Messianic Judaism Quest

Its important to note that the statements below are based upon the classical Jewish relationship between the Written Torah and Oral Torah, and in turn on rabbinic “legislation.” This is a point many Messianics fail to understand. Rabbinic legislation is designated as “d’Rabban” while those commandments derived from the Torah are referred to as D’Oraita.

[Read more →]

The problem for many Messianic Jews lies in the fact that most observant Jews attribute the same divine revelation, authority, and status, to the Oral Torah as is inherent in the Written Torah.

[Read more →]

I believe that a view of “Jewish Christianity” or “Christian Judaism” to use the scholarly terms for the earliest Jewish followers of Yeshua recognizes that there was not a monolithic expression among the various circles that embraced the messianic claims of Yeshua. That being said, this will be a complicated task and to some extent the practical implementation of this will be reflective of the underlying Jewish background and experiences of each messianic community just as it exists within the normative Jewish community.

[Read more →]

I received an email earlier today regarding a Messianic conference to be held later this year. In the brochure mention was made of a new siddur produced by First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ). The brochure I read seemed to imply that the new siddur would have modifications made to certain prayers.
Without having read the […]

[Read more →]

We might simply this argument by using the following illustration. In one sense, the Torah provides the constitution for Israel. Like the Constitution of the United States, the actual implementation of its statutes are left to the Congress and the validity of those laws was left to the courts. Those properly trained in the Written and Oral Torah would correctly interpret the issues in question and apply them to constantly changing circumstances and conflicts.

[Read more →]

We often hear that Messianic Judaism is representative of “Biblical Judaism” or of being “Biblically Jewish.” The exact meanings of these phrases are always complicated and often convoluted. What they imply is that “Rabbinic Judaism” is by default unbiblical.

[Read more →]

The classical Jewish view of the Divine authorship of the Torah remains strong in traditional Jewish circles, but exclusive Mosaic authorship has been challenged for some time and dates back to the textual critics of the 18th and 19th centuries. The classical form of the documentary hypothesis is known as the Graf-Wellhausen model.The traditional Jewish approach has almost unequivocally rejected this or any view which compromises the divine origin of the Torah.

[Read more →]

I believe in fact that reviewing the canon of the New Testament is in fact very much a part of the discussion in considering a mature messianic Judaism. Why? Because the fundamental document (s) distinguishing the messianic Jew is the New Testament.

[Read more →]

My original intention had been to review in depth the development of the New Testament Canon, with concentration on the various lists which show certain books (e.g. Revelation, Hebrews, Second Peter, Jude, etc.) as not having been accepted universally, as well as other books (e.g. Shepherd of Hermes), which were considered authoritative by many communities.

[Read more →]

Perhaps the best example of the “struggle” with G-d that might be found in the Hebrew Scripture is the dialectic between Job and his friends. G-d of course intervenes quite forcefully at the end, but G-d’s own questions to and confrontation with Job reveal the fact that man is limited in his ability to comprehend the expansiveness and complexity of both G-d and His involvement in creation. That inability explains why Judaism allows for variation in many theological areas. This is something important to remember I believe.

[Read more →]