Needing Evil in the Perfect World

Hence the paradox of our existence: perfection begets imperfection (as in Rebecca’s pregnancy), for nothing can be said to be truly perfect unless it possesses the potential for struggle, which means that it must be vulnerable to imperfection. And imperfection gives birth to perfection (as in Tamar’s pregnancy), when that vulnerability is exploited to reap the rewards of struggle and to attain the perfect twinship of pristine goodness and vanquished evil.

From Tamar's Twins
by Rabbi Yanki Tauber
Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe

My wife sent me the lesson from which I just quoted above via email and as I was reading it, I recalled something she has told me from time to time. Christianity emphasizes the fall of Adam and Eve from perfection and how the world descended into sin as a result. The fall of man is a central theme in Christian belief. We base a great deal on this understanding, including the need for a Savior to redeem mankind.

Yet, from what my wife tells me, in Judaism, there is no concept of original sin.

The article my wife sent me was based on the Lubavitcher Rebbe's teaching for this week's Torah Portion Vayeshev and the "encounter" between Judah and Tamar. The entire passage is contained in Genesis 38 so I won't recount all of the details here. However, one of the comments made by the Rebbe particularly drew my attention:

But a similar contradiction is also to be found in our sages’ remarks regarding G‑d’s creation of the world. On the one hand, we have the Midrashic statement that “the world was created fulfilled”—i.e., fully matured and lacking nothing. Yet the perfect world which G‑d created contains the potential for imperfection, even evil. Indeed, this potential is an integral part of its perfection. The Midrash, citing the verse, “And G-d looked upon all that He made and, behold, it was very good,” comments: “‘Behold it was very good’—this is the good inclination; ‘and behold it was very good’—this is the inclination for evil . . . ‘behold it was very good’—this is good fortune; ‘and behold it was very good’—this is suffering . . . ‘behold it was very good’—this is paradise; ‘and behold it was very good’—this is hell . . . ‘behold it was very good’—this is the angel of life; ‘and behold it was very good’—this is the angel of death..."

Based on this statement, in order to create a "perfect world", God had to make the world capable of containing anything, including evil. In fact, if the world couldn't allow evil by design, then it couldn't be called "perfect". A perfect world created by God required qualities such as the inclination for evil, suffering, hell, and the angel of death, despite the fact that death was not supposed to exist (at least from a Christian perspective), prior to the "fall".

I'm not saying all this to throw a serious theological monkeywrench into the machine so much as to try and understand how it is possible for Jewish talmudic thought and understanding to merge with Christian canon at this intersection. In Messianic Judaism, even in those organizations which adhere strictly to the Oral Law and that honor the wisdom of the sages, acceptance of some very Christian ideas is required. Messianic Jews, in order to be "Messianic", must believe that Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMoshiach) is the Messiah, the Son of God, and the Savior of the entire world. They must also believe in some manner and fashion, that the world is in such as state that the Messiah must come to redeem the world and the people in it.

I understand about Tikkun Olam or "repairing the world" but while there is a certain amount of overlap between the Jewish concept of the Messiah's mission to fix our planet and the Christian concept of the Savior returning to redeem the world, they aren't the same thing. Neither is the idea that the world needed to be created with the capacity for evil in order to be perfect, and the free will of man that resulted in the fall.

Perhaps some of the Messianic Jews who roam the blogosphere could stop by sometime and help clear up this seeming contradiction (and even the Lubavitcher Rebbe refers to a contradiction in one of the previous quotes).

I've already posted the link to the original source for this blog post, but I certainly invite you (if you haven't already), to read Tamar's Twins so you can get the benefit of the entire article. I'll leave you with one final quote:

Yet unlike the mixed progeny of Isaac and Rebecca’s marriage, the twin sons born out of this morally dubious union were both righteous men. Indeed, all kings of Israel, from David to Moshiach, are the issue of Tamar’s pregnancy...The whole of history is the noble and painful progress toward the resolution of this paradox, when, in the age of Moshiach, “the saviors (descendants of Tamar) shall ascend the mountain of Zion to judge the mountain of (Rebecca’s) Esau,” uniting the vulnerabilities that are born out of the perfection of G‑d’s creation with the perfection that is born out of the vulnerabilities of the human condition.

