This past week, I posted a semi-response to an article that we were directed to by a visitor to this blog. Essentially, the Messianic Jews were advocating that Christ came merely to teach us the Law, and was equal to that of Moses. As I explored their site a bit more, I discovered this post. It began,
We have no other King, Savior, or Redeemer than HaShem. If one does not believe this, then they are not Jewish, and an idolater according to the Talmud. The Messiah is the King, Savior, and Redeemer of Israel. If one does not believe this, and does not expect his coming, then you have no share in the World to Come according to the RaMBaM. If one rebels against the Messiah, he will not forgive that person, according to the Torah.
And end with this:
We have no other King, Savior, or Redeemer than HaShem. This article will continue to expand this very basic Torah concept. So far we have examined that Messiah is the promised seed, and that mankind either calls upon or profanes his name, the Torah uniquely identifying the seed as “HaShem.” We also have examined that Messiah, according to the Torah, is quite literally the pillar that Jacob anointed, called the “Beit El” – House of God. In future versions of this article we will ask the Torah to show us how Messiah is the Word of HaShem, and the Angel of HaShem – the agent of HaShem who carries out his will on the earth. Stay tuned.
(I would encourage you to read the entire article.) As we debated, I kept coming back to the above article because something didn’t sit well with me. So, I asked, ‘Is Jesus Christ God’?
They answered,
Messiah is like Joseph, Moses, and King David. He is the Davar HaShem (Word of the LORD), the Beit El (House of God), the King, Redeemer, and Savior of Israel (and we have no other King, Savior, or Redeemer than HaShem). He is the fullness of the godhead dwelling in bodily form. To say “Christ is fully God,” though ideologically correct (since I understand what you mean by it), it is an overly simplistic, and dogmatic – a statement that HaShem in his divine wisdom never sought to spell out of us in such precise terms (whereas I know many human beings who would love to add that one in for Him). Such a simplistic position derails our focus of him being the agent of HaShem that carries out His will, diminishes the very nature of his being the “seed” of the woman of Gen 3:15, and brings us dangerously close to idolatry – a position for which Judaism at large is right to condemn once that line is crossed.
Can you tell the difference of what was said and what we would say?
And then, they say:
There is no punctuation in the Greek manuscripts. “God and Savior” can just as easily be “God, and Savior.” Perhaps you would have a case if the Greek word for word translation read “Our God Jesus Christ” but there is a Greek participle kai, meaning “and,” between “God” and “Savior Jesus Christ,” which could indicate separation (and this seems to be the case contextually and historically to Judaism as well). Judaism recognizes the appearance of God, and the appearance of the salvation of God separately. This is also true according to John. But it is not my intent to hijack your post here into a discussion on how the scriptures instructs us how to approach the divinity of Messiah.
Then, of course, they equate Christology with Mormonism, and
Since we know the Torah does not allow for God (Eloheim) to be a man (Num 23:19), then either Paul is contradicting Torah when he says “God and Savior Jesus,” or is communicating a concept found within Torah “God, and Savior Messiah” – just as we know the Torah does not allow for anyone claiming to be the Messiah to be a homosexual (or any other sinner for that matter).
And all I can say is,
Your attitude should be the same that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in human form. And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal’s death on a cross. Because of this, God raised him up to the heights of heaven and gave him a name that is above every other name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.(Philippians 2:5-11 NLT)
The bible is clear that Christ is not merely an angelic intermediary or a mere man, but He is the Son of God, God Himself in human flesh, the Word of God become Man. This is what happens when we remove Christ from our view and go after strange gods and false doctrines, ignoring the doctrine of the Church.
But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:3 NKJV)
Now, I of course would give them the chance to correct themselves – did I miss something?
Friends, if you or your congregation is flirting with Messianic Judaism, please, let it go. Paul spent a good bit of his time battling the distraction of the Law, trying to turn the eyes of the Saints to Christ and Christ alone.
Joel L. Watts holds a Masters of Arts from United Theological Seminary with a focus in literary and rhetorical criticism of the New Testament. His interests include exploring the role of mimesis in human civilization, specifically in the study of religion and media, as well as science fiction and the way in which it has allowed mythology to be explored in light of scientific discoveries of the past century. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013) and a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013).
Website: → Unsettled Christianity
Connect
Just to clarify, their view of “Christology” does not match most of Messianic Judaism. The view of my covering organization, the Coalition of Torah Observant Messianic Congregations, as expressed in our Statement of Faith:
2. Hear, O Israel: YHVH [the L-RD, the Most High] is our Elohim. He is One. He alone is ADONAI (Deuteronomy 6:4 & Isaiah 43:10-11). He is the Creator of heaven and earth, of all living beings, and of everything both visible and invisible (Genesis 1:1, Colossians 1:15-17). Although He is limitless in power, authority, time, matter, and space, He has chosen, in His infinite wisdom, to reveal His nature to humanity in perceivable and comprehendible manners. Scripture records G-d revealing Himself in the following manners: as fire (covenant with Avraham between the two halves of the cow; Genesis 15:17), as the form of a man not born of a woman, (when He approached Avraham with the two angels; Genesis 18), as a burning bush (spoke to Moshe; Exodus 3:2), as the fourth Man in the furnace, (Daniel 3:25), as the promised Messiah being a Man made of flesh and born of a woman (Isaiah 7:14, Galatians 4:4). Although there are numerous examples of G-d revealing Himself to humanity in various ways and forms, of those ways and forms, He has chosen to refer to Himself in the following primary contexts: as the Father (HaAv), as the Son (HaBen) Y’shua, and as the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit/Breath). What makes these primary contexts important is not only the fact that G-d used these forms to reveal Himself to humanity, but in doing so, He refers to Himself in these primary contexts as the one and only true and living G-d.
