Articles
Messiah Yeshua’s Followers becoming “as Judah?”
Barbara L. Klika, MSW, Undershepherd, Life Coach
November 2010
Among Messianic believers, there is a tension that is unknown to the Christian
church today. It is an old tension; one that we seem to have re-entered now in our
times with great but often un-tempered zeal on all sides. It is the unresolved issue of
how much “like Judah” followers of Yeshua Messiah/Jesus must be as we return to
Torah and a Hebraic understanding in our faith, seeing Messiah, Aleph and Tav, as
the Living Torah Who does not change. Having just returned from Israel, this
tension has been brought into even more sharp focus for me.
It is difficult to deal with this tension for many more reasons than what may appear
on the surface. Just having a different understanding is sometimes interpreted as
being contentious and causing strife. Even lovingly pointing out the difference
between the content of the argument and the personal behavior of those involved is
sometimes interpreted as hostility. Either position could be taken in a calm, mature
way or in an immature, reactive and argumentative way. It is also true that some
refuse to deal directly with any issues or immature behavior, believing that to
overlook it is the loving and “covering” thing to do. This is not a new issue either.
And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men
of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for
you were not yet able to receive it, Indeed, even now you are not yet
able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among
you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?
1 Cor. 3: 1-3 NASB
Following Messiah Yeshua for those not born into the House of Israel has been
controversial from the start. No less than it was in the first century, it is confusing for
those newly come under conviction that the Torah is for us today, recognizing
obedience out of faith to our God and His righteous teachings rather than bondage
under law. There are two approaches which appear to be equal and opposite errors
being commonly made as we all strive to Shema, Shema! hear and obey our Elohim.
The first is more commonly found within traditional Christianity and a few Messianic
groups. The second is almost exclusively found within Messianic groups:
1) Complete rejection of Judah or Judaism and distancing from the roots of our
faith, even to the extreme belief that the “church” has replaced Judah. This
seems to carry into some Messianic circles, believing that Ephraim will
eclipse or replace Judah.
2) Complete acceptance of everything of Judah or Judaism as the only standard
by which unity with Judah and Messiah can be obtained or some even say,
salvation is established.
There are more longstanding factors briefly reviewed before going on to more recent
arguments. The evil one loves to maximize polarity and set one against another with
an “either/or” perspective, which is not in itself, Hebraic but rather a western or
Helenistic perspective. (ie. Reject Judah entirely or accept Judah unconditionally.)
Variations on these two predominant themes will likely be apparent. These polarized
responses are often considered to be strife between brothers since the “either/or”
perspective makes collaboration more difficult Strife, Strongs #4090, medan,
appears to be mostly associated with lies, hatred, and untruths. The difference of
understanding, in itself, is not truly strife, but the manner of dealing with the
differences certainly can be that.
Of course, a compromise that violates Torah in any way would be unacceptable to
those who Honor the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. A third possible response
will be presented in conclusion.
1) Complete Rejection of Judah and Judaism
The subject of those coming into faith in the God of Israel rather than being born
into it was perhaps first addressed in the council described in Acts 15: 20-21, coming
to the following conclusion:
…we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality,
from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses has had throughout many
generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every
Sabbath. NKJV
Here is one of the first confusions as to what this means. Many have thought that all
that is needed for righteousness is to observe these four things without concern for
any other aspects. These four concerns represent the “old law” and were originally
understood to be necessary to have fellowship with Jewish people. As long as new
believers observed these four things they were living “righteously” while learning
more. A later conclusion was that this is, indeed all that is necessary for those of
Gentile bloodlines to enter in to the Body of Messiah in complete fellowship with one
another.
In our day, these four seem completely irrelevant to many anyway! They aren’t
worried about whether or not Judah or Judaism approves, since Christianity has
been viewed as a “new” religion. Even Paul’s many admonishments that the Torah
has not been abolished and that we are not to boast against the root as recorded in
the Book of Romans fall on deaf ears, often confusing the law of sin and death with the Law/Torah.
