwise dismiss it out of hand. As I Corinthians 9 states, "To the Jews I become as a Jew, in order to win Jews, to those under the law I became as one under the law ... that I might win those under the law" (v.20). However there are several passages which are used by some to refute this position. It is to these passages that we turn now. I CORINTHIANS 9:19-21 At first glance, these verses would seem to support Messianic Jewish conclusions. However, there are interpreters who find in these verses two phrases which are a source of anti-Messianic Jewish viewpoints. We quote the passage in its entirety. "To the Jews I become as a Jew, in order to win the Jews, to those under the law I become as one under the law though not being myself under the law - that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law - not being without law toward God, but under the law of Christ - that I might win those outside the law." We should first note that Paul here establishes a valid principle for sharing the Good News. That is, we are to have a loving indentification with those whom we seek to win. Clearly, the Messianic Jew is heartened by the clear statement that one may practice the Law, "I become as one under the law." One reason for the practice of the heritage, but certainly not the sole reason, is loving identification with those we seek to win. Two other phrases bring various interpretations: "though not being myself under the law" - by some is taken to mean that the Mosaic revelation with its standards and practices no longer has any meaning to the life of the believer. Rather, the believer is now under the "law of Christ," not the Law of Moses. The "law of Christ" is variously explained as loving God and our neighbor or as all of the New Testament commands. However, there are problems with this view. First, the command to love God and our neighbor (in Mark 12 and the other Gospels) is a quotation from Torah. Some say that when the New Testament quotes Torah, it becomes part of the "law of Christ" but otherwise has no force over us. This view is certainly "forced." When the New Testament quotes Torah, it does so because it is Scripture. This settles the issue. (Note Ephesians 6:1 ff.) I Corinthians 9:8 says, "Do I say this on human authority; does not the law say the same?" It is clear that Paul, by example and other teaching (II Timothy 3:16) taught the valid inspiration and authority of the Torah. The law against incest is not in the New Testament. Therefore, can we say that since incest is not quoted in the "law of Christ" it is permissible? No, of course not! The same is the case with just weights and measures. The author believes that the phrase "law of Christ" is a synonym for "law of the Spirit" found in Romans 8:1. When we are in the Spirit, we are no longer under the Law as a fearful taskmaster, hoping to gain eternal life by our works. Our essential and central content of faith is the love of God, the atonement in Yeshua and the power of the Spirit. This produces a new approach to Scripture whereby the Spirit places God's desires upon our hearts as well as empowers us to perform God's will. The reading of Scripture is a primary means for the Spirit to give us a depth of conviction and power. This all occurs on the basis of an intimate fellowship with God rather than a rote maintenance of a code which seems external to us. Yet it is the very Torah which the Spirit will use to "instruct" in God's ways and to "train in righteousness' (2 Timothy 3:16; Ezekiel 36; Jeremiah 31). However, none of God's eternal standards are invalidated; all are made part of the Covenant relationship of walking in the Spirit. Furthermore, Paul seeks to present himself and the Gospel in such a way that there will be no stumbling blocks to his listeners' acceptance of the Good News. Gentiles were not required to take on the call of national Israel. This does not mean that Paul ceased to be a Jew in Gentile settings, but he certainly did not make his Jewishness so prominent that it would blunt the Gospel. When Paul says in v.22, "to the weak I became weak," he does not mean that he literally gave up his courage, faith and strength. It means he identified with the weak in such a way that his presentation of the Gospel would meet them where they were. The "law of Christ" does not replace Torah, but is a principle of approach to all of Scripture in the power of the atonement and the Spirit. This is the meaning of not to be under the Law as a system of righteousness. This passage is perfectly exemplified by Paul's life and practice in the Book of Acts. Of special significance is the fact that the Apostle to the Gentiles, because of his Jewish identity, never ceased to care for his people and his heritage. Though called to Gentile ministry, he lived as a Jew. If this be the case, how can Jewish followers of Yeshua, who believe themselves called to Israel, live in ways that befit non-Jews? We do not seek to bring anyone into bondage; all must be done in the Spirit. However, the example of all the apostles, even Paul the Apostle to the Gentiles, properly causes us to believe that those who are negative to the Jewish biblical heritage have not heard the Spirit in regard to these questions. (AND SO WE HAVE THE TRUTH AND PRINCIPLE THAT JESUS UPHELD, WE ARE TO LIVE BY EVERY WORD THAT COMES FROM THE MOUTH OF GOD - MAT.4:4. HOW DO WE DO THIS, FOR WE ARE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT NOT THE OLD COVENANT? THERE IS A STUDY ON THIS BLOG YOU NEED TO STUDY - CALLED - "LIVING BY EVERY WORD OF GOD - HOW?" I HAVE RECENTLY UP LOADED IT. Keith Hunt) PASSAGES IN GALATIANS We will not repeat the basic discussion of passages in Galatians already covered in the Section on the Judaizers in the chapters on the "Books of Acts and Messianic Judaism" and "Paul, Israel and the Law." The reader should turn to these chapters for more information on Law and Grace and the Judaizing controversy. We do recall for the reader that: (1) Galatians was written before the Acts 15 decision on Gentile freedom in the Gospel; and (2) the Judaizers were a group which taught that a person who is uncircumcised must follow the law of Moses to be saved. Their view thoroughly invalidated the Gospel of salvation by grace through faith. (3) Furthermore, to the Judaizer, the Gentile was unclean and could not be eaten with unless he was circumcised and followed the Law. Table fellowship, the proof of the spiritual equality of Jew and Gentile, in the Messiah was to them impossible. We should note that the Book of Galatians does not address the issue of Jewish followers of Yeshua maintaining their Jewish practice and identity. This is not even in view; Alan Cole states that Galatians does not at all preclude such Jewish practice and identity but that its principle of freedom in Messiah fully allows for the possibility. The question of Jewish practice in Yeshua must be settled by those passages which speak to it; the Book of Acts, etc; the testimony of history concerning Apostolic practice and identity, and the whole drift of Scriptural teaching