As I word it, more pithily, we believe in One God, Who manifests Himself in the universe in three primary manifestations: Father, Son (named Yeshua), and the Shekinah (referred to in Greek as “Holy Spirit”).
Just to clarify, their view of “Christology” does not match most of Messianic Judaism. The view of my covering organization, the Coalition of Torah Observant Messianic Congregations, as expressed in our Statement of Faith:
2. Hear, O Israel: YHVH [the L-RD, the Most High] is our Elohim. He is One. He alone is ADONAI (Deuteronomy 6:4 & Isaiah 43:10-11). He is the Creator of heaven and earth, of all living beings, and of everything both visible and invisible (Genesis 1:1, Colossians 1:15-17). Although He is limitless in power, authority, time, matter, and space, He has chosen, in His infinite wisdom, to reveal His nature to humanity in perceivable and comprehendible manners. Scripture records G-d revealing Himself in the following manners: as fire (covenant with Avraham between the two halves of the cow; Genesis 15:17), as the form of a man not born of a woman, (when He approached Avraham with the two angels; Genesis 18), as a burning bush (spoke to Moshe; Exodus 3:2), as the fourth Man in the furnace, (Daniel 3:25), as the promised Messiah being a Man made of flesh and born of a woman (Isaiah 7:14, Galatians 4:4). Although there are numerous examples of G-d revealing Himself to humanity in various ways and forms, of those ways and forms, He has chosen to refer to Himself in the following primary contexts: as the Father (HaAv), as the Son (HaBen) Y’shua, and as the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit/Breath). What makes these primary contexts important is not only the fact that G-d used these forms to reveal Himself to humanity, but in doing so, He refers to Himself in these primary contexts as the one and only true and living G-d.
As I word it, more pithily, we believe in One God, Who manifests Himself in the universe in three primary manifestations: Father, Son (named Yeshua), and the Shekinah (referred to in Greek as “Holy Spirit”).
Rabbie, I would agree with you here. Thank you for the clarification.
You mean, you agree with that “Christological” perspective?
You mean, you agree with that “Christological” perspective?
I believe I do, at least on the surface.
To be sure, Rabbi, I find it easier to discuss other things, once we know who Christ is. If we disagree on Christ, then it doesn’t matter if we match on all other things.
I posted a response here: http://thechurchofjesuschrist.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/the-yoke-and-burden-of-messiah-the-torah-or-calvary/#comment-14837
If you can’t preach “Jesus Christ is God” from the Torah, then you have a false Messiah, and your Jesus doesn’t matter.
But to head off the discussion entirely, remember that I said I agree with you ideologically on the matter. I just disagree on how the divinity of Messiah is presented by you. I choose to stay confined to the text of scripture concerning this matter. You seem to be comfortable to go beyond it. And that is only really where do disagree.
I posted a response here: http://thechurchofjesuschrist.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/the-yoke-and-burden-of-messiah-the-torah-or-calvary/#comment-14837
If you can’t preach “Jesus Christ is God” from the Torah, then you have a false Messiah, and your Jesus doesn’t matter.
But to head off the discussion entirely, remember that I said I agree with you ideologically on the matter. I just disagree on how the divinity of Messiah is presented by you. I choose to stay confined to the text of scripture concerning this matter. You seem to be comfortable to go beyond it. And that is only really where do disagree.
Paul said that all Scripture was God breathed, meaning that the bible is more than the Torah. The first five books of Moses are followed by many more – depending upon your communion. Limiting yourself to Torah as Scripture with the rest as divine commentary is unbiblical, unTraditional, and unhealthy. I would hope that you state exactly what you believe.
We believe in Genesis through Revelation as being the inspired word of God. We believe that the Word of God can only be understood best through the Jewish hermeneutic system of PaRDeS (Peshat, Remez, Drash, and Sod) – and that the foundation of the bible is the Torah, and that the Holy Spirit preserved the canon only because the canon did not contradict what was previously written.
We call the writings of the disciples of Yeshua, the Latter Writings, and that they are included in the TaNaKh (Torah, Nevim/Prophets, Ketuvim/Writings), as we believe the page separating the Old from the New Testament is the least inspired page in your bible, which continues the Marcionite error of a polythesistic two-god mentality (that the new god of the NT did away with the old god of the OT).
Since we hold the Latter Writings to be part of the TaNaKh, we therefore hold those writings in authority over the Talmud.
This means we hold any doctrine, teaching, or word derived from the Prophets and the Writings, or extant literature, accountable to that which was written before. Since the Torah is the divine instruction given by HaShem himself from Mt. Sinai, it can not be superseded by anything that comes later (since it is written that one is not to add to nor take away from it).
Since we assume that the prophets, and writers, and the disciples of Yeshua all wrote with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that the Spirit does not contradict the Word of God which came before, this means, if one derives something from their writings, that contradicts the Torah, we must throw out the bad doctrine we have derived, and not the Writings. It’s about realigning any doctrine or teaching we learn from the rest of the bible, with the Torah, rather than assuming our doctrine that seems to contradict the Torah, is correct at the expense of the Torah.