Review: The Talmud on Trial

Allow me to take this opportunity to demonstrate that the Talmud often agrees with the Gospels. Just as in all the main points of ethics there is agreement, so also both the Talmud and Gospels condemn pride, arrogance, and presumption. Consider the following concluding argument from the Talmud in regards to the above-cited quotation: -By an inspired practitioner of Judaism, I. Lichtenstein, District Rabbi at Tapio-Szele (Budapest, 1886)

I've written a couple of reviews of articles that will be appearing in the Fall 2010/5771 issue of FFOZ's Messiah Journal, including Vine of David and One Law for All but this one is different. This is no ordinary magazine article. To quote from the article's introduction:

Vine of David is pleased to present, for the first time in English, the entirety of Rabbi Lichtenstein’s 1886 publication The Talmud on Trial. Translated from the German by Kevin Hanke, with additional translation by Nikola Orlic, and Jeff Ashman. Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein originally published The Talmud on Trial in 1886, prior to publicly announcing his faith in Yeshua.

Rabbi Lichtenstein wrote this paper in response to the comments of Scottish missionary, the Reverend Alexander McCaul which, in his publication Netivot Olam, he at once praised the Old Testament and Moses and completely denigrated the Talmud. The following gives you an idea of Reverend McCaul's viewpoint:

The Oral Law is presumptuous; it confers upon itself the authority of God; it is tyrannical, gruesome, heartless to foreigners [non-Jews], it humiliates and degrades the female sex, it promotes heresy and superstition, it weakens the influence of moral obligations, it promotes and is partial to ‘outward observance,’ without feeling, without heart, without consecration, in short, without God. It gives deceptive proof-texts for its absurd assertions, which can only maintain their validity by means of one-sided, illogical arguments which have been brought out of the trash heap.

Interestingly enough, although Rabbi Lichtenstein provides a creditable defense of how the Talmud is the source of morality and ethics among observant Jews and in no small measure, reflects the teachings of Yeshua (Jesus), today among many Gentiles in the Messianic movement, the Talmud remains as poorly esteemed.

I was commenting to someone today in an email how Gentiles in the Messianic movement by and large still conceptualize God, Yeshua, the Bible, and their faith in fundamentally Christian terms and in those terms, the Talmud doesn't make a great deal of sense. It becomes at least a puzzle if not a stumbling block as to why many Messianic Jews continue to cling to the Talmudic teachings when they are extra-Biblical and don't speak of Yeshua. Yet we Gentiles may be missing the point because we don't have the benefit of a Jewish education or growing up ethnically, culturally, and spiritually Jewish.

My wife (who is Jewish) tried to explain it to me and I chronicled her explanation, based on a class she attended that was taught by the local Chabad Rabbi, in a blog post called What Did Jesus Change: Ritual? It's a bit of a long read, but it's the best I can do to try to explain to a Gentile Messianic and Christian audience how Jews see the Talmud differently than we do. Of course, I only have my perspective to go on so you'll have to take it for what it's worth.

We also tend to neglect what the Talmud says directly about Gentiles. Fortunately, I blogged on that topic, too.

In about fifteen pages, Rabbi Lichtenstein tries to explain to his Christian audience how the Talmud functions in the life of every observant Jew, how it acts as a clarifier of the Words of God and a pointer to the Heart of the Almighty. You'll have to read the entire article to really get Rabbi Lichtenstein's point and fortunately, the issue of Messiah Journal containing this paper comes out in about a week.

You might ask yourself why a Gentile Christian/Messianic audience should care about the Talmud and its relevance to the teachings of Yeshua and his disciples? Hopefully part of the answer is in the question itself but beyond that, if you truly want to solve the mystery of why so many (but not all) Jewish Messianics consider Talmud study and a Talmudic lifestyle a "must", Rabbi Lichtenstein's defense should give you a clue.

If you're interested in more on the Lichtenstein article, the Gathering Sparks blog has a short commentary. To discover more about the contents of the soon to be published Fall issue of Messiah Journal including additional reviews, visit the FFOZ blog.