on Israel. Once again, in all of the discussion on the Law in Galatians, we must remember that Paul does not demean the Law as a standard of God. Rather, with the advent of the Messiah, all is done in His power and under the inspiration of His Spirit. We approach the Law as "adults," not as children who have rules set over them due to their immaturity, hence, the analogy of the schoolmaster and the Law before Messiah. In Messiah, we are sons of God's kingdom and not under the Law as a custodian, but under the power of the Spirit as sons who follow by inspiration and reason, not rote. Having given these general comments we turn to these specifics: GALATIANS 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek ... for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Colossians 3:11-parallel). It is sad that we even have to respond to the use of this verse as a proof-text against Messianic Judaism. Incredibly, the answer would be obvious if the whole verse was quoted. The left out portion is "there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female." Paul is not saying that all distinctions between men and women have been obliterated! This would lead to the end of marriages and families. In what sense is there neither male nor female, then? It is defined in vv 26, and 29 - "In the Messiah, Yeshua, you are all children of God, through faith ... And if you are Messiah's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." Men and women are exactly one in this, that they are equally children of God and spiritually of equal significance. In no way does God envision men bearing children or an end to all the wonderful joys that the male/female distinction brings to life as a result of His creation order. Men and women have different callings in life, though they are one in Messiah. It is precisely the same with Jew and non-Jew in the Messiah. Both may be called to different styles of life and witness, to different fields of service, yet they are spiritually one in the Messiah. The oneness spoken of does not lead to a dullness of all peoples, nations and races becoming the same in speech, manner, dress, mission and style. What a horribly boring world that would be! It would be like a symphony orchestra composed of all violins! God's unity is a symphonic unity, blending all together under the head conductor, the Messiah. Oneness in the Messiah leaves ample room for varieties of life and calling, especially in regards to Jew and non-Jew. Note as well, non-Jews are called (in v.29) not spiritual Israel, but the offspring of Abraham by faith. EPHESIANS 2:14 "For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility." Messianic Jews, on the basis of this passage, are often accused of re-erecting the "wall of partition" between Jew and Gentile. It is charged that because Jews maintain their Jewish/biblical heritage, they become distinct from other believers, hence re-erecting the wall. The wall of partition does not refer to a difference of practice and lifestyle by which Jews and non-Jews may be distinguished. It rather refers to practices which precluded table-fellowship between Jew and Gentile and produced hostility. Gentiles were then pagans, idolators. According to biblical Law, contact with unclean meats precluded on the food lists of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, contact with blood and with death made a person unclean. Uncleanness precluded visiting the Temple for a specified period of time, one to seven days. Since it was impossible to know if a Gentile had such contact, the oral tradition of Judaism concluded that contact with Gentiles made one unclean. The solution for the religious was to avoid all contact with Gentiles. In Yeshua, however, the Gentile is no longer a pagan or unclean (Acts 10). Both Jew and the non-Jew are spiritually one in Yeshua. The non-Jewish believers are given a charge to avoid those things which would be especially abhorrent to Jewish believers (Acts 15). Now in Yeshua, Jew and Gentile accept one another and have table fellowship, prayer and praise together! This does not imply, however, that they are to have identical calling and lifestyles. As J.H. Yoder argues, the wall has to do with acceptance and table fellowship which was such a crucial demonstration of acceptance. The rejection of fellowship implied that the other person was not spiritually acceptable. The wall of partition is not a wall of distinctions, but a wall of hostility as Ephesians 2:14 clearly states. Now in the light of this, let's quote the whole of the passage from 2:13-16, "But now in Messiah Yeshua you who were once far off have been brought near in the blood of Messiah. For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end."  The commands and ordinances are not necessarily intrinsically Torah, but the oral extensions of these laws made Gentiles unclean and contact with Gentiles something to avoid. As well, it would abolish commands precluding a Jew worshiping in the most intimate way with a Gentile since the Gentile, in Yeshua, is no longer an idolatrous sinner, but has been cleansed by the cross. In the Messiah, a universal body of believers of Jew and Gentile is formed. This does not preclude a Jew's special calling - for he is both part of the universal body and the nation of Israel. It does not preclude the instruction of Torah (II Timothy 3:16-17). It is crucial here to note that a Messianic Jewish congregation is a New Covenant congregation in which Jews and non-Jews fellowship together in oneness. Each have equal privilege in Yeshua. However, the style of worship is Jewish and Jewish members are encouraged in their identity and calling. Because there is mutual acceptance rather than seeking to press one another into preconceived molds, true love can flourish. The greatest proof of an end to the wall of hostility is the Messianic congregation where Jews and non-Jewsin significant proportions - worship together. In a non-Jewish congregational setting where a lone Jew has lost his practice and identity there is little testimony of this truth. However, there is a place for Jewish segments of predominantly nonJewish congregations which maintain their Jewish involvement in the present and future through their children. A Messianic Jewish congregation is just one kind of expression of the universal body of the Messiah! (An interesting take on this part of Paul's writings, and not without merit. But it is not technically the correct answer. There was a literal wall in the Temple with a sign on it that stated NO Gentile was to pass beyond that point, on pain of death. This wall was a division between Jew and Gentile (prosolite Gentile). It was a man-made commandment and ordinance. Paul is here teaching that in Christ ALL such man-made commandments were abolished. There was now no division at all between Jew and Gentile - all were on the same platform, on the same level, on the same plank - no one was above or below another - all were equal on the salvation stage - Keith Hunt) GALATIANS 4:8-10 Verses 9-10, in particular, speak of this - "You