I hope this clarifies a basic outline of our hermeneutic structure.
This is why we ask for any doctrine one has, to be proven from Torah – since nothing can add to it or take away from it (or else it’s not scripture, and according to the Torah, such a writer would be a false prophet or false teacher).
In other words, we don’t have to trust in the authenticity of the Latter Writings by a mere confirmation of the Holy Spirit, or reliance on Church tradition (for other religions use these as their subjective proofs, having nothing objective upon which to build on). We can trust that the Latter Writings are inspired, because everything that they teach, and show, can be derived from the boundary of the Torah (and from the Prophets, which their teachings are also derived only from the Torah).
Messiah and his disciples preached the gospel from the Torah (and the Prophets). We should too. When a Christian approaches someone with a Jewish hermeneutic, and can’t reason from the scriptures (like the Bereans expected Paul to do), one’s witness is lost entirely, and their Messiah marked as a false prophet.
We are commanded to reach the Jew first. As such, our responsibility as believers in Messiah, is to be educated in how to reason the truths of the Latter Writings, from the scriptures that came before – the ultimate foundation being founded in the Torah, with nothing else adding to it or subtracting from it.
As you can see from the majority of articles on our site, the Torah is sufficient in that regard to teaching the gospel entirely. After all, what did Moses have? What did Rahab have? What did King David have? (I would mention Abel as well, but for that I would have to explain how the Torah has always existed, before it was even written, and that would take too long here). Yet they are listed as those who had faith in the Messiah in Hebrews. Thus they too were able to place their faith in Messiah, and be counted as one of the righteous, by those that knew Messiah face to face as he walked on the earth.
One who claims we need the Prophets and the Writings (and the Latter Writings of the disciples of Yeshua) to know Messiah, is simply one, in all honesty, is ignorant of the Torah, the foundation of our faith. One misses out on the fullness and clarity of the Torah as it teaches us about the Messiah in every nuance, phrase, portion, book, and detail, from the minutiae to the whole, and thus later the prophecy or writing that help explains it further.
This means from the hermeneutic I’ve presented, one is practically led to inquire of EVERYTHING of the Torah, “what does THIS (word, phrase, sentence, etc) have to do with Messiah?” – and the answer will astound you. I thus challenge you to the same. This is better than a KJV only stance. The KJV isn’t inspired any more than a translation can capture the full essence of the language it is translating from. Yet the Hebrew bible, in its original language, is just as divinely intricate and compact, as the Torah is to the 10 Words on the Tablets. I invite you to inquire of the Holy Spirit on this matter, to investigate Moses for the first time, and truly find the Messiah it teaches, and then with this foundation, reexamine the teaching of Messiah Yeshua, and those of his disciples, as well as Paul. You will find a consistency that blows your presuppositions away.
But I must warn you. Everyone who has done this is ultimately held responsible to what they learn. Not many are willing to submit. The way is truly narrow, and there are few who find it. Once started on this journey into the Messiah from the Torah, there is no going back. But don’t let that discourage you. The reward for “completing the race,” as Paul describes it, is a crown of glory that eternal in nature.
As it is written:
“It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.” (Proverbs 25:2).
We believe in Genesis through Revelation as being the inspired word of God. We believe that the Word of God can only be understood best through the Jewish hermeneutic system of PaRDeS (Peshat, Remez, Drash, and Sod) – and that the foundation of the bible is the Torah, and that the Holy Spirit preserved the canon only because the canon did not contradict what was previously written.
We call the writings of the disciples of Yeshua, the Latter Writings, and that they are included in the TaNaKh (Torah, Nevim/Prophets, Ketuvim/Writings), as we believe the page separating the Old from the New Testament is the least inspired page in your bible, which continues the Marcionite error of a polythesistic two-god mentality (that the new god of the NT did away with the old god of the OT).
Since we hold the Latter Writings to be part of the TaNaKh, we therefore hold those writings in authority over the Talmud.
This means we hold any doctrine, teaching, or word derived from the Prophets and the Writings, or extant literature, accountable to that which was written before. Since the Torah is the divine instruction given by HaShem himself from Mt. Sinai, it can not be superseded by anything that comes later (since it is written that one is not to add to nor take away from it).
Since we assume that the prophets, and writers, and the disciples of Yeshua all wrote with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that the Spirit does not contradict the Word of God which came before, this means, if one derives something from their writings, that contradicts the Torah, we must throw out the bad doctrine we have derived, and not the Writings. It’s about realigning any doctrine or teaching we learn from the rest of the bible, with the Torah, rather than assuming our doctrine that seems to contradict the Torah, is correct at the expense of the Torah.
I hope this clarifies a basic outline of our hermeneutic structure.
This is why we ask for any doctrine one has, to be proven from Torah – since nothing can add to it or take away from it (or else it’s not scripture, and according to the Torah, such a writer would be a false prophet or false teacher).
In other words, we don’t have to trust in the authenticity of the Latter Writings by a mere confirmation of the Holy Spirit, or reliance on Church tradition (for other religions use these as their subjective proofs, having nothing objective upon which to build on). We can trust that the Latter Writings are inspired, because everything that they teach, and show, can be derived from the boundary of the Torah (and from the Prophets, which their teachings are also derived only from the Torah).
Messiah and his disciples preached the gospel from the Torah (and the Prophets). We should too. When a Christian approaches someone with a Jewish hermeneutic, and can’t reason from the scriptures (like the Bereans expected Paul to do), one’s witness is lost entirely, and their Messiah marked as a false prophet.