Oh. At the beginning of this blog post, I quoted a small portion of Rabbi Lichtenstein's commentary regarding the relationship between the Talmud and the words of the Master. Here's the rest:

Whoever humbles himself, he will be lifted up by the Holy One, blessed be he; but whoever lifts himself up arrogantly in pride, he will be abased by the Holy One, blessed be he. Whoever covets positions of honor, from him honor retreats. Whoever shuns a position of honor, a position of honor pursues that one. Whoever tries to go against the “spirit of the times” (Zeitgeist), the current of time will oppose him; he will be pulverized by the flywheel of time. But whoever takes into account present-day conditions will find that time actually, regularly assists him and proves to be to his advantage. (b.Eruvin 13b)

Struggle

After taking them across the stream, he sent across all his possessions. Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn. When he saw that he had not prevailed against him, he wrenched Jacob's hip at its socket, so that the socket of his hip was strained as he wrestled with him. Then he said, "Let me go, for dawn is breaking." But he answered, "I will not let you go, unless you bless me." Said the other, "What is your name?" He replied, "Jacob." Said he, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with beings divine and human, and have prevailed." Jacob asked, "Pray tell me your name." But he said, "You must not ask my name!" And he took leave of him there. -Genesis 32:24-30 (JPS Tanakh)

Torah portion Vayishlah is traditionally read on this coming Shabbat and it recounts the very famous event of Jacob wrestling with "the Divine". We are left to question whether Jacob (or Israel) wrestled with an angel or actually with God or, as some in the Messianic movement theorize, with a "pre-incarnate Yeshua" (Jesus). We don't know. The question has been tossed about for centuries by the wise sages and while opinions flourish, no definite answer has come forth. More than the identity of Jacob's mysterious opponent though, I want to know how it's possible for a human being to enter into combat with a supernatural being...and win?

For years I had struggled with the theology of Catholicism, a theology which emphasizes belief. Once I seriously questioned that belief, the roots of my faith were shattered. Though I was taught that deeds were important, the stress was on having faith, on "believing in" something, even though or perhaps especially because it evaded all reason. In Judaism, by contrast, it is the emphasis on action, on righteous behavior that I find so attractive. The allowance, sometimes encouragement, of questions concerning belief, God, and truth is such a welcome relief. One can be religious and question; in fact, it is one's duty to question. Once I had learned that Israel meant "to struggle with God", I felt my destiny at hand.
-by Lydia Kukoff in her book
Choosing Judaism

I woke up in the middle of the night last night trying to outline this blog in my imagination. I'm teaching specifically on Jacob's struggle tomorrow at my congregation, but at 3 o'clock this morning, I realized that I'm undergoing a struggle like Jacob's on a daily basis. I'm undergoing this struggle every time I post an article on this blog. I'm undergoing this struggle every time I try to reconcile all of the different comments by all of the different contributors here and on other blogs in the Messianic realm. What does it all mean and how can I be a part of it? Is there really a place for a child of the nations in the Kingdom of God? Some say "only in the Gentile Christian church" while others insist "the Torah is for everyone." Everyone believes they are telling the truth, but who is actually right?

In my search for personal answers to my faith, perhaps Jacob (and by inference, God) is trying to tell me the answers aren't as important as the struggle. Yes, Jacob's "wrestling match" ended with a definite conclusion and the course of his life was set as Israel from that moment on, but he still had to struggle. It wasn't just handed to him and indeed, he carried a scar (or in his case, a limp) as a reminder of the struggle for the rest of his days.

Struggling with my faith and trying to carve some niche for myself in the Kingdom has left its fair share of scars. Others seem to experience nothing but sheer joy in their faith, but neither do they ask questions. They just accept. Quoting Lydia Kukoff, Judaism isn't a faith of answers but of questions and struggles and while I make no claim to Judaism, my Messiah and Master is Jewish. Seeing through that lens, it may be that it's the struggle itself that defines each person's faith.

Adam was the direct handiwork of G-d. No other human being could ever be as magnificent. Yet he had only one temptation to resist and he gave in. Which teaches us that the greatest challenges in life are those that are closest to your purpose of being. To the point that if you wish to know your central purpose in life, you need only look at where your greatest challenges are. -Rabbi Tzvi Freeman

My wife forwarded an email containing this quote to me a few days ago. I suspect she was trying to tell me something about me and about us (since she's a non-Messianic Jew). I found another quote in Kukoff's book that I also think is relevant, though I'm not sure exactly how yet.