Thus, the current question of how much “like Judah” we need to be
is mostly limited to those persuaded of the importance of our Hebraic heritage.
For two thousand years, many Christians have taken several Scriptures as a
repudiation of all things “Jewish,” with this one prominent among them.
For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus
Christ. John 1: 17 NKJV
This passage has been understood to contrast the past relevance of Moses teaching
of the law with the current reality of grace and truth in Jesus. A knowledge of
Hebraic perspective and Hillel’s Rules of comparison, along with recognition of the
added word “But” by translators, will reveal that this comparison is more of—For if
this is true, how much more so that!-- and not an “either/or” contrast.
The type of “grace” referred to here is not that of undeserved merit so much as it is
the social grace, charm and beauty of the Law more fully revealed in Messiah.
(Strong’s #G5463 charis) Concepts of grace have been the subject of great
confusion as summarized here from Easton’s Bible Dictionary.
. Summary:
Most of the discussions of the Biblical doctrine of grace have been faulty in
narrowing the meaning of "grace" to some special sense, and then endeavoring to
force this special sense on all the Biblical passages. For instance, Roman scholars,
starting with the meaning of the word in (say) 2Co 12:9, have made Ro 3:24 state
that men are justified by the infusion of Divine holiness into them, an
interpretation that utterly ruins Paul’s argument. On the other hand, Protestant
extremists have tried to reverse the process and have argued that grace cannot
mean anything except favor as an attitude, with results that are equally disastrous
from the exegetical standpoint. And a confusion has resulted that has prevented
men from seeing that most of the controversies about grace are at cross-purposes.
A rigid definition is hardly possible, but still a single conception is actually present
in almost every case where "grace" is found—the conception that all a Christian has
or is, is centered exclusively in God and Christ, and depends utterly on God through
Christ. The kingdom of heaven is reserved for those who become as little children,
for those who look to their Father in loving confidence for every benefit, whether it
be for the pardon so freely given, or for the strength that comes from Him who
works in them both to will and to do. 1
A right understanding of “grace” is beyond many so to simplify it, many
seem to equate “grace’ with the New Testament, thus denying the
abundant grace our Father has shown to His people from the very
beginning. This, too, is used as justification to reject anything perceived
as “Jewish.” A simple online search for the term throughout Scripture will
quickly reveal it’s presence throughout. Really, just to comprehend that
God didn’t outright kill Adam and Eve in their rebellion but covered for
them, that He didn’t immediately destroy rebellious Israel during the
Exodus but bore with them and raised up their children in strength, and
that even later in the land He allowed them to experience their need for
Him yet quickly sent a judge/deliverer when they cried out to Him is
already pushing against this false dichotomy.
Some who have embraced a Hebraic view are certain to include the second
sentence as recognition that the four issues noted were just a starting point to
begin fellowship since the new believers could be expected to learn a little at a
time every Shabbat in every city. Even in the time soon after Yeshua’s earthly
ministry confusion and misunderstanding arose over how to best follow Him.
Galatians is an excellent example, still often understood as grounds for rejecting
Torah. As Gentile believers came in greater numbers, the “Jewishness” of the faith
came into question, a simple description of a very complex situation with many
historical factors that cannot be addressed here.
There are various schools of thought here. In what we call traditional Christianity, the
view has been that we are to distance ourselves from Judah as much as possible
while Judah has had an equally strong stance to stay away from Christians.
Some Christians will allow admiration from a distance, though often grudging and
still having a clear “us” and “them” perspective. Some even have interest, respect
and admiration for the cultural aspects of Judaism, recognizing them as part of the
foundation of our faith, though they would still consider them “quaint” and not really
relevant for practice today. Is not this the same picture found in Ezekiel 33: 31-32:
So they come to you as people do, they sit before you as My people and they hear
your words, but they do not do them, for with their mouth they show much love, but
their hearts pursue their own gain.