We are commanded to reach the Jew first. As such, our responsibility as believers in Messiah, is to be educated in how to reason the truths of the Latter Writings, from the scriptures that came before – the ultimate foundation being founded in the Torah, with nothing else adding to it or subtracting from it.
As you can see from the majority of articles on our site, the Torah is sufficient in that regard to teaching the gospel entirely. After all, what did Moses have? What did Rahab have? What did King David have? (I would mention Abel as well, but for that I would have to explain how the Torah has always existed, before it was even written, and that would take too long here). Yet they are listed as those who had faith in the Messiah in Hebrews. Thus they too were able to place their faith in Messiah, and be counted as one of the righteous, by those that knew Messiah face to face as he walked on the earth.
One who claims we need the Prophets and the Writings (and the Latter Writings of the disciples of Yeshua) to know Messiah, is simply one, in all honesty, is ignorant of the Torah, the foundation of our faith. One misses out on the fullness and clarity of the Torah as it teaches us about the Messiah in every nuance, phrase, portion, book, and detail, from the minutiae to the whole, and thus later the prophecy or writing that help explains it further.
This means from the hermeneutic I’ve presented, one is practically led to inquire of EVERYTHING of the Torah, “what does THIS (word, phrase, sentence, etc) have to do with Messiah?” – and the answer will astound you. I thus challenge you to the same. This is better than a KJV only stance. The KJV isn’t inspired any more than a translation can capture the full essence of the language it is translating from. Yet the Hebrew bible, in its original language, is just as divinely intricate and compact, as the Torah is to the 10 Words on the Tablets. I invite you to inquire of the Holy Spirit on this matter, to investigate Moses for the first time, and truly find the Messiah it teaches, and then with this foundation, reexamine the teaching of Messiah Yeshua, and those of his disciples, as well as Paul. You will find a consistency that blows your presuppositions away.
But I must warn you. Everyone who has done this is ultimately held responsible to what they learn. Not many are willing to submit. The way is truly narrow, and there are few who find it. Once started on this journey into the Messiah from the Torah, there is no going back. But don’t let that discourage you. The reward for “completing the race,” as Paul describes it, is a crown of glory that eternal in nature.
As it is written:
“It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.” (Proverbs 25:2).
So, can you prove your system of hermeneutics by the Torah?
It seems to me that you readily follow the traditions of me, against what we are commanded by God and Christ, and Paul. Your idolization of the Torah is worrisome, and has clouded your mind. I would be interested to know what other Messianic’s believe about this. There is nothing in the New Testament of primitive Church history and Tradition to allow for your belief system. I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church, and come to the full knowledge of the New Testament.
I have no interest from learning from you, finding your presuppositions antithetical to Christianity. If you want your mind truly ‘blown’ then I hope and pray you start to draw from the well of salvation.
“So, can you prove your system of hermeneutics by the Torah?”
I’ll give you a start. Literally.
The first word of the bible, being found in Genesis 1:1; in the Hebrew, is “B’reisheit.”
The Torah teaches us by this first word, quite a number of hermeneutic principles, the first of which I will let it show you. If you have read a Hebrew scroll, you will realize that the first letter of the word “B’reisheit,” the bet, is oversized. This isn’t a styling format, since it’s not followed (in fact other places, such as the Shema have single letters oversized more than others).
Therefore the first question you or anyone who looks at the Torah for the first time, usually asks is, “Why is the bet oversized?” We then learn from this that the Torah is teaching us that every detail in the Torah is significant with divine meaning, down to the very structure of the text, and even of individual letters. The answers (there are multiple) to that question will lead someone into the entire Jewish hermeneutic system. That there are multiple answers also reveals another Jewish hermeneutic – that there are multiple meanings of the same text, from each different approach to the text; but only one right answer for each approach.
I personally am working on an expansive teaching that develops an understanding of PaRDeS from the Torah, as the Torah teaches it, but I feel like I’m reinventing the wheel since though much of this understanding has been completely lost from the Church, it is in fact covered by a proper Jewish education, and is taught as the proper system of biblical hermeneutics by all Jewish yeshivas. I am not that surprised that you have not heard of it, since even most seminarians have no clue what proper Jewish hermeneutics are – yet all the apostles wrote within its framework.
“Your idolization of the Torah is worrisome, and has clouded your mind.”
and
“I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church, and come to the full knowledge of the New Testament.”
These are statements that Mormons, and indeed Muslims have said to me, except replace the words “Christ” and “New Testament” with “Joseph Smith” and “Book of Mormon,” and “Muhammed” and the “Quran.” If this hermeneutic – to accept the cart before the horse, to nullify the Torah as being a valid test of true doctrine – is your foundation, then it is a shaky one. I instead prefer to stand on the foundation of Torah, and believe the entire bible, not just Matt-Rev, so that when the Mormon does come knocking, the Muslim does come preaching, that I can trump their hermeneutic with that given by God himself at Mt. Sinai.
Furthermore, and I will close this comment with this, it is clearly written:
Deut 12:32-13:5 says in brief:
“It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from THE WAY the LORD your God commanded you to follow.”
Now let’s match it with what you said:, “I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church”and by this you mean for us to abandon Torah. To which I hope it is now clear that if the Christ and Church you preach has “abandoned” “The Way,” then according to Deuteronomy 13, both you and I have a moral duty to reject such a person. If you believe Moses, you will believe Messiah, for he wrote about Him. But if you don’t believe (or understand) Moses, then how can you believe (or understand) what I say?