observe days, and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I have labored over you in vain." The obvious conclusion drawn by the foe of Messianic Judaism is that Paul here is against anyone observing Jewish holidays. However, what were the special months and years referred to in Judaism? They are not found in Scripture, except for the seventh sabbatical year when slaves were freed and the land was given beneficial rest. Once again, the context of preceding verses is essential. According to what we know of the region of Galatia historically, Paul is writing to predominantly non-Jewish people. He says, "Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you want to be once more. You observe days, and months and seasons and years; I am afraid I have labored over you in vain" Galatians 4:10-11. The full context has prompted many commentators to hold that Paul here is not speaking of Jewish biblical celebrations. There must have been another problem in Galatia, it is thought. This problem is acknowledged to be connected with astrology. It is also known that heretical groups existed which connected some of the Jewish holidays to astrology and superstition. Paul could not be speaking of celebrations given by God as putting people under the bondage of evil spirits! Nor could he be speaking of Jewish holidays in saying that they, a non-Jewish group, are turning back to weak and beggardly elemental spirits. Apparently, what Paul refers to is a drift into superstition connected to special years, days and seasons - akin to astrology. This is a bondage, for during such days, some actions are safe and others are unsafe, some endeavors are to be undertaken and will be especially fruitful, while others are especially dangerous. This actually brings bondage to evil spirits. There may have been a perverted Jewish content added to some of this. Certainly, in the light of this background, this passage has nothing to say against Jewish people celebrating God's grace in their history through feasts of Israel. There is no superstition connected to this and no bondage to evil spirits! Again, Paul's example in life shows the critics of Messianic Judaism to be misinterpreting this passage, ignoring not only the historical context, but the very words of the whole passage itself. We might also note that Derek Prince in a taped message quotes this passage in regard to astrology. He notes that the wording recalls Deuteronomy 18:10-14 in speaking against astrology as. "observing seasons." II Kings also says in a context of astrology that Manasseh "observed times" or seasons (II Kings 21:6). (The writer is close to the truth, and certainly has merit in his explanation. The key is, yes, Paul is addressing Gentiles here, but certainly ones who had not know the true God, had worshipped and lived a life of following man-made gods, who were really no gods. Now they had come to know the true God, but were after knowing Him, going BACK AGAIN to their old gods and ways of worshipping their old gods, with pagan days, months, years, and etc. I ask the reader to take a little time on the Internet and find out where January 1st came from - beginning the year in the middle of winter. Where did starting the day at 12 midnight come from? Where did Christ-mass come from? Where did Easter come from? Where did Halloween come from? Where did the Roman calendar come from? Where did observance of the First day of the week come from? Ah yes, after a little study, think you'll get what was going on here with many of the Galatians. They were GOING BACK AGAIN to old pagan ways. This section has nothing to do with God's days and Festivals which cannot be called "weak" or "beggarly" - Keith Hunt) SARAH AND HAGAR-GALATIANS 4:21-31 There is a very unusual allegory given whereby Paul states that Hagar and her son, Ishmael, parallel the Covenant from Mount Sinai representing children who are slaves. This, says Paul, stands for the present city of Jerusalem. However, there is a Jerusalem above that is free. It is this Jerusalem who is our mother. We are like Isaac, children of the promise and like Isaac - who was born by the Spirit - we are persecuted by the son born of the flesh. Sarah's words are then quoted: "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son" (Galatians 4:30). The conclusion is that we, as followers of Yeshua, are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. The whole allegory is given to enlighten those who desire to be under the law of works righteousness - that is, those who have accepted the theology of the Judaizers. This is a very difficult passage of Scripture to interpret. We do not know the exact nature of the situation in which Paul would respond with such an unparalled analogy. This passage should definitely be understood in the light of the clearer, straightforward passages, such as those in the books of Romans and Acts. A quick reading of this passage has caused some to conclude that Jews who follow their calling are under bondage and are slaves; they should therefore give up all Jewish practice and identity. This, however, cannot be the meaning of this text, for several reasons. It was not the example of Paul in the Book of Acts, nor the import of his teaching in the Book of Romans on the value of being a Jew. Next, Isaac is the son of promise according to the analogy. He was the one given the promise of blessing, land and nationhood from his father Abraham. Because Isaac is the son of promise and the product of miraculous birth, Jews exist today. Paul, therefore, cannot be saying that being a Jew is a slave-type bondage. The contrast is not at all about being called to Jewishness, but is rather a contrast between flesh and spirit. Paul is contrasting the spirit, promise, and faith to the flesh and a fleshly understanding of the Law. Abraham was given the promise of many descendants, a great nation through which all the world would be blessed. He believed God, but Sarah was barren. Hence he sought to bring about God's promise by human fleshly (ordinary) means. In the ancient Near East, if a man's wife was barren, she could give him her maidservant. The children born to the servant would count as their own. Hence, Abraham would have descendants; human means would be used to secure the promise of God. However, this was contrary to God's way of working. Abraham was to have the son of promise miraculously - by his own wife - by the power of the Spirit. The Judaizers also sought to use human means to fulfill God's divine purposes. Keeping the Law by human effort, they contended, would bring salvation. Indeed, they taught that Gentiles must accept circumcision (become Jews) and keep the Law of Moses to be saved. Human works would produce the salvation of God. How similar to Abraham's use of human work in producing Ishmael by Hagar. The approach of the Judaizers to the Sinai covenant is tantamount to slavery and parallel to the slave woman and her child. Those who seek justification before God by their own good works will find only greater condemnation, and even bondage to sin (Romans 