Indeed, you are to them as a very lovely song of one who has a pleasant voice and
can play well on an instrument; for they hear your words, but they do not do them.
NKJV
People often think that Judaism has been maintained in some kind of pure form
since the days of Messiah which is not accurate. Synagogue teachers in the time
following Yeshua’s death and resurrection were divided. It is seldom recognized that
many accepted Him as Messiah and taught Torah accordingly.
Then the word of God spread and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in
Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.
Acts 6:7 NKJV
It is more commonly known that most denied Yeshua as Messiah and also taught
Torah accordingly, taking it upon themselves to threaten and punish the disciples
who taught of Him as presented in many Scripture passages. These teachers
actually eventually added a “malediction” to the daily prayer of benediction,
Shimona Esra, which cursed those who accepted Yeshua as Messiah. Certainly,
those who received Yeshua could not remain under a teacher such as this so
fellowship was disrupted!
Later, the Roman Catholic (Christian) church also codified this separation most
emphatically in what is known as Constantine’s Creed:
As a preliminary to his acceptance as a catechumen, a Jew “Must
confess and denounce verbally, the whole of Hebrew people,
forthwith declare that with a whole heart and sincere faith he desires
to be received among the Christians. Then he must renounce openly
in the church all Jewish superstition, the priest saying, and he, or his
sponsor if he is a child, replying in these words:
…in one word, I now renounce absolutely everything Jewish…
Furthermore, I accept all customs, rites, legalisms and feast of the
Romans…In the New Roman Religion.”
(This information can be found in its entirety online. Stefano Assemani, Acta Sanctorium Martyrum
Orientalium at Occidentalium, Vol. 1, Rome 1748, page 105)
In these days, the veils and scales described in Scripture as being over the eyes of
the nations and of Israel are being removed as we are called to move back together
once again to be made one in His Hand. The division was allowed for His purposes,
whether we understand them or not. A study of all the singular concepts that were
divided into two and later called into unity through Scripture is a very enlightening
study. It can be done by examining the meanings and implications whenever the
number 2 is involved. Our God is a specialist in teaching the same theme over and
over through many different circumstances and people; together making a
convincing picture of the two becoming one in more than one matter!
2) Complete Acceptance of Judah and Judaism
There are a number of concerns here, as would be expected in such an old
dilemma. Most of them center in one way or another on the fact that the Torah was
given to Moshe and that Judah has kept the Torah intact over the centuries.
Because they have kept the Torah they deserve respect and honor as the leader of
the tribes of Israel. This often appears in practice as complete acceptance of all they
do as well. In fact, there has been a blurring of distinction between the whole House
of Israel and Tribe of Judah, many taking them to mean exactly the same people
group. (In truth, Judah, often called “Jews” today, is only one of the twelve tribes of
the whole House of Israel. Yeshua is very clear many times that He is coming back
for the whole House of Israel.)
Because Judah has kept the Torah it is believed by many that they have the only
correct understanding of how to honor YHWH, or HaShem, which many would say
includes the Oral Torah, or traditions of the elders. While some have taken the
position that Gentile believers who come to faith in the God of Israel and/or Yeshua
Maschiach are privileged to then honor the Torah and the moedim, others conclude
that there is no need for Gentile believers to do so. Many people have written
extensively of this position over the years so their arguments won’t be repeated in
full. The interested reader can find a recent series of statements along these lines
from First Fruits of Zion director, Boaz Michaels, at their website, www.ffoz.org as it
was printed in Messiah Magazine. (There is also a very thorough Scriptural rebuttal
of this argument provided by Tim Hegg at www.torahresource.com . Mordechai
Silver, of Tree of Life Ministries also speaks eloquently to this division and the need
for appropriate unity.)