The Torah was given in public for all to see, in the open. For if it had been given in the Land of Israel, Israel would have said to the nations of the world, you have no share in it; Therefore, the Torah was given in the wilderness, in public, for all to see, in the open, and everyone who wishes to receive it, let them come and receive it. -from the Midrash

I sometimes want to give up this entire path because of the struggle, because of the lack of unity, because of the constant bickering and debate, but the battle of Jacob with the Divine Being in Vayishlah reminds me that the walk of faith isn't always a gentle stroll through a leafy glade...it's sometimes running as fast as you can, balancing on the edge of a razor blade, trying not to fall and trying not to bleed. Of course, you get cut...and there are scars.

Seven Steps to Jewish Living for Non-Jews

Yahnatan just put a link in a twitter post to an article written by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach for the Jerusalem Post called No Holds Barred: Non-Jews as the Saviors of Judaism. I've read of Rabbi Boteach's suggestions previously in one of his books and while I don't see him getting a lot of support in the Orthodox Jewish community, his comments could have a unique (and for all I know, unintended) affect on the Gentiles in the Messianic Jewish movement. This is especially so given the topic of Rabbi Boteach's soon-to-be-published book:

For the past six years I have been working on a book, to be published shortly, on a new understanding of Jesus as prophet rather than deity, based exclusively on the New Testament. The real story of Jesus as teacher of traditional Jewish spirituality to his disciples lies explicitly in the text. I have lectured Christian audiences about rediscovering the uniquely Jewish Jesus as a way of deepening their spiritual understanding of Christianity and stripping it of any acquired pagan coating. The response has been overwhelming.

Wow! I bet it has. The interesting thing, and I wonder how the church will truly accept this, is that Rabbi Boteach speaks of "Judaizers" as the answer to saving Judaism. Normally, churches speak of "Judaizers" in very negative terms as if they're "trying to bring us under the Law" (egad). I also wonder what combined Judaism thinks of this?

Two thousand years ago a still mysterious man named Saul of Tarsus saw that the ideas and values behind Judaism were so breathtaking that they could change the world, if only they could be stripped of their ritual demands and be mixed with a human deity who was more accessible than Judaism’s invisible God. Thus, from the foundations of Jewish spirituality Christianity, and later Islam, was born. The time has come for the original progenitors of the ideas to offer the world the original source, not by converting non-Jews to Judaism but by reviving an ancient “associate” status that allows them to live lives deeply influenced by Jewish spiritually and values while retaining their own identity.

Many years ago, I heard a Jewish (non-Messianic) woman refer to Jesus as "a nice Jewish boy", but she had nothing good to say about that "traitor" Paul, who twisted the teachings of Jesus into another religion (i.e. Christianity). In both Christianity and Judaism, it's generally agreed that Paul threw away his Jewishness and converted to the Christian religion, which he more or less invented (the latter is more of a Jewish viewpoint from what I understand). Rabbi Boteach starts from a similar foundation, but reframes Paul's actions in a much more positive light.

Rabbi Boteach outlines seven steps Gentiles would go through to incorporate Judaism in their lives and you can find these in the source news article (hence the title of this blog post). Is this so different from what Messianic Judaism proposes relative to the Gentiles in their midst? It's not about converting Gentiles to Judaism, it's about integrating the rest of the world into the values given to the Jews by God.

Since Yahnatan brought this up on twitter but hasn't yet blogged about it, I thought I'd take it upon myself to start the conversation in the Messianic blogosphere. I think it's a subject worth tossing about. First read the Jerusalem Post article and then come back here and comment.

Let the games begin.

One Torah to Rule Them All

In Messiah everyone is in equal standing before God as regards salvation, but we all have our individual responsibilities. There is only one Torah for all of God’s people, but within that one Torah are many different distinctions. Once we understand that the Torah itself makes these distinctions, it becomes easier for us to grasp the words of the apostles, because, after all, it is the Torah from which they themselves are drawing.

Toby Janicki
Article: One Law for All
Messiah Journal 105/ Fall 2010 Edition

Recently, Boaz Michael of First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ) asked me to review some of the material in the latest edition of Messiah Journal. I wrote the first review on my congregation's blog addressing Boaz's letter about the FFOZ sister organization Vine of David, but the topic of Toby Janicki's One Law for All article seemed better suited for my personal blog. It's here where I am more at liberty to express my personal opinions on the issues that unite and separate Gentiles and Jews in the Messianic movement.

