-----Original Message-----
From: David
Miller
Sent: Wednesday, 05 January, 2005 10.00
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
Judaizers within the Messianic Movement
DAVIDM
I
think you very much have misunderstood my post. I testified that the Messianic
movement is of God, but qualified that with the observation that like all
movements of God, there are some dangerous elements within it. These would be
those who function like the Judaizers in Paul's day. Kay asked for clarification
on that statement and this is the context in which my post ought to be
understood.
SLADE
Nice save... but alas. It doesn't save. The context of the message you gave was within "what aspects of the Messianic Movement you feel may be dangerous." This was the question posed to you, and the response you gave was clearly understood within its context. Saying the Messianic Movement is of God makes no sense within the context of this message. Your message is below and I have dissected it from my understanding and within the context of it a specific answer to a very specific question. DavidM remains in 12-point Courier font while I revert to 12-point Times New Roman.
The dangerous aspects are those within the movement who emphasize shadows over reality.
The problem with this statement is the subjectivity of your definition of "shadows." You are clearly one who sees Newer Testament fulfillment of Older Testament "shadows" as nullifying these OT "shadows" in favor of NT "realities." Again, you make it clear that those of a different theological slant than you are considered dangerous. This is a perfectly logical extension of your thought here. Also, what happens when someone thinks your "reality" is indeed "shadow?" Does that make you just as dangerous? Worse case scenario, it makes you alone in your own heaven at the end of days. At best, it makes you alone here on earth until the end of day.
For example, those who think that keeping Torah commandments that deal with shadows is the only way to be pleasing to God.
Here you give an example of your opinion of emphasizing shadows over reality (see your comment, "For example"). What you state here is dangerous unless one is a prophet which you have been disqualified until further notice. Why is it dangerous? Because you attempt to climb into the heads of people and determine their heart. "The only way to be pleasing" is a statement with no basis designed to elevate your argument. Illogical, yet common argument... first used against the Marranos if memory serves me correctly.
This would include the practice of killing a lamb in addition to faith in Yeshua
What are you implying here? Are you saying we sacrifice lambs? Are you saying we kill lambs to eat? You kill cows for food and so do I. I kill lambs to eat... and you don't? Are you, perhaps, referring to the remembrance of Passover? If so, what do you think we think the Pascal [meal] lamb represents?
of observing the moedim in addition to remembering that to which they point, of sabbath observance in addition to entering the kingdom of God,
I hear "obedience" touted on this board a lot [by you and Judy Taylor], yet when one claims to be obedient, they are dangerous. Are you are being double-minded or setting us up to fail? Again, this argument is rooted in ignorance. When Messiah returns, we will be celebrating the Sabbath, the New Moons, Feast of Tabernacles, etc., yet you oppose it. You are suggesting a schizoid faith I want no part of. I'd rather me pagan. Perhaps Dave Hanson and I have more in common than you and I.
of circumcision of the flesh in addition to circumcision of the heart, etc.
In addition to? Is there a specific order to these circumcisions are you suggesting is wrong? Where do you understand Jewish people never to circumcise their male children? Do you not know that Moses required circumcision of the heart as well?
Also, those who insist upon using Hebrew names,
You insist upon using Greek and English names! Why is your way so much superior when we consider that transliterations of modern Hebrew and Greek names are used today (i.e., Yitzchak Rabin, Ariel Sharon, etc.).
of denouncing the Trinity, etc.
No one here has renounced the Trinity to my knowledge. Perhaps your greatest difficulty is with the Oneness Pentecostal movement and not Messianism after all! I will admit to knowing some in the Messianic Movement who oppose Trinitarianism, but I've never considered that a big deal. I don't think it's a big deal that Oneness Pentecostals and hardcore Trinitarians are going to share the Kingdom with me either. Perhaps you are speaking of my refusal to be dogmatic about the Trinity or about Oneness!
Generally, the Judaizing elements are causes of concern.
A definition of "Judaizing" would be nice... since you're generalizing here. In my definition, I agree, but the tonal quality of your post rings like a 120db 1K sine wave in my ear.... which means you and I are doubtfully using the same definition.
The letter kills but the spirit gives life.
Yeah... so what?! We ALL agree... even Rabbinic Judaism!