A more recent approach to the argument that Judah is to be emulated in order to
find unity with them and with Messiah comes through the examination of the 7 Spirits
of YHWH in light of their relationship to these days of Creation, events and Spirits
connected with each day. While dealing with eschatological events the argument is
made that since Judah is the fourth son, and the fourth day of Creation involved the
sun, moon and stars along with the Ruach ha Kodesh and the concept of
government being on his shoulder, thus Judah is to have the governing role over all
those who believe in the God of Israel.
Agreeably, many things in Revelation cannot be understood accurately without a
familiarity with Temple practices or at least what Judaism has practiced for many of
the Feast Days. Clearly it seems that Judah will at some point in the future exercise
leadership and not ownership of the moedim. It seems equally clear that at such a
point in the future Ephraim should humbly agree with YHWH”s order and not
become arrogant as they come into Torah and think that they will surpass Judah.
Some recommend that people follow Judah’s lead on calendar issues and other
matters since they have been keeping Torah for so many years; and surely have a
lot to teach us. This would also include doing whatever is necessary to keep peace
with those who disagree, even to the point of observing more than one calendar if
need be. The Scripture about the scepter not departing from Judah (Numbers 24:17)
as another confirmation of their leadership role.
Observations
There are issues and conflicts with both of these polarized positions. Neither
polarized response is valid. The division between those who kept Torah and those
who accepted Messiah Yeshua was foreknown and acceptable to YHWH for a
season for His purposes; just as the concept of “two” includes both witness and
division. Judah is to be respected and there is indeed, a great deal to be
learned from their experience, history and Torah understanding. This respect
does not necessitate uncritical adherence to all of their practices. Each of the tribes
and each individual has been gifted by our Elohim with certain attributes and each of
these attributes is equally important, not to be overridden or ignored. Just as there
are 7 aspects to the Spirit of YHW and each is to be in balance with the other, so
respect for all the people of YHWH should be in balance.
It is also true that “Jewish by bloodline” believers in Yeshua are still carrying vestiges
of their former belief systems of one form or another of Judaism with them. Just as
those coming from a traditional Christian background of whatever denomination
need to re-evaluate their understanding of Scripture and spiritual phenomenon
experienced in light of what they are learning usually about Torah, so do Jewish
believers often carry patterns of thought and beliefs that need to be re-evaluated in
light of Messiah Yeshua and the Brit Chadasha and are not necessarily to be
accepted uncritically.
Despite some Messianic leaders supposition that this is the case, it is not really
difficult to check into practices within Judaism over several centuries and see
differences even here, let alone over several thousand years. In fact, if one studies
the concept of halachah, which means “the way we walk” and is the term to describe
how one actually practices various aspects of Torah it will become evident rather
quickly that there has never been a time when only one “way” was considered
correct.
Which portion of Judah should be considered THE correct way?
If one is to “follow Judah” for the sake of unity, a primary issue is that of Judah’s lack
of unity within Judaism. Orthodox, Ultra Orthodox, Reformed, Chassidic—these are
some of the labels, rather like the different synods or divisions within many
denominational churches Christians are familiar with. Just a short visit to Israel
reveals the large number of differing sects, each with their own customs and
traditions, often including very specific manner of dress and hairstyles for men and
women. There has been great disgust among Judah for the division within Messianic
circles yet perhaps it can be said that the only “advance” in Judaism is that they are
more settled and fixed in their differences.
This is not a new situation either. Even in Scripture, we see the tension between
groups such as the Sadducees and the Pharisees, Scribes, Essenes and Zealots,
and the two main leaders of Judaism of the time: Hillel and Shammai. In truth, there
never has been only one “Jewish Halachah” but rather a system of regional or area
leaders that determined what was considered accepted in their realm.
Some people would have us believe that kosher food laws and laws concerning
ritual slaughter can be extrapolated BACK to first Century times with the assumption
that what was done in the 3rd century is surely what was done in the 1st. 2 This is not
an automatically correct conclusion, nor is it clear how those who hunted wild game
for food managed to convince the game to stand still while the certified shochet
made the prescribed cut with prayer. Since Abraham fed his 3 guests meat and
curds (Gen. 18:6-8) Scriptural support for the prohibition of meat and dairy together
as is taught does not seem valid; in view of the rule of complete mention, or allowing
Scripture to interpret Scripture.