Just because the Church in your words, has abandoned Jewish hermeneutics doesn’t make it valid reason to do the same.
Shalom.
correction. I mean to say “If you believe Moses, you will believe Messiah, for he wrote about Him. But if you don’t believe (or understand) Moses, then how can you believe (or understand) what Messiah says?” (I got mixed up between talking about what he said, and recalling what he said.)
That’s not what I said. What I asked was, ‘Show me where we are to limit anything to the Torah only?’ I didn’t say anything about hermeneutics. I said show me doctrine in Scripture where we are limited to the Torah only. Hermeneutics is fine, although you seem to border of reading into the text what is not there originally.
“Show me where we are to limit anything to the Torah only?”
I didn’t say we are to limit anything. I said we can trust that the Latter Writings are inspired, because everything that they teach, and show, can be derived from the boundary of the Torah (and from the Prophets, which their teachings are also derived only from the Torah). And how do we know their teachings must be within the boundaries of Torah? It is written:
“All this Word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.” (Deut 12:32 in your Catholic/Protestant bible or Deut 13:1 in your Jewish bible).
In the Hebrew:
Deuteronomy 13:1
אֵת כָּל-הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם אֹתוֺ תִשְׁמְרוּ לַעֲשׂוֺת לֹא-תֹסֵף עָלָיו וְלֹא תִגְרַע מִמֶּנּוּ
Et chal ha-Davar asher anochi mitzvah et-chem oto tishmeiru la-asot lo tosef alaiv v-lo tigrah mimeinu.
Et (Aleph-Tav, this we know the following is about the Messiah who is the ‘Alpha’ and the ‘Omega,’ the Aleph and the Tav, the first and last, thus the entire Torah is about Messiah (we find this “word” “in the Beginning” with God)) chal (all) ha-Davar (the Word, now Messiah is introduced, the Torah equated with Messiah) asher (which) anochi (I have) mitzvah (command) et-chem (to you) oto (shall you) tishmeiru (observe, from the root shamar, which also means to guard – like in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were to shamar/guard the Torah) la-asot (to do, from the root asah, which means to serve/worship/work like in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were to asah/serve/work the Torah, also as in let my people go so that they may asah/serve Me) lo tosef (not)(to add or augment/exceed/get more/increase) alaiv (to it (or)) v-lo tigrah (not)(to scrape off/to shave/remove/lessen/withold/abate/diminish/do away/keep back/restrain/make small/withdraw) mimeinu (from it (all)).
We can see from the above, that if one adds to or takes away from, anything of HaDavar – the Word that HaShem commanded (mitzvah) (In the singular, this is referring to the “singular” Mitzvah of Ex 24:12 where it is written that HaShem gave Moses “the Tablets, the Torah, and the Mitzvah for their instruction” which means to include all three since the Mitzvah is the final instruction/explanation of the Torah, as the Torah is the instruction/explanation of the Tablets), that one adds to or takes away from the Messiah. Therefore, since the entire Torah was given to Moses (as well as the Tablets and the Mitzvah for their instruction), we can understand that the Torah is warning us of even adding or taking away to or from the Mitzvah, that is, the individual instruction or right way of doing a instruction, which itself (the Torah) is an instruction on the 10 Words, all given by HaShem to Moses. For if one adds to or takes away from even the application of the Torah from the Tablets, Torah, and Mitzvah, one diminishes Messiah, and leads another to walk not in the Way (as in yes, THE Way, the Messiah) contrary to Torah, as the rest of the proceeding verses of Deut 13:1-5 seek to warn us about such false prophets doing.
Deuteronomy 4:2 also has this same commandment given:
1 Hear now, O Israel, the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live (have eternal life) and may go in and take possession of the land (in the World to Come) that the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you. 2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. (for by adding to or subtracting from the Messiah, we accept a false Messiah – a false Master, a false Baal)
3 You saw with your own eyes what the LORD did at Baal Peor (case in point). The LORD your God destroyed from among you everyone who followed the Baal of Peor, 4 but all of you who held fast to the LORD your God are still alive today (and so too this will be repeated at the End of the Age).
We are to limit the teaching of Messiah, to the boundaries of HaDavar – the Word that HaShem commanded (mitzvah), that is, the Tablets, the Torah, and the Mitzvah. Anything else in addition, or subtraction of that, and thus of the Messiah, is according to Hashem equatable to those who engaged in fornication at the incident of Baal Peor. I will leave you with that since this can go on and on and on.
You have made it clear that if it cannot be found in the Torah, then we should not have it. Again. Show me the proof for your previous statements that hermeneutics must be limited to the Torah, especially since we have writings older than the Torah in the bibl
Ploycarp יוֹמ טוֹב לְךָ
Food for thought…
In Deuteronomy 18 God makes a promise to raise up a prophet like unto Moses, who will have YHWH’s words put in his mouth. YHWH commands that Israel ought to listen to him.
This section [along with Deut. 13:1-5] can be understood as God setting parameters for what ought to be understood as legitimate prophets. The boundary any prophet must stay within in order to be considered legit is the boundary God gave Israel at Sinai, which one would do well to admit was not the creation of God’s law, but rather the first time it was given to a people in codified form [cf. Gen. 26.5]. [Side note - God didn't give Torah in written form prior to this because it was never intended to be for any "one" person, or even a few, but for an entire people/Kingdom. How much do we consider as legitimate Joseph Smith, or Muhammad receiving a "book" from the Creator God? Sinai had hundreds of thousands of witnesses - not just one.]