7:8). Only dependence on the grace and promise of God will bring true freedom and deliverance. Hence, although the Judaizers in the flesh are sons of Isaac, they act more like sons of the slave woman, Hagar. They are acting in the flesh and do not give a true testimony to the meaning of God's promises to Abraham's descendants. In fact, they are like the then-present state of Jerusalem - in bondage to Roman occupation - rather than the future Jerusalem of promise to be brought about by the power of God's Spirit. The slave does not inherit the promises of God, but remains in bondage to the way of human works. There is nothing in this passage to suggest that fulfilling the God-given call to be part of the nation of Israel is, itself, bondage. Both Jew and Gentile are children of promise - like Isaac - when they approach God by faith unto salvaton. However, in the leading of the Spirit, both may indeed have a difference of calling and lifestyle. The Jew who follows the way of the Spirit may sense a love for his nation and a call to witness to God's purposes in it. The non-Jew may take a different path. Paul had no arugment with a Jew expressing his faith by identity with the calling of Israel, and he expected both Jew and Gentile to reflect the moral dimensions of the Law in the life of faith. His quarrel was with legalists who sought to bring non-Jews forcibly into the role of Israel by their teaching that no salvation was otherwise possible. They showed themselves to have completely misunderstood the "Good News."  Why would Paul use such a difficult analogy to make this point? We cannot know for sure; but we are comfortable in that the above exposition is acceptable to the evidence of Scripture. Perhaps the best suggestion was given by R.N. Longnecker, who held that Paul was probably responding to an analogy that the Judaizers used. They would have been teaching that non-Jews must become Jews and adopt the whole of the Sinai revelation and Jewish practice in order to be children of the promise. Otherwise, they would be castoffs, like Hagar and her child, Ishmael. Paul thus uses this argument to turn the tables on his opponents, holding that they show themselves to be akin to the slave status of Hagar and Ismael by their legalistic bondage-producing teaching. (The writer is very close to the truth and in the overall is correct. Paul contrasts those who were teaching that justification and salvation could be realized by keeping the Old Covenant without Christ, and the New Covenant of promise and faith, which is the true freedom through Christ, that God the Father had always given as to the way it would be for the forgiveness of sins and being saved into eternal life. I fully expound the book of Galations IN MANY STUDIES - Keith Hunt) THE BOOK OF HEBREWS - CENTRAL CHAPTERS For Messianic Jews, the Book of Hebrews is a truly wonderful book. It presents the greatness of God's revelation in Yeshua in an unparalleled way, revealing Him as Prophet, King and - most of all - High Priest. The middle chapters of the book bring out the dimensions of the work of Yeshua as priest and sacrifice, primarily by contrasting His work with the priesthood and sacrificial system which foreshadowed and pointed toward His redeeming work. Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, in which the High Priest entered the holiest part of the Tabernacle and sprinkled blood upon the ark for the nation's sin, is the central Holy Day emphasized here. In its sacrificial dimensions, Yom Kippur is the great pointer to Yeshua's work.  Why then is Hebrews listed among difficult passages? It is because there exists an interpretation of the book which is anti-Messianic Jewish. This interpretation is not in accord with the biblical context or history, yet it has gained popularity. The view teaches that Hebrews precludes following the calendar of Judaism and any identity with Israel's feasts and festivals, because all of these things have been replaced by a New Covenant that does away with the Law. Chapter eight is the central chapter for this discussion. For we read: "The ministry Yeshua has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is a mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. For if there had been nothing wrong with the first covenant, no place would have been sought for another" (8:6-7). The writer then goes on to quote Jeremiah 31:31-34, which gives the promise of the new Covenant and says, "By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear" (8:13). A critic of Messianic Judaism thus draws the conclusion that all dimensions of Jewish identity and practice are part of what is obsolete and should be forsaken. Furthermore, we are even accused of making the blood of Messiah of no effect and spurning His sacrifice when we remember our national origins in the Exodus by celebrating Passover! "It is impossible for those who have been once enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the Word of God and the powers of this coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace" (Hebrews 6:4-6). How this interpretation can be fairly gleaned from these passages without great violence to the context is paradoxical. Let us respond as follows.   If this is the true interpretation of Hebrews, all first-century Jewish believers (including Paul and the other apostles) would have been guilty of these horrible sins. Yet these apostles are our examples. The problem of Hebrews for Messianic Judaism dissolves when we take the time to carefully read just what is being said to whom!  Recent studies have shown - by language parallels and emphases - that the Book of Hebrews was probably written by a group of Essene Jewish followers of Yeshua. The book emphasizes the Tabernacle in the wilderness instead of the fixed Temple which was built later. All its imagery and teaching on sacrifices is related to the Tabernacle. The Qumran community (an Essene-like community) held the Temple and its present priesthood to be greatly corrupt. They therefore expounded the sacrificial system dimension of Scripture in relation to the Tabernacle, even though the Temple was then the scene of these rituals ... and the Tabernacle did not exist. Qumran also emphasized the Melchizedekian Priesthood in their teachings. Moreover, Qumran rejected the then present priesthood as illegitimate since they were not de scended from Zadok. Hence it is now becoming a generally accepted view that the Book of Hebrews was addressed to a group of Essene - like Jewish followers of Yeshua, of which there were probably many in the first century. They were in danger of giving up their faith in the work of Yeshua and returning to the hopes of the Essenes who did not follow Him. They would hence be depending upon Essene ritual for salvation and the hope of the reestablishment of a true priesthood which parelleled the purity of the period when Israel worshipped and sacrificed at the ancient Tabernacle which anteceded the Temple. The emphasis was then on the Mosaic sacrificial system purified, as the way of bringing the power of God to Israel