One Law for All is, as you might imagine, FFOZ's commentary on the traditional assumption among many Gentile Messianic groups that all of the Torah commandments which apply to the Jews apply also to Gentile believers by virtue of our being "grafted in" (Romans 11). Actually, the more common argument from the Gentile Messianic point of view has to do with the "ger" issue; the set of apparent statements in the Torah that say "one law" shall apply to the native born Israeli and the ger ("stranger", "alien", "sojourner") among you. The following is just one example:

For the generations to come, whenever a foreigner or anyone else living among you presents a food offering as an aroma pleasing to the LORD, they must do exactly as you do. The community is to have the same rules for you and for the foreigner residing among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the foreigner shall be the same before the LORD: The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you -Numbers 15:14-16

Early in the article, I thought Janicki was going to step into the classic argument presented in traditional (that is, non-Messianic) Judaism stating that only the seven Noahide Laws apply to Gentile believers in Yeshua, as if Yeshua never existed, never taught, and never considered Gentiles in his teachings (let alone the teachings in the letters of Paul). Fortunately, he only starts out there.

Janicki expands his investigation into the use of the term "ger" using many examples (too many for me to cite in this review) showing the distinctions between how some of the various Torah commandments apply to the Jews and the Gentiles who lived among them in ancient times. He also very neatly integrates what FFOZ has called "divine invitation" (though he never mentions the term) into his narrative by illustrating how some of the Torah commandments are required by the Children of Israel but allowed by any Gentile who desires to comply. To illustrate this, let's look at a slightly different translation of the above quoted passage from Numbers:

And if a stranger is sojourning with you, or anyone is living permanently among you, and he wishes to offer a food offering, with a pleasing aroma to the LORD, he shall do as you do. For the assembly, there shall be one statute [chukkah achat] for you and for the stranger [ger] who sojourns with you, a statute forever throughout your generations. You and the sojourner [ger] shall be alike before the LORD. One law [torah achat] and one rule [mishpat echad] shall be for you and for the stranger [ger] who sojourns with you. -Numbers 15:14-16

The quote used in Janicki's article brings out a bit more clearly the distinction in this particular command between the obligation of the Jews to make such an offering and the acceptance (but not requirement) of the same offering from a Gentile temporary visitor or permanent "alien" resident. What Janicki doesn't state but I believe to be true, is that the distinction between "ger" and native Israeli persisted until either the ger left the community of Israel or completely assimilated (see Rahab, Ruth, and the mixed multitude who followed Moses out of Egypt) and finally became indistinguishable from the the Children of Jacob (See Who Belongs to the Covenant? below).

As a whole, I found Janicki's article to be well researched, easy to read, and straightforward in its approach. To go further, I agree that you can't base the Gentile Messianic "One Law assumption" on the set of "ger" quotes in the Torah. I previously wrote an analysis of this issue on my congregation's blog called Who Belongs to the Covenant? If you read my commentary and then review Janicki's article in Messiah Journal, you see that there is significant overlap in our viewpoints. That said, where I state in my article how the coming of Yeshua changed the landscape for the Gentiles, Janicki concludes with the following:

With this understanding we can approach Apostolic passages such as, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments” (1 John 5:3), and “Neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God” (1 Corinthians 7:19). These passages were written to communities that contained both Jews and Gentiles. Each person hearing these words would have understood “commandments” as referring to the specific parts of Torah that applied to them as a Jew or Gentile and man or woman.

Janicki's, and thus FFOZ's conclusion is that what was established as the relationship between Jew and Gentile relative to God and the commandments in the Torah remains completely unchanged post-Messianic times and that only a tiny subset of Biblical commandments have any sort of application to Gentile believers. This would be the identical subset of Torah commandments established in the time of Moses and, from Janicki's perspective, be completely unmodified by the coming of Yeshua.