So, in light of this promise God made in Deuteronomy and the “litmus” test that ought to be given to any so-called prophet, we can better understand all the challenge that Jesus faced from the other religious leaders in the Gospels. They were testing him to see if he was transgressing the bounds of Torah. Even though they were doing what they should have done, their motive was ill. They wanted to try to “catch” him breaking Torah. Did he? By no means. Jesus was, however, not keeping certain traditions of the elders, which at that time had been handled as being a “law” [cf. Matthew 15].
Both Peter and Stephen quote this reference Deut. in relation to Jesus [cf. Acts 3.18, 22, 24; 7.37]. It would seem best to conclude that Jesus is both “the” and “a” fulfillment of that promise. What this means is that Jesus, according to Deuteronomy 18 is the prophet who God raised up in the likeness of Moses and who spoke all that YHWH told him to speak [cf. John 12.49-50; Matt. 5.17; Luke 6.6-10; John 17.6-8].
Here is one description of how hermeneutics should be “limited,” rather, kept within the bounds of Torah.
Shalom.
Ploycarp יוֹמ טוֹב לְךָ
Food for thought…
In Deuteronomy 18 God makes a promise to raise up a prophet like unto Moses, who will have YHWH’s words put in his mouth. YHWH commands that Israel ought to listen to him.
This section [along with Deut. 13:1-5] can be understood as God setting parameters for what ought to be understood as legitimate prophets. The boundary any prophet must stay within in order to be considered legit is the boundary God gave Israel at Sinai, which one would do well to admit was not the creation of God’s law, but rather the first time it was given to a people in codified form [cf. Gen. 26.5]. [Side note - God didn't give Torah in written form prior to this because it was never intended to be for any "one" person, or even a few, but for an entire people/Kingdom. How much do we consider as legitimate Joseph Smith, or Muhammad receiving a "book" from the Creator God? Sinai had hundreds of thousands of witnesses - not just one.]
So, in light of this promise God made in Deuteronomy and the “litmus” test that ought to be given to any so-called prophet, we can better understand all the challenge that Jesus faced from the other religious leaders in the Gospels. They were testing him to see if he was transgressing the bounds of Torah. Even though they were doing what they should have done, their motive was ill. They wanted to try to “catch” him breaking Torah. Did he? By no means. Jesus was, however, not keeping certain traditions of the elders, which at that time had been handled as being a “law” [cf. Matthew 15].
Both Peter and Stephen quote this reference Deut. in relation to Jesus [cf. Acts 3.18, 22, 24; 7.37]. It would seem best to conclude that Jesus is both “the” and “a” fulfillment of that promise. What this means is that Jesus, according to Deuteronomy 18 is the prophet who God raised up in the likeness of Moses and who spoke all that YHWH told him to speak [cf. John 12.49-50; Matt. 5.17; Luke 6.6-10; John 17.6-8].
Here is one description of how hermeneutics should be “limited,” rather, kept within the bounds of Torah.
Shalom.
יוֹם טוֹב
יוֹם טוֹב
It is clear that “All these words that I command you, do not add to, nor take away” (Deut 12:32) means to not add to or take away from all the words of the Tablet, Torah, and Commandment for their Instruction. Thus anything that claims to be founded on the Torah, (such as Messiah’s teaching, or else he’s a sinner), must be understood only from the Torah. This is a logical. After all, the size of a house is only limited by its foundation. I don’t see a disconnect between the Torah saying to not add to or subtract from it, with understanding that anything that claims to be founded upon it and thus not contradict it, to be thus only understood within it.
Job may “come before Torah” but in all honesty, Job wasn’t given in the sight of three million people with tongues of fire evident. We therefore test Job in light of the Torah given at Sinai, just as we do any scriptural claimant. Now if only we could bend our UNDERSTANDING of the Torah and the rest of scripture, to the same criteria.
Otherwise, if a scriptural claimant adds to or takes away from the words that HaShem commands us, we have a moral obligation to reject the scriptural claimant and tear it out of our bibles, and reject the prophet or teacher who is leading us in a “different way.” Since I hold the Prophets and Writings as divinely inspired, I am therefore forced to only throw out any understanding I have of them that may contradict the Torah, rather than throw out what it is they wrote. If I am honest with myself, when the Torah says I’m wrong, then wrong I am and I must submit my teaching, doctrine, or theological stance, to it. The moment I think I can step outside the boundary of adding to or subtracting from Torah, I have just handed all false religions the keys to legitimacy.
Now, if the Torah says to not add to or subtract from it, then this includes refusing ANYTHING that does so. This also includes hermeneutics. You will find that the P in PaRDeS, stands for peshat – or literal understanding based on context. The Church, for the most part, when it teaches hermeneutics, completely focuses on the peshat part of hermeneutics, and then only a part of peshat. This is good, but the Torah teaches there are much more deeper levels of understanding the Torah. We rob ourselves when we are limited only to the literal, illumination, grammatical, historical, typological, and scriptural synergistic principles of hermeneutics. These can be proven from the Torah as valid methods of interpretation, but all my point is, that there is more. So now I ask you, how do you know your hermeneutic system is correct? The moment your answer relies on how methods of interpretation are used by scripture itself, you will have proven my point.