and deliverance from the hands of oppressors. It is thought that in this time of national crisis - perhaps during the Roman invasion of Israel to quell the rebellion of 66-70 CE - that the Jewish believers in Yeshua here addressed were forsaking their faith and in danger of returning completely to Essenean- type beliefs. By doing this, they would spurn the Gospel and crucify the Son of God afresh. It was not by remaining Jewish that they did this. This is why there is such exhortation in the face of grevious trial (12:7-13). (A fanciful idea the author gives. The truth is simply much simpler. Paul wrote the book of Hebrews to Christians, mainly Jewish Christians, but certainly Gentile Christians would be educated and informed and corrected in matters where correction was needed. It covers important aspects of the Messiah; the Temple; Priesthood past and one under the New Covenant; it covers "tithing" and sacrifices of the Temple; it is also a needed "Jewish" type epistle as the Temple and Priesthood and Sacrifices would shortly come to an end - with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Roman armies in 70 AD - Keith Hunt) The essence of argument of the book is to not place our hopes in ritual or in a purified human priesthood because in Yeshua we have a better sacrifice, a better priesthood and a better Covenant. There is no statement to the effect that we have a better Law, for, as we have seen, the New Covenant promise is to write God's Law, statutes, and ordinances upon our hearts (Ezekiel 36:27). Further attention to the Book of Hebrews shows that what is referred to as being "obsolete" is the whole Temple-priestly, sacrificial system. Indeed the word obsolete is literally in "process of vanishing" in the original. Paragraph after paragraph emphasizes the limitations of the blood of bulls and goats and the repeated ministrations of the priesthood. The writer to the Hebrews emphasizes that the Mosaic Covenant, as a Covenant, is essentially connected to this system - which is vanishing. The New Covenant replaces this Covenant because of the weaknesses inherent in that old system which was given only for a time to point to the sacrificial-priestly work of Yeshua. We have stated clearly that we believe the Abrahamic Covenant with Israel is still in effect (Romans 11:29). We have also argued that the Mosaic Covenant, as a Covenant, is no longer in full effect and that God has sovereignly removed the possibility of following this Covenant by allowing the Temple to be destroyed. Hence, as a Covenant by which we gain entrance into the presence of God, this Covenant is superseded. Note that the writer of Hebrews is clearly referring to the Mosaic Covenant and emphasizing its priestly-sacrificial dimensions when he states that it, as a Covenant, is vanishing (see all of Chapter 8). (The reader should note that "obsolete" is not the correct translation from the Greek.) The suspension of the sacrifical system is thought by many to have reference only to this age of the Temple's suspension and that a re-establishment of the Temple system will occur in the Millenium, under the Messiah. However, as the Temple system in ancient times pointed forward in anticipation of Messiah's work, so it will point back in the future. The sacrifices also exemplified dedication and thanksgiving (see J. Walvoord, The Millenial Kingdom). However, this would not be the same Temple system as before (see Ezekiel 40-48.) This does not mean that the Mosaic writings are not Scripture, profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and training in righteousness (see II Timothy 3:16). Nor does it mean that these documents (Torah) cannot give guidance to a Jewish calling and identity which transcends the sacrificial-priestly system. The feasts, for example, are the national celebrations of Israel and exist because of God's promise to make of Abraham a great nation. They celebrate God's acts of grace to Israel. Although recorded in Mosaic writings, they are essentially connected to the Abrahamic Covenant, a Covenant of faith and promise still in effect.... The Book of Hebrews is one of the most "Jewish" books every written! By its specific emphasis, it shows the meaning of Yeshua in a most Jewish way. Because it only emphasizes the obsolescence of the Temple-sacrificial system and not of Israel and its national life, and because it appeals to the great heroes of Jewish history as the major example and spur to faith, it is a book which certainly supports a Messianic Jewish calling. II CORINTHIANS 3:7-18 "Now if the dispensation of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such splendor that the Israelites could not look at the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to fade away, should not the dispensation of the Spirit be attended with greater splendor? For if there was splendor in the dispensation of comdemnation, the dispensation of righteousness must far exceed it in splendor. Indeed, in this case, what once had splendor has come to have no splendor at all, because of the splendor that surpasses it. For if what faded away came with splendor, what is permanent must have much more splendor. Since we have such a hope, we are very bold, not like Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not see the end of the fading splendor. But their minds were hardened; for to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Messiah is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds; but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is removed. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit." This chapter provides us with several unusual statements. Here a contrast is made between the New and Old Covenants. We should note that the references contrasting the New Covenant relate not to the Tenach or the Old Covenant Scriptures as a whole, nor even the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy), but only the Covenant which Moses received from God. There is no contrast with the Abrahamic Covenant, for example, in Genesis 12-17. Of this Mosaic Covenant received from Sinai we read these descriptive words: "The written code kills," "the dispensation of death," "dispensation of condemnation." In contrast the New Covenant is called the "dispensation of the spirit" and the "dispensation of righteousness." Indeed, the New Covenant is compared to the old as one which has greater splendor and permanence while the old is fading away. A superficial reading of this passage causes some to reach very popular untenable conclusions. A reading in the light of the whole context of Pauline theology, however, gives an understanding that is both rich and consistent. Among the untenable conclusions reached by some are that: (1) We should have nothing to do with the content of Torah, since its content produces spiritual death; (2) A Jew who accepts Yeshua, but practices his heritage of feast and nationhood, seeks to remain under a dispenstion of death rather than fully embracing the new dispensation of life in the spirit. The first conclusion is utterly false. Need