While I can agree with the vast majority of what Janicki says, he fails to acknowledge that the coming of the Messiah had any sort of impact on the change in status for Gentiles who have come to faith in the Jewish Messiah. It's as if we continue to remain "strangers" and "aliens" in the kingdom of God, like rogue asteroids or comets temporarily captured by the sun's gravity and always in danger of being cast away again into the darkness, as opposed to the more stable planetary (Children of Israel) bodies in permanent residence within the solar system. But what about this?

I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me - just as the Father knows me and I know the Father - and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life - only to take it up again. -John 10:14-16

Surely you have heard about the administration of God’s grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets. This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus. -Ephesians 3:2-6

The passages from John 10 and Ephesians 3 are repeatedly cited by Gentile Messianics when we try to establish that we do have a place in the Kingdom of God where we can stand alongside our Jewish brothers and sisters, however, they are never addressed in articles such as Janicki's, which primarily seek to establish areas of distinctions between Gentiles and Jews rather than create links or build bridges between our two groups.

I don't mean to say that Janicki's intent was hostile or divisive in any sense. There is nothing in the wording or tone of his article to suggest that he is attempting to marginalize Gentile believers in the Messiah in any way. His intent seems completely focused on clearing up how the "one law" passages in the Torah don't automatically mean Gentiles are obligated to Torah commandments in a manner identical (or even vaguely resembling) to the Jewish people. It's important to understand though, that the "ger" issue doesn't encompass the entire scope of Gentile status as the adopted offspring of God, and does not at all cover the things that Yeshua's coming changed as far how Gentiles can enter the kingdom.

I spent some time going over what Yeshua taught in the book of Matthew and collected a summary of my conclusions in the article What Did Jesus Teach the Gentiles to Obey? While there is additional exploration required in this area, but I do believe that there's more to the Gentile relationship to God and the commandments than can be accounted for by a hard look at the "ger" scriptures in the Torah.

I really like Janicki's article and recommend it as a very clear picture of how the "ger" and "one law" passages in the Torah can not be relied upon to establish Gentile "obligation" to Torah commandments, but please keep in mind that the scope of Janicki's analysis begins and ends within the "ger" topic. Relative to Yeshua, there is much more to discover about Gentile identity within the Messianic realm.

Do I believe that Gentile and Jewish obligation and observance of the Torah is different? Absolutely. Is the matter completely defined and settled within the confines of Janicki's article? Not at all. Janicki only settles (assuming you agree with all his conclusions) one aspect of the puzzle. There are many more jigsaw pieces to examine and construct before the entire picture becomes apparent. I hope this is a journey both Jewish and Gentile believers can undertake together.

Black sheep author signing off for now.

Alongside

If you've been reading this blog for any length of time, you know one of the central themes I write about (harp on) is the apparent disparity and disunity between Jews and Gentiles in the Messianic movement. Half the time I'm told it's the Gentiles' fault for trying to usurp practices that are exclusively Jewish and so on and so forth. I'm not even sure there is another half of the time, which doesn't make things any easier. Trying to figure out what this relationship is supposed to be, particularly from God's point of view (let alone all of the human beings who have an opinion) gives me a headache and right now, I have a beaut.

However Dr Michael Schiffman has been kind enough to comment on my one of the blog posts I wrote for my congregation's blog and recently, he responded to a comment made by another reader that went like this:

".. there is nothing wrong with gentles coming alongside Jewish brethren and learning Torah. Part off Torah talks about the Jewish people (Israel) being set apart from the nations. When the nations start saying they are the same as us, it negates God’s intent that Israel be a separate nation with a separate unique calling. Its not a judgement against Gentiles, just acknowledging Israel’s unique calling. It is not that anyone is better than anyone else. One new Man does not mean we are the same. Its nothing personal, I assure you. I know many Gentiles get offended by that, but there is no intent to offend. I’m sure that was not God’s intent in Torah either."

I know that many Gentile Messianics and some Jewish Messianics may take exception to Dr Schiffman's explanation, but it was just about the most straightforward and clear description of Jews and Gentiles in the Messianic community that I've ever heard...well, ever read, anyway. Usually these discussions are charged with so much emotion that it's hard to get a simple and clear answer out of anyone regarding how we're supposed to interact and get along (or even if we are supposed to get along). However you want to take it, I thought that there was something to this coming alongside comment that should be shared.

