“Re-Judaizing Jesus”
Time Magazine recently published an article which implies that a rising number of Christian teachers regard “[Jewish] sources like the Mishnah and Rabbi Akiva as vital to understanding” Yeshua. Surely, reference to this literature among the Hebrew Roots community is common, but according to the aforementioned article, it is also true of at least two Christian leaders.
My hope is that believers who come across factoids like this will not take them to heart, and will instead steer clear of Jewish literature as an avenue for understanding Yeshua. Seeing the Master in His proper historical and cultural context is one thing, but the Talmud and other Jewish writings are ultimately useful and authoritative for one thing only: acquiring an understanding of Judaism—a Judaism which is historically and spiritually hostile to the Messiah Yeshua. Indeed, did not the Master Himself say to the fathers of Rabbinic Judaism, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’” (Mark 7:7) For all their alleged wisdom and insight, the Rabbis take us on a circuitous journey around and passing by the God of Israel, failing to deliver us into a deeper relationship with and knowledge of Him.
I also take stark issue with the idea that Yeshua was “passionate[ly] dedicat[ed] ‘to Jewish ideas of his day’”. The Master Yeshua, though immersed in first century Israeli culture and what Stern calls “thoughtforms of their time” (p. 32, JNT Commentary), surely would not have appropriated the teachings of men and taught them as His own. On the contrary, Yeshua brought not “Jewish ideas” to their fullness, but the Torah and the Prophets (Mt.5:17ff), and if there is any resemblance between the teachings of the Rabbis and that of Yeshua, I contend that it was the Master’s influence on His contemporaries—not the other way around! There is no doubt that restoring the Jewishness of Yeshua is absolutely crucial, but to study Talmud in order to uncover “ideas that he rewove but did not abandon” is misleading at best.
In my personal study of Jewish literature, I have yet to come across a piece of godly, divine wisdom that is unique to those writings. If we want to understand the “New Testament Jesus,” we need to look no further than page one of our Bibles—beginning with the Torah, then on through the whole of Scripture—the only truly authoritative Jewish text. If only my “people of the Book” would forsake their philosophical ways and return to the Torah and the Scriptures!—because as long as we remain confined by the wisdom of men, Salvation will remain ever elusive.
I would like to openly invite anyone to offer up here any piece of Jewish literature that aids in our understanding of Yeshua that cannot be found anywhere in Scripture. I do not make this challenge brashly or with disdain for the texts of Judaism, but only in the confidence that there is no need (and indeed, it may even be counter-productive) to go beyond Scripture in seeking the “Re-Judaized Jesus”.
5 Comments
For the most part I agree with your points. When my Messianic Rabbi mentioned the piece in Time, it sounded very exciting, and in some ways it is, for when the church discovers more of the Jewishness of Yeshua, it will help to bridge gaps and begin a very exciting time, and it seems like maybe that time is soon coming. However the text of the article was much less exciting than the title. I found nothing interesting in the use of traditional Jewish text, nor in the inclusion of someone in the forefront of Emergent/Emerging theology. To include Jewish writings and water down the Good News, does little for me, and little for God, but how often does Time magazine do anything to glorify God?
So, for me, I am glad that the idea is spreading and Gentile believers are starting to see the roots of their own faith. Ultimately the Scripturally Jewish Jesus is not Jewish because of the rabbinic traditions of His day, but because of being Torah true. He was Jewish not for doing Jewish things, but for doing Biblical things, the commandments of God. Recognizing that is a positive thing as we have a consistent Messiah and a consistent Father in Heaven, the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8). B”H
Bryan Z.
By Bryan Z on December 23, 2006 at 2:22 am
Amen Kevin!!
I give you credit because so many in the “messy-anic” movement would call such a comment as “anti-semitic”. I would say anti-semitic against who? Why is the “true Judaism” always referred to how one follows the Talmud and the rabbis, instead of of how one follows the true God and His Messiah Yeshua?
I applaud you Kevin, as you continue to inspire believers to realize that they do not need man’s “interpretations” to live a life dedicated to The Almighty. By allowing the Ruach to guide you and Yeshua as the example for you to live a life pleasing to the Father, is the personal relationship that He desires from all those who He calls His own.
May He bless you and keep you, and may He bring blessings to you and your family and on all of the work of your hands.
Aaron L.
By Aaron L on May 07, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I beg to differ with you, Kevin. Although over-focusing on the Talmud/Rabbinic sources can cause some to focus less on the actual Word, re-reading these sources CAN help us better understand the life and ministry of our Messiah. As we read the Rabbinical literature with Yeshua-loving eyes, we are able to see him in his proper context and it opens up our eyes to the deeper meanings of his teachings. It’s time we saw him for who he really is and was, and not in the Anglo-Saxon context we have been taught for centuries. Thank you for your blog, and I pray for more healthy discussions such as this.
By Rivkah on June 11, 2008 at 11:10 am
Sounds good, Rivkah. I look forward to the excerpts from Jewish literature you’ll be posting here to support your position.
By Kevin Geoffrey on June 11, 2008 at 11:19 am
That’s an interesting point Rivkah. So by your reasoning, as long as we look at things with “Yeshua-loving” eyes, then we can see the deeper meaning of His teachings. So then the “Anglo-Saxon” way of seeing Jesus in Easter and Christmas is justified - by your reasoning. Please understand that I am not trying to patronize you, but I thought the only way to see Yeshua in full and correct context is through the filter of the Torah. Remember the words of Isaiah when he said (also quoted by Yeshua) “Then the Lord said, ‘Because this people draw near with their words And honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned {by rote,}’” (Isa 29:13, NASB).
You see the difference here. I would agree with your point if Yeshua taught as those of Talmud/Rabbinic sources taught, but he did not. Yeshua quoted and taught from the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings; the Rabbis only quote and teach from themselves and others like them. Remember when the crowds gathered and were amazed at Yeshua’s teachings because HE DID NOT TEACH AS THE PHARISEES TAUGHT, HE TAUGHT AS HAVING AUTHORITY (Mat 7:29, Mar 1:22) Yeshua taught with the authority of Elohim, the Rabbis only taught with the authority of those that preceded them.
It is my utmost belief that the only contextual way to understand Yeshua’s teachings; in fact any teachings found in the Brit Chadasha, is through the lens of the written Torah of Elohim (and of course by the leading of the Ruach, which should go without saying). Shalom, sister in Yeshua, and may the Shalom and truth of our master Yeshua and the Elohim of Israel guide you in all ways.
Aaron
By Aaron L on June 14, 2008 at 11:08 am
Post a Comment