we again quote II Timothy 3:16-17, "All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, etc." The psalmist says "the law of the Lord is perfect, giving life to the soul" (Psalm 19:7). Is Scripture contradictory? Does what brings life in Psalm 19 bring death in II Corinthians 3? Obviously not. Paul clearly says of the Law that God gave as part of His revelation, "So the law is holy and the commandment is holy and just and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure! We know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin" (Romans 7:12-13). This passage gives the solution to false interpretations which despise Torah. When Paul called the Mosaic Covenant the dispensation of death, it was not because of its inherent nature. It was rather because of what people made of the Torah by their approach to it. Because humans are sinful, they approached Torah as a system of works-righteousness and falsely sought to earn God's favor by their own merits. Although the Law is a guide under the leading of the Spirit of God, when used as a written code to be followed in our own fleshly power, it condemns. For by the Law's high standard, we all stand condemned (Romans 3:23). So as to not face this condemnation, a person becomes a rationalizer of his faults and becomes self-righteous. Yet Scripture says God dwells with those who are of a contrite and humble heart (Isaiah 57:15). Hence, an approach to the Law with this self-righteous attitude served to separate people from God, producing a dispensation of death. The Mosaic revelation itself was not a dispensation of death; but man's approach to it produced this legalistic period. Even the foremost 16th century Christian theologian, John Calvin, said of this passage, "there are some rash teachers who hold we should throw out the tablets of the law calling the law a dispensation of death." He responded "Perish this wicked thought from our minds." The issue is not whether the Torah is used for guidance, teaching and correction (II Timothy 3:16, 17) but, rather, the attitude of approach. Approached with dependence upon God's mercy, the Law, as Psalm 19 says, gives life to the soul. What of the contrast between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant in terms of glory? The Mosaic Covenant of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy was glorious. However, the New Covenant - which outstrips it in power - has much greater glory! It is by the light of the New Covenant that we see, once and for all, the end of all self-righteousness. As man gazes at Yeshua hanging on the tree, all pretensions to merit-by-works are utterly stripped away. The New Covenant replaces the Mosaic as the way of entrance into the presence of God and providing a new way of approach to God by the sacrifice of Yeshua, which replaces the sacrifices of the Mosaic revelation central to it. The splendor of Yeshua's personal revelation makes the other revelation fade in comparison. It does not provide a new Law, but rather the power to do the Law in Him. In that covenant we are accepted as perfectly righteous before God and are privileged to enter boldy unto the throne of Grace. Hence, the Mosaic mediation system of priest and sacrifice is superseded. Nothing in this passage, however, removes the gift and call of God to Jewish followers of Yeshua, which Paul calls (in Romans 11:29) "irrevocable." The apostles' example in maintaining their heritage is clear. Some years after this passage was written, Paul testified that he lived in observance of the Laws and customs (Acts 27 ). He was not contradicting his own writing. The call of a Jew to the purposes of Israel is a result of God's everlasting covenant with Abraham. Jewish national practices rooted in Torah primarily celebrate the fulfillment by God of those promises. (Yes Paul lived according to the Bible, God's word, just as Jesus taught us to do - Mat.4:4. Hence the laws that needed to be caried over into the New Covenant were so done, and Paul could claim he lived according to the Law - the Word of God, not the false ideas and traditions of Judaism, but God's true word. And Paul taught it was not wrong to do physical rites of the Temple and physical circumcision, IFyou SO DESIRED, but the physical rites and physical circumcision was not needed for justification and salvation. SOME ONE probably heard Paul say, "temple rites           and physical circumcision are not required for salvation," and did not hear the            context and so immediately told others Paul rejects the Temple and all its rites.           Paul did not reject them, and at times did them, even taking a nazarite vow one           time. The difference with Paul and some others was they taught them as part          way to salvation; Paul taught no such things.            - Keith Hunt) In every practice we see Yeshua's meaning and light over all. The message of this passage is parallel to that of Hebrews, as delineated above. For it is now by the Spirit and His conviction that we are guided to do God's will and follow His call with the Scriptures as our resource. This is freedom indeed. In this walk we are transformed step-by-step into the likeness of the Messiah (II Corinthians 3:18). ALL FOODS DECLARED CLEAN - MARK 7:19 (ACTS 10) This passage is usually quoted to imply the end of any relevance for the food laws of Leviticus 11, and to give evidence that all practices rooted in Torah (Genesis--Deuteronomy) are also to be eliminated. Messianic Jews have various interpretations of the food lists contained in Leviticus 11. Their approaches seek an understanding of the purposes of the lists. Some hold that these laws are related to the symbolic meaning of animals as not fitting a concept of wholeness, or because they feed on carrion, and are thus too tied to the death and decay (symbols) resulting from sin for proper usage. Others hold that these laws have definite health value and are still valid today. Some hold that such laws of clean and unclean only penalized a person by precluding them from Temple worship for a day or a week, etc. Hence, without a Temple system, these laws lose direct relevance for those who are in Yeshua. Others hold that these laws have continuing validity in keeping Jews a distinctly-called people through being unique in what they eat. Chapter VII will give this writer's perspective on these laws. However, the issue of food laws must be settled in the light of their purpose. We must also take into consideration the elimination of the Temple system by the work of Yeshua. The phrase in Mark has little bearing on the issue. A careful reading of the passage in context proves that the passage does not eliminate the distinctions of Leviticus. In chapter seven, Yeshua was criticized because His disciples ate without following the prescribed hand washing ritual by the tradition of the Pharisees. According to tradition, this made the food unclean. Yeshua's response was first a criticism of the tradition which set aside the commands of God by interpreting them in such a way that the actual command in its intent