Investigation of current Beit Din authority over food handling practices is another
area that is in fact NOT so uniform as one might think, but rather a loose network of
groups having authority in different countries or regions around the world that do not
all agree on every point.
It is not necessary to agree or observe these practices beyond that which is
stated in Scripture, in order to remain respectful of those who are persuaded
of their importance. This is often a matter of personal and corporate maturity.
The calendar of observance of the moedim is another salient point. The vast
majority of Jewry around the world adhere to the schedule established early on in
the Diaspora. A few groups still differ on how to count the Omer or other details of
observance such as one or two days. The Karaite’s are Jews who have broken away
from this practice centuries ago. Modern Karaites now observe the sighted moon as
near in observance of Torah commands as they understand to do. For this, they are
respected by some and denigrated by others. Recently, there has been a
resurgence of what is called the “lunar Sabbath” calendar again by those called
Jews as well as others, now saying that even the sighted moon practice at the
beginning of months is not adequate to be on YHWH’s true timetable.
Just a few weeks ago I was told by a Jewish Believer in Messiah that “everyone
knows” the calendar established while in the Diaspora is “wrong” but that it is kept
for the sake of unity with Jews around the world. The desire for unity amidst so much
uncertainty in the world is certainly understandable. Is the choice really the best
one? Might it also just be more for the sake of convenience in planning?
Our desire is to please Messiah and to honor His Word and directions to our best
ability. If unity between believers is chosen as the criteria to continue doing what is
recognized as inaccurate, how does this keep Messiah and His Word of primary,
central importance?
Should believers in the God of Israel then follow every lead of people who
have a different criteria from what is taught in the Torah for the sake of human
unity?
Seems that Isaiah spoke pretty clearly to this point in another situation:
For the leaders of this people cause them to err;
And those who are led by them are destroyed.
Isaiah 9:16 NKJV
This teaching metaphor of putting different things that are in groups of sevens “on”
the menorah has been very enlightening; a wonderful part of studying thematically
including the awareness of Hebraic meanings of things that just go past our
awareness in English. Still, as there are limitations to how far one can take an
interpretation of parables so there is a limit here.
Judah, being the fourth brother, would seem to have no significance here as he is
one of a group of at least twelve brothers, not seven. It doesn’t seem reasonable to
fit him on the fourth day/candle to establish leadership metaphorically. If this
reasoning were to hold true, then what would we do with David who, though he was
of Judah’s line, was the 8th son? He would not be “on” the menorah at all yet who
could deny his position of leadership as King? Perhaps this can be done by grouping
the tribes/brothers, in two sets of 3 pairs with the central stem/candle as Messiah,
which would come to “four” but with the central candle being the Ruach, and
Messiah; not Judah.
It is understood that the spiritual Truth came first, as Messiah was slain before the
foundation of the world, and that physical pictures were given to help human beings
comprehend the greater spiritual truths. But if our eyes stop at the physical
representation, ie look to Judah rather than to the Ruach, how would this be
different than the serpent on the pole? Looking to the serpent was given as a
method of healing and restoration but eventually King Hezekiah had to destroy it as
the people saw the physical form without keeping the spiritual Truth, a picture of
idolatry. To look for unity with human Judah rather than THE Lion of Judah as a
prerequisite for Truth appears to be the same error made with the serpent on the
pole.
If Judah has the only significant leadership role, what do we do with Moshe and
Aharon who were of Levi? Certainly it is well known that the priests often led in
battle; Levites, going forth in song and with shofars? And what of Moshe’s
recognition of the leadership of Caleb and Joshua? Was it “Judah” who led them
into conquest of the promised land? No; Joshua was of the house of Ephraim.