It is clear that “All these words that I command you, do not add to, nor take away” (Deut 12:32) means to not add to or take away from all the words of the Tablet, Torah, and Commandment for their Instruction. Thus anything that claims to be founded on the Torah, (such as Messiah’s teaching, or else he’s a sinner), must be understood only from the Torah. This is a logical. After all, the size of a house is only limited by its foundation. I don’t see a disconnect between the Torah saying to not add to or subtract from it, with understanding that anything that claims to be founded upon it and thus not contradict it, to be thus only understood within it.
Job may “come before Torah” but in all honesty, Job wasn’t given in the sight of three million people with tongues of fire evident. We therefore test Job in light of the Torah given at Sinai, just as we do any scriptural claimant. Now if only we could bend our UNDERSTANDING of the Torah and the rest of scripture, to the same criteria.
Otherwise, if a scriptural claimant adds to or takes away from the words that HaShem commands us, we have a moral obligation to reject the scriptural claimant and tear it out of our bibles, and reject the prophet or teacher who is leading us in a “different way.” Since I hold the Prophets and Writings as divinely inspired, I am therefore forced to only throw out any understanding I have of them that may contradict the Torah, rather than throw out what it is they wrote. If I am honest with myself, when the Torah says I’m wrong, then wrong I am and I must submit my teaching, doctrine, or theological stance, to it. The moment I think I can step outside the boundary of adding to or subtracting from Torah, I have just handed all false religions the keys to legitimacy.
Now, if the Torah says to not add to or subtract from it, then this includes refusing ANYTHING that does so. This also includes hermeneutics. You will find that the P in PaRDeS, stands for peshat – or literal understanding based on context. The Church, for the most part, when it teaches hermeneutics, completely focuses on the peshat part of hermeneutics, and then only a part of peshat. This is good, but the Torah teaches there are much more deeper levels of understanding the Torah. We rob ourselves when we are limited only to the literal, illumination, grammatical, historical, typological, and scriptural synergistic principles of hermeneutics. These can be proven from the Torah as valid methods of interpretation, but all my point is, that there is more. So now I ask you, how do you know your hermeneutic system is correct? The moment your answer relies on how methods of interpretation are used by scripture itself, you will have proven my point.
see my answer below after Joel U.
[...] A Convenient Dialog: Messianic Judaism 2009 March 4 by Polycarp Most of the comments, if not all, are from the this post and this post. [...]
Rabbie, I would agree with you here. Thank you for the clarification.
I believe I do, at least on the surface.
To be sure, Rabbi, I find it easier to discuss other things, once we know who Christ is. If we disagree on Christ, then it doesn’t matter if we match on all other things.
Paul said that all Scripture was God breathed, meaning that the bible is more than the Torah. The first five books of Moses are followed by many more – depending upon your communion. Limiting yourself to Torah as Scripture with the rest as divine commentary is unbiblical, unTraditional, and unhealthy. I would hope that you state exactly what you believe.
So, can you prove your system of hermeneutics by the Torah?
It seems to me that you readily follow the traditions of me, against what we are commanded by God and Christ, and Paul. Your idolization of the Torah is worrisome, and has clouded your mind. I would be interested to know what other Messianic’s believe about this. There is nothing in the New Testament of primitive Church history and Tradition to allow for your belief system. I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church, and come to the full knowledge of the New Testament.
I have no interest from learning from you, finding your presuppositions antithetical to Christianity. If you want your mind truly ‘blown’ then I hope and pray you start to draw from the well of salvation.
“So, can you prove your system of hermeneutics by the Torah?”
I’ll give you a start. Literally.
The first word of the bible, being found in Genesis 1:1; in the Hebrew, is “B’reisheit.”
The Torah teaches us by this first word, quite a number of hermeneutic principles, the first of which I will let it show you. If you have read a Hebrew scroll, you will realize that the first letter of the word “B’reisheit,” the bet, is oversized. This isn’t a styling format, since it’s not followed (in fact other places, such as the Shema have single letters oversized more than others).
Therefore the first question you or anyone who looks at the Torah for the first time, usually asks is, “Why is the bet oversized?” We then learn from this that the Torah is teaching us that every detail in the Torah is significant with divine meaning, down to the very structure of the text, and even of individual letters. The answers (there are multiple) to that question will lead someone into the entire Jewish hermeneutic system. That there are multiple answers also reveals another Jewish hermeneutic – that there are multiple meanings of the same text, from each different approach to the text; but only one right answer for each approach.
I personally am working on an expansive teaching that develops an understanding of PaRDeS from the Torah, as the Torah teaches it, but I feel like I’m reinventing the wheel since though much of this understanding has been completely lost from the Church, it is in fact covered by a proper Jewish education, and is taught as the proper system of biblical hermeneutics by all Jewish yeshivas. I am not that surprised that you have not heard of it, since even most seminarians have no clue what proper Jewish hermeneutics are – yet all the apostles wrote within its framework.
“Your idolization of the Torah is worrisome, and has clouded your mind.”
and
“I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church, and come to the full knowledge of the New Testament.”
These are statements that Mormons, and indeed Muslims have said to me, except replace the words “Christ” and “New Testament” with “Joseph Smith” and “Book of Mormon,” and “Muhammed” and the “Quran.” If this hermeneutic – to accept the cart before the horse, to nullify the Torah as being a valid test of true doctrine – is your foundation, then it is a shaky one. I instead prefer to stand on the foundation of Torah, and believe the entire bible, not just Matt-Rev, so that when the Mormon does come knocking, the Muslim does come preaching, that I can trump their hermeneutic with that given by God himself at Mt. Sinai.