is disobeyed! Yeshua taught that the more important issue of clean and unclean is not foods or rituals of washing, but the nature of one's heart attitude. Real spiritual defilement does not depend upon what goes into a man and passes out, but relates to the spiritual heart of the person, which, when corrupt, is the source of sin (evil) thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, etc. Yeshua did not directly teach at this time that the food laws or the Biblical heritage of Jews was then at an end. Indeed the statement, "Jesus declared all foods clean" may be a scribal addition, as noted in English versions by brackets. We cannot be sure that it comes from Mark himself. Let us assume that it does. If so, it does not say, as often misquoted, that "all things are clean" but that all foods are clean. A "food" would be defined as that which was listed as acceptable in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy. Hence the passage may only mean that foods not ritually treated according to the non-biblical Pharisaic tradition are yet acceptable for eating. When we turn to the parallel of Matthew 15, this becomes almost certain - for Yeshua there concludes, "Eating with unwashed hands does not make a man unclean." The issue clearly is the clean and unclean nature of foods in regard to ceremonial washing. Pork would not be considered a food. Certainly, poisonous plants are not options for our eating. "You shall not test the Lord your God" would apply to the foolishness of eating poisonous foods knowingly and expecting God's protection. Some hold that the unclean foods of Leviticus 11 possess such dangers in more limited degrees. However we may interpret the above Scripture, an application of the biblical kosher laws is not determinable on the basis of this passage alone. The passage gives no weight to a generalized conclusion that all celebrations of the Jewish biblical heritage are now to be eliminated. MATTHEW 6:7 "And in praying do not heap up empty phrases (vain repetitions) as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words." Jewish worship, even in the time of Yeshua, was liturgical in part. The word liturgy does not connote a dangerous practice to avoid. Liturgy simply is an order of prayers and readings that are written or orally memorized and repeated as part of worship. The Psalms, for example, are liturgical. Jewish prayers - some of which go back to the time of Yeshua--primarily weave Biblical verses, promises, and teachings together and put them into prayer form so that Scripture will be prayed into one's life and the life of the community. Spontaneous prayer, memorized prayers and Biblical passages are all integral to worship that is pleasing to our Father in Spirit and truth (John 4:24). The problem, as indicated, is simply this: Messianic Jews have adopted some of the great prayers of Judaism which are biblical in content. Despite the fact that such material is biblical, Messianic Jews are accused of engaging in vain repetition which is contrary to the Spirit. To such accusers, only worship that is made up "on the spot," spontaneously is of the Spirit. These folks do not recognize that such a view would actually eliminate their choruses and hymns as well. But since music makes these forms more enjoyable to them, they are accepted. A hymn is a prayer sung to God; and there is no reason why a spoken prayer may not be as spiritual as a hymn sung. The accusation of "vain repetition" comes because the prayer may be repeated daily or weekly, as well as from the allegation that such prayers are not as emotionally moving to some people as musically-sung choruses and hymns. The interpretation of this passage in some quarters arises from a contemporary cultural prejudice against form, and is, itself, fraught with difficulties. What is Yeshua saying in Matthew 6t--He was first teaching His disciples not to pray like Gentiles or pagans. The charact- eristic of pagan religion He probably had in mind was its magical-legalistic character. Pagans envisioned that if they said a phrase over and over it would produce certain definite results. The prayer could be babbled over and over without any meaning or thought, but as a magical way of manipulating the gods or nature. This was thought to be of value.  Yeshua's point is that when we pray, we are coming before our personal heavenly Father. Hence our prayer must be given consciously as a heart-intended offering to Him of praise, or a heart-intended request of intercession. If the prayer is written or memorized, it should be said with thought so that we will mean it! We must make it our own through our heart attitude. If the prayer is spontaneous, the same holds true. How vain are the repetitions of those socalled spontaneous prayers that are babbled out without thought or heart-intention! Imagine coming before a person and saying Hallelujah over and over again as fast as you can, without putting your heart and mind behind it! Yet some who criticize us for praying a Psalm do just this and are themselves guilty of vain repetition. They do not direct their hearts to God, but are emotionally "psyching themsleves up" through fast repetition. To cap the argument, Yeshua goes on to teach the apostles a simple memorized prayer that can be said with meaning and used with other prayers. This prayer is in mnemonic form, as can be seen in modern translations that put it into poetical form. Furthermore, the prayer is parallel in its content to the ancient Jewish prayer known as the Kaddish which Yeshua probably prayed in the synagogue: Yeshua's prayer Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven. Kaddish Glorified and sanctified be God's great name in the world which he created according to his will. May he establish his kingdom during the days of your life and all the house of Israel. The importance of heart-intention is crucial to infusing repeated prayers and Psalms with meaning. It is also crucial in keeping spontaneous prayer from degenerating into stereotypical phrases and cliches that have no meaning. The rabbis called such heart-intention 'kavanah,' and taught that without it, all prayers are vain! The best teachers of worship have always caught that both spontaneous prayer and repeated content are important to a balanced worship; Repeated content teaches us how to pray scripturally by making scriptural content the center of our prayer so our heart's desire is God's own desire. Spontaneous prayer then is enriched by biblical content and brings a freshness to the liturgy of worship. All worship should be offered to our God who is present, a real person before whom we bring offerings of praise and intercession. The issue, should not be primarily our boredom, but God's (Malachi 2:1). We know from God's directives for worship in Tarah that He enjoined acts of worship which precisely repeated daily, weekly and annually. He, also delighted Himself in spontaneous acts of praise and prayer. Problems for worship are not only matters of style, but issues of whether or not our spirit is open to the inspiration of the Spirit in all acts of worship so our love and imagination soar toward God! "God is a Spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). COLOSSIANS 2:16-23 "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Messiah. Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions. He has lost connection with the Head, from whom the whole body, supported and held together by its ligaments and sinews, grows as God causes it to grow. Since you died with Messiah to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 'Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!'? These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility, and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence." This passage is somewhat obscured by the fact that we do not know the circumstances to which it was addressed. Some quote the passage, however, as proof against celebrating Jewish festivals. Yet, the passage is far more complex, for the situation evidently reflected not only those who were judgmental in regard to Jewish observances but who also worshipped angels (v.18), "practiced asceticism" in a harsh treatment of the body (v.23), and were involved in superstitions of not touching or tasting. These superstitions involved participation in the "elemental spirits" of the universe which are demons. All of his is called "philosophy and empty deceit according to the elemental spirits of the universe." But it is clearly not speaking about Biblical Judaism,  This has prompted most scholars who are students of the passage to hold that Paul was not addressing a group of Jews who were in the mainstream of Judaism, but one of those heretical Jewish groups (or even superstitious Judaized non-Jews) who were influenced by pagan superstition and seeking to teach their doctrine at Colosse. Hence Paul could enjoin the Colossians not to be brought under judgment by those who would enforce Jewish observance on them. The very ones who are doing such mischief are engaged in superstition. Jewish observances point to Yeshua, the substance of the faith which they already have. Therefore it is not incumbent on them to be forced into these practices. At the same time, Paul enjoins them to avoid clearly pagan practices connected to the disarmed "principalities and powers," a phrase which is usually taken to refer to the most powerful of demonic rulers. Paul would never call the content of Torah human commands and teachings. Clearly, what is in mind is not the call of a Jew to maintain his celebration of God's gracious work in the history of Israel and the world. Rather, it is the imposition of such practices on non-Jews that is forbidden, as well as the whole quasi-magical superstition present at Colosse. (THE AUTHOR IS PART CORRECT, BUT FAILS TO SEE PAUL IS NOT DIVIDING HERE THE JEWISH CHRISTIANS FROM GENTILE CHRISTIANS. PAUL IS TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT APPLY TO CHRISTIAN JEW OR GENTILE - Keith Hunt) Paul does not contradict his own practice, as recorded in Acts. The passage says nothing negative to a Jew who, in light of the whole of biblical history, senses a call of God's Spirit to remain part of his people and to celebrate God's faithfulness to Israel through the festivals which are now used to extol salvation in Yeshua. God has faithfully preserved the Jewish people according to His Covenant, and the Messianic Jew is a unique witness to the Covenant-keeping God, which gives confidence to all people of God's faithfulness. As a witness to his own people as well, his involvement in the concerns of the Jewish community - as well as in the biblical heritage - is necessary if the love of the Messiah is to be demonstrated. Only then is the truth heralded that "God has not forsaken his people" (Romans 11). Israel is a unique people with a unique Biblical- cultural life. So far as it is consistent with Scripture, the Messianic Jew will be involved in identification with Israel - on every possible level. He should not shirk the work involved, for the Spirit can strengthen him to every good work. God did not spend 2000 years creating a context for understanding the gospel only to destroy the context of understanding. (THIS EXPLANATION BY THE AUTHOR IS VERY POOR IN ADDRESSING THE  REAL ISSUE HERE FACING THE CHRISTIAN - BOTH JEW AND GENTILE  CHRISTIANS. I HAVE DEVOTED AN ENTIRE STUDY TO EXPOUND THIS  PASSAGE, IT IS CALLED "COLOSSIANS 2:16 — DOES IT ABOLISH   HE FEASTS OF GOD?" Keith Hunt)  TITUS 3:9 "But avoid foolish controversies and geneologies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are not profitable and are useless." Paul here speaks of divisive people who will not submit themselves to spiritual authority. They are contentious, always looking for arguments, and, therefore dangerous. The phrase semetimes cited against Messianic Jud to avoid "quarrels about the Law." This is taken to mean that we are to avoid the Law or any discussoin of its meaning or purpose since the Law has no relevance for us. How false is this view in the light of II Timothy 3:16 and 17, which call "all Scripture profitable" and II Timothy 2:15, which calls us to diligence in studying, to correctly handle "the Word of truth." To have a sincere concern to understand the meaning and purpose of the Law in the light of all Scripture is clearly a God-given mandate. This is indeed a major theme of Romans 2-8. Paul is not contradicting his own concern to understand "God's holy, just, good and spiritual law" (Romans 7) in the light of God's purpose for it. Quarrels and controversies we are to avoid; but those who are anti-Law also engender such quarrels and are similarly to be avoided as "lawless men." SUMMARY We have sought to explain many of the passages that are used by the critics of Messianic Judaism. Our summary of these passages - in light of all the evidence of Scripture supports rather than detracts from Messianic Jewish conclusions. Often the naive follower of Yeshua will find an erstwhile opponent stringing these passages together out o f context. He is then shaken by the seeming weight these passages carry in contradiction of Messianic Judaism. However, we could just as easily string together pro-Messianic Jewish passages. The problem is that prejudice and pre-conceived conceptions have caused the very picking and choosing of these passages. Bias illicitly uses Scripture for its own purposes. When all of the passages are seen in the light of the whole teaching of Scripture, in the context of the situation to which each passage was addressed, the problems dissolve. The Messianic Jewish understanding can then be seen to be that which is in accord with Scripture. May this chapter strengthen faith in the marvelous consistency and wisdom in the revelation of God. It is principle that when Scripture seems to speak against the Law, it is generally speaking of the misuse of the Law as a means of gaining merit for salvation by works-righteousness or depending upon the Law for our relationship with God. Our obedience is rather the response of love produced by God's Spirit in us. .......... To be continued