There are different types of leadership presented throughout Scripture; often in a
group of three: prophet, priest and king. This three strand cord provided a stable
base for decision-making which still stands today as a sound model for leadership.
Various skills are needed for effective leadership and rarely is there one individual
who has all three in sufficient measure; might it also be reasonable to say then that
the different positions might also represent people from different tribes with
complimentary skills? Since human nature is unchanged, unlike manmade
procedures which rarely stay the same, this might seem reasonable to extrapolate
backwards and assume that it would still be the same, and with Scriptural support as
well!
Unconditional rejection or acceptance of Judah as the only possible leader and
keeper of THE correct way has surely been a polarizing, divisive matter at Messiah’s
fulfillment of the spring moedim and now again as we await His return for the
fulfillment of the fall feasts and the restoration of all things. Not only are we dealing
with fleshly matters but spiritual forces as well. Surely it is obvious that the evil
one doesn’t really care which position is taken, so long as it is done in a
divisive manner? In this way, the content of the discussion gets lost in the
personal animosity and contentiousness.
Just as an overwhelming desire for one of the seven spirits of YHWH to be operating
more so than the others can lead to an imbalance and instability for a person, so
could it also be true that a desire for one tribe to hold all forms of leadership tightly
and exclusively could lead to the same phenomenon? This effect will be most
pronounced as we lift up our heads anticipating His return, under greater and greater
pressure from the world, the flesh and the evil one.
Seems rather like the arguments that arose between Yeshua’s talmudim as to who
would be greatest, doesn’t it? Didn’t He encourage them in humility, to be content
with what each was given?
And there arose a reasoning among them, which of them should be
greatest. And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart , took a
child….for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.
Luke 9: 46-48 KJV
Didn’t Shaul/Paul deal with this as well when people spoke of following other
people?
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ
that ye all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you;
but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them
of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say that every
one of you saith I am of Paul, and I, of Apollos, and I, of Cephas and I of
Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified fro you? Or were ye baptized
in the name of Paul? 1 Cor. 1: 10-13 KJV
Scriptural Truths come alive the more we pursue the various levels and depths of
what has been provided for us. No longer just looking at people and their stories, but
at the connection between them, the connections between their circumstances as
well as examining the intricacies of the Hebrew language in its great depth we see
so much more. The end is told from the beginning in many forms. I believe this can
help us in the quest for understanding precedent for reconciliation and leadership in
the end times as well.
The vision in our age of history that Judah is to be “the” leader and that others who
want to find unity with Messiah need to unite with Judah first pertains to the
restoration of all things as we near the end of the age and Messiah’s return. There is
a parable about this matter. It seems quite well accepted that the parable of the
prodigal son represents the elder son as Judah and the younger son as Ephraim;
both looking to the Father who is as our Abba.
When Ephraim came to his senses and returned, with whom was he reconciled?
With the Father.
Where was Judah? Off in the distance resisting and protesting the love and care
shown to Ephraim.
As he complained the Father reassured him that he, too, was loved but that
celebration should be made for one who has come back as from the dead. Rather a
picture relating to Ezekiel’s dry bones, too, isn’t it? It is the Father who brought
about any reconciliation that happened between the brothers. They apparently
couldn’t do it on their own. Does this application seem to be “stretching” the parable
beyond its intent? Human nature doesn’t change though traditions do.
Unfortunately, this picture of Judah’s behavior seems to be a painfully accurate one
of his behavior toward those who are returning to Torah in our day. Clearly this is
NOT the case with every Jewish person having an “attitude” of superiority or disdain
toward “Gentile” believers coming in but it is certainly a frequent enough occurrence
as to leave no doubt that arrogance can easily come from an assumed leadership
role. This is certainly an instance of strife among brothers when one considers
himself above the others, and however benevolently, abrogates their input as
unworthy of serious consideration.