Furthermore, and I will close this comment with this, it is clearly written:
Deut 12:32-13:5 says in brief:
“It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from THE WAY the LORD your God commanded you to follow.”
Now let’s match it with what you said:, “I would hope that you abandon your way, long ago settle by Christ and His Church”and by this you mean for us to abandon Torah. To which I hope it is now clear that if the Christ and Church you preach has “abandoned” “The Way,” then according to Deuteronomy 13, both you and I have a moral duty to reject such a person. If you believe Moses, you will believe Messiah, for he wrote about Him. But if you don’t believe (or understand) Moses, then how can you believe (or understand) what I say?
Just because the Church in your words, has abandoned Jewish hermeneutics doesn’t make it valid reason to do the same.
Shalom.
correction. I mean to say “If you believe Moses, you will believe Messiah, for he wrote about Him. But if you don’t believe (or understand) Moses, then how can you believe (or understand) what Messiah says?” (I got mixed up between talking about what he said, and recalling what he said.)
That’s not what I said. What I asked was, ‘Show me where we are to limit anything to the Torah only?’ I didn’t say anything about hermeneutics. I said show me doctrine in Scripture where we are limited to the Torah only. Hermeneutics is fine, although you seem to border of reading into the text what is not there originally.
“Show me where we are to limit anything to the Torah only?”
I didn’t say we are to limit anything. I said we can trust that the Latter Writings are inspired, because everything that they teach, and show, can be derived from the boundary of the Torah (and from the Prophets, which their teachings are also derived only from the Torah). And how do we know their teachings must be within the boundaries of Torah? It is written:
“All this Word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.” (Deut 12:32 in your Catholic/Protestant bible or Deut 13:1 in your Jewish bible).
In the Hebrew:
Deuteronomy 13:1
אֵת כָּל-הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם אֹתוֺ תִשְׁמְרוּ לַעֲשׂוֺת לֹא-תֹסֵף עָלָיו וְלֹא תִגְרַע מִמֶּנּוּ
Et chal ha-Davar asher anochi mitzvah et-chem oto tishmeiru la-asot lo tosef alaiv v-lo tigrah mimeinu.
Et (Aleph-Tav, this we know the following is about the Messiah who is the ‘Alpha’ and the ‘Omega,’ the Aleph and the Tav, the first and last, thus the entire Torah is about Messiah (we find this “word” “in the Beginning” with God)) chal (all) ha-Davar (the Word, now Messiah is introduced, the Torah equated with Messiah) asher (which) anochi (I have) mitzvah (command) et-chem (to you) oto (shall you) tishmeiru (observe, from the root shamar, which also means to guard – like in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were to shamar/guard the Torah) la-asot (to do, from the root asah, which means to serve/worship/work like in the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were to asah/serve/work the Torah, also as in let my people go so that they may asah/serve Me) lo tosef (not)(to add or augment/exceed/get more/increase) alaiv (to it (or)) v-lo tigrah (not)(to scrape off/to shave/remove/lessen/withold/abate/diminish/do away/keep back/restrain/make small/withdraw) mimeinu (from it (all)).
We can see from the above, that if one adds to or takes away from, anything of HaDavar – the Word that HaShem commanded (mitzvah) (In the singular, this is referring to the “singular” Mitzvah of Ex 24:12 where it is written that HaShem gave Moses “the Tablets, the Torah, and the Mitzvah for their instruction” which means to include all three since the Mitzvah is the final instruction/explanation of the Torah, as the Torah is the instruction/explanation of the Tablets), that one adds to or takes away from the Messiah. Therefore, since the entire Torah was given to Moses (as well as the Tablets and the Mitzvah for their instruction), we can understand that the Torah is warning us of even adding or taking away to or from the Mitzvah, that is, the individual instruction or right way of doing a instruction, which itself (the Torah) is an instruction on the 10 Words, all given by HaShem to Moses. For if one adds to or takes away from even the application of the Torah from the Tablets, Torah, and Mitzvah, one diminishes Messiah, and leads another to walk not in the Way (as in yes, THE Way, the Messiah) contrary to Torah, as the rest of the proceeding verses of Deut 13:1-5 seek to warn us about such false prophets doing.
Deuteronomy 4:2 also has this same commandment given:
1 Hear now, O Israel, the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live (have eternal life) and may go in and take possession of the land (in the World to Come) that the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you. 2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you. (for by adding to or subtracting from the Messiah, we accept a false Messiah – a false Master, a false Baal)
3 You saw with your own eyes what the LORD did at Baal Peor (case in point). The LORD your God destroyed from among you everyone who followed the Baal of Peor, 4 but all of you who held fast to the LORD your God are still alive today (and so too this will be repeated at the End of the Age).
We are to limit the teaching of Messiah, to the boundaries of HaDavar – the Word that HaShem commanded (mitzvah), that is, the Tablets, the Torah, and the Mitzvah. Anything else in addition, or subtraction of that, and thus of the Messiah, is according to Hashem equatable to those who engaged in fornication at the incident of Baal Peor. I will leave you with that since this can go on and on and on.
You have made it clear that if it cannot be found in the Torah, then we should not have it. Again. Show me the proof for your previous statements that hermeneutics must be limited to the Torah, especially since we have writings older than the Torah in the bibl
see my answer below after Joel U.