What may chafe the Gentiles in the movement is that the definition of "alongside" refers to being "parallel" and "close by one side", which sounds pretty good, but it's not the same as being "equal". I think the lack of equality in the relationship is usually interpreted as "Gentiles are inferior", but that doesn't seem to be what Dr Schiffman is saying. You can have a man and a woman alongside each other, they can be equal in that they have equal worth as people and equal worth before God, but they certainly aren't the exact same beings. Maybe this is what Paul was trying to describe here:

So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. -Galatians 3:26-29

I don't know if that's supposed to be the whole answer, but it's a start. I know. It seems like we should be a lot further along than just at the starting line, but starting down the path, even if we're starting over and over again, is better than not walking the path together at all.

Two of the Master's sheep in the sheep pen walking side-by-side. One black and one white. It's a start.

What Do Sheep Want?

I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ." -1 Corinthians 1:10-12

It seems like Paul was dealing with issues in the Messianic community (i.e. "the Church") in much the manner as we are dealing with divisions in the Messianic community today. While we can all, at least in principle, follow the same Messiah and worship the same God, how we understand what that means and how we operationalize that worship can be radically different.

I suppose today Paul might have said something like, One of you says, “I follow Billy Graham”; another, “I follow the Pope”; another, “I follow the UMJC”; still another, “I follow Christ.” That kind of puts things in perspective, though I'm sure many of you will think I'm being unfair. The way I read it though, today, just as in Paul's day, we create divisions where they may not need to exist. Certainly Paul wasn't in favor of such divisions:

Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. -1 Corinthians 1:13-17

Is the Messiah Yeshua divided? Paul didn't think so, yet we seem to be subdividing him all over the place. Every time a church splits, every time a denomination fractures and forms its own group, every time the Messianic or One Law/One Torah or Two House communities stand apart from their fellows, we split off part of the Messiah and drag him with us down the path our particular interpretation of the Bible. I thought we were supposed to be following him, not the other way around. What are we looking for?

Where is the wise person? Where is the Torah teacher? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. -1 Corinthians 1:20-25

If the Messiah is the power of God and the wisdom of God and we all follow the Messiah, why aren't we "wiser" than we are (as opposed to a bunch of "wise guys")? Paul went on to say:

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. -1 Corinthians 1:27-29

If this is true, why do we boast about our "wisdom", our identity, and our titles all the time, both in the Messianic blogosphere and before God? To counter that attitude in himself (even though Paul was well educated and positioned), he said "For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling". (1 Corinthians 2:2-3). This isn't to say Paul didn't have a tendency to occasionally pontificate, but much of his overarching message as recorded in his letters was not one of division and self-aggrandizement but one of unity and humility. What divides us isn't in the message of Paul nor is it from the Spirit of God.

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for,
“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”
But we have the mind of Christ. -1 Corinthians 2:14-16

I'm as guilty of relying on my own "wisdom" as the next guy, but Paul reminds me, and reminds us all, that "we don't know jack" without the Spirit of God to guide us into having the mind of the Messiah.

Of course, there has been more than one person in the community of faith who has claimed some special relationship with God and a few of these folks have called themselves "prophets". On that basis, they claim the Spirit of God has given them special "revelation" not covered in the Bible (and many times contradicting the Bible), and thus cults are born. Yet many more of us simply claim that we're smart enough to know better, that our interpretation of the Bible is the "right" one, and that our interpretation nullifies everyone else's understanding. In that, I think each and every expression of Christian and Messianic worship has been found guilty from time to time.

In 1 Corinthians Chapter 3, Paul calls Apollos and himself (and by inference, all other disciples and teachers of the Messiah) only servants and co-workers in God's service. Could Paul have meant that both Jewish and Gentile disciples were (and are) "co-workers", with one worker planting the seed and the next worker watering it, and so on? Are we really in this together?

I've heard from more than one person that some people are repelled from us rather than drawn to us because of our divisions and bickering. What are we doing driving people away from Him? If we all serve the Messiah as we claim, why aren't our fruits good and our actions appealing?

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. -1 Corinthians 3:10-13

The foundation of our faith was laid by the only one with the power and right to lay that stone: the Messiah. What we choose to build on it, for good or for ill, is our own decision. Regardless of how pleased and satisfied we may feel about the "coolness" of what we've constructed, a day will come when fire will descend and reveal the true nature of our work.