Perhaps the most compelling argument to be cautious about “becoming as Judah” in
order to find unity with fellow believers first is the danger of that form of idolatry and
the path it encourages. It is a reality that many thousands of believers have made
the transition from faith in the Jesus of Christianity, to faith in Yeshua understood in
a Hebraic context, and have then become enamored of all things Jewish. Judaism
has their “anti-missionaries” as well; specifically trained to challenge Christians and
those who believe in Yeshua as Messiah. There is even a website with a chart
depicting this as a normative pattern of faith development. Many thousands have
moved right past holding on to both written Torah and the Living Torah, Yeshua ha
Maschiach to the position that there is no need for Messiah Yeshua at all. They then
begin to question the validity of the entire Brit Chadasha. Some reject Him in their
return to Judaism, and some express an ambivalence: maybe he is and maybe he
isn’t Messiah but it no longer matters to them.
Though leaders of Judaism may rejoice, the greater question is whether or not
Messiah does.
Conclusion
Based on all of the above commentary the conclusions are as follows:
REJECTION 1) distance from anything perceived as “Jewish.”
And the ancillary error of the first position to assume that anyone
will replace or eclipse Judah.
REJECTION 2) unconditional acceptance of what is perceived as Jewish.
THIRD OPTION
I propose a third option of mutual respect, one for another and for the specialized
roles each tribe and each person is to play in our Father’s plan.
I further propose that all parties concentrate on unity/echad in Messiah Yeshua and
His written Torah. (I specify written Torah due to the unresolved and perhaps unresolvable-until-Messiah-comes issues pertaining to Oral Torah.)
This will still leave some conflict as people strive to determine how best to interpret
and walk out what has been written. As has been done in times past, there is a need
to understand that each regional area will have leaders of influence who help
determine what is done in that area. Good people of good will and deep Biblical
scholarship can have very different understandings as we know painfully well.
Since an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient Elohim certainly knew this
would happen and did not prevent it, it behooves us to graciously respect one
another in our halachic differences while also continuing to exhort and encourage
one another on to completion or maturity in all aspects of life.
Confusion can not be avoided in some issues that were left ambiguous: the snares
left to test us and see whether or not we will be able to hold loosely to those things
that cannot be proven one way or another while still retaining relationship with our
brothers.
While we need to remain open-handed to avoid dogmatic, rigid interpretations and
imposing them on others, we also need to remember that maturity needs to be
addressed whichever position is taken. Accountability and exhortation toward
maturity in all aspects of personality, behavior and relationships is still necessary
and should not be construed as contentiousness or strife. “Bearing with one another”
in our weakness and “covering” should not be understood as a form of enabling one
to continue in that weakness, hardly a gift of love.
Joyfully, with this approach, Yeshua willing, we may be able to learn to walk Torah
together with all the strengths, giftings, talents and special abilities of each of the
tribes working together toward the one new man described. At the time of
restoration each tribe will be functioning as they were called, under Messiah.
The new flock that our Shepherd has promised: one flock, one Law, one Shepherd.
He is the Head and Leader over us all.
May it be so in our day.
21And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds,
22yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you
before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach--
23if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away
from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under
heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.
24Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I do my share on behalf of His
body, which is the church, in filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions. 25Of this church
I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your
benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, 26that is, the
mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been
manifested to His saints, 27to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory
of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
28We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so
that we may present every man complete in Christ.
29For this purpose also I labor, striving
according to His power, which mightily works within me. Colossians 1: 23-29
1 Easton, Burton Scott. "Grace," International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia. Edited by James Orr. Blue Letter Bible. 1913. 1 Apr 2007. 28 Jun 2010.
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/Search/Dictionary/viewTopic.cfm?
type=GetTopic&Topic=Grace&DictList=4#ISBE>
2 Holy Cow! God Cares what We Eat? Eagan, Hope,
MessiahYeshuasFollowersBecomingasJudah.November2010.pdf