This blog serves as an outreach for Pastor Randy Powell of the First Baptist Church of Franklin, PA. Feel free to ask questions or send me an e-mail at pastorpowell@hotmail.com
Light vs. Dark imagery is very common in the Bible. In fact, when seeing a vision of God, or meeting an angel, the text typically describes the scene by reference to dazzlingly bright light. The Apostle Paul utilizes this analogy often, telling us that we were in darkness but now have seen the Light of Christ. Here in Ephesians, however, Paul goes a step further. He proclaims that we WERE darkness but now in the Lord we ARE light. It isn't about the place, but the person. God's power not only transforms this world, it transforms human beings.
As Children of the Light, we now must embrace goodness, righteousness, and truth. Additionally, we cannot have anything to do with the deeds of our former darkness, instead we must expose such deeds that the light may continue to overcome evil.
I'll admit, I'm a fan of God's grace. That isn't a hot-take, nor should it raise anyone's eyebrows. If there are a few folks down through the years who have misunderstood grace, or who have tried to take advantage of God's grace, throwing it overboard in response would be ludicrous in the extreme...
Lesson 41 page 6: "The church's loud and predominant teachings about God's grace also make it difficult for people to believe in God's wrath. Ever since the Protestant Reformation, the emphasis on grace has tipped the scale so severely off balance that many Christians anticipate no consequences for sin whatsoever. That's a good recipe for neutralizing the fear of the LORD, neutering the gospel message, and storing up wrath."
It turns out that First Fruits of Zion has a problem with grace. Technically, they have a problem with the Protestant Church's emphasis on grace because they think it undermines God's wrath. Once again in this Torah Club lesson we have the Straw Man brought out to tell us that "many" Protestants think that there are no consequences, at all, to sin. Why would Protestants think something so foolish? Apparently because they spend to much time praising God's grace.
Set aside for the moment that this is patently false. There is no substantial part of the Protestant Church that teaches that believers are free to sin because grace has "neutered" God's wrath. Given that there are hundreds of thousands of pastors worldwide, I'm sure FFOZ could trot out a few examples of crackpots in defense of their spurious claim, but to claim that this is so widespread that it needs a correction (that's coming) is ridiculous. This is a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad absurdum. If you claim that your opponent (and FFOZ's opponent is most assuredly the Church) believes something so foolish, those listening to you will be more likely to believe your "cure" for the non-existent disease.
What then is the point? Why would FFOZ make such an explosive claim, attacking the fundamental viewpoint about the Gospel of 1/3 of the Church? What are they trying to put in the place of grace?
Lesson 41,page 7: "It's important to remember that the New Testament Greek word translated as grace (charis) is the Greek equivalent to the Biblical Hebrew word we see translated as 'favor.' It's the same concept and should be translated consistently to avoid confusion."
FFOZ has built its false teaching on the foundation of an eternal, perfect, and unchanging Torah that must be observed by all peoples, in all places, for all time. When rule keeping is the heart and soul of what you say and do, the natural result is to drift ever further into legalism. This is human nature, it happens every time. Conveniently, then, FFOZ now teaches that because Moses earned God's favor, and favor equals grace, we too can earn God's grace. Not only that, the HaYesod chapter proclaims that human beings can share their extra grace (earned by unjust suffering) with others.
In case you're wondering, grace in the NT and favor in the OT are not one and the same. Word usage determines word meaning, context is king. The argument that FFOZ is making doesn't hold water, to simply proclaim that two words in different languages from texts written many generations apart are equal does not make it so. However, FFOZ must proclaim absolute continuity between the testaments on even things like word definitions because they are viewing all of scripture through the lens of Torah, but that's not how communication, and certainly now how translation, works.
Nobody is earning the grace connected to the Gospel that is proclaimed in the NT. God chooses to whom he will give it, and God freely gives it. To say otherwise is an abomination.
Lesson 41 page 9: 'The name of the daughter of Asher was Serah' (Numbers 26:46)...The census mentions a woman named Serah, the daughter of Asher. She's the granddaughter of the patriarch Jacob, and she also appears in the list of Jacob's seventy children who entered Egypt about three hundred years earlier: 'The sons of Asher: Imnah and Ishvah and Ishvi and Beriah and their sister Serah' (Genesis 46:17)"
To warn about the disparagement of grace in this Torah Club lesson is the proper focus. That's one of the most dangerous ideas that FFOZ has ever put forth (tough competition there). So, why am I also highlighting this odd embrace of Jewish folklore as the means of interpreting Genesis 46:17, Numbers 26:46, and 1 Chronicles 7:30? The answer is simple enough: poor hermeneutical methods result in foolish teachings, or worse. Why is FFOZ telling Torah Club members that the Serah in Jacob's day was still alive during King David's reign? Jewish folklore says so.
Lesson 41, page 10: "At the very least, she must have had longevity comparable to that of the earliest generations recorded in the Bible. Jewish folklore depicts her...According to one legend, she lived into the days of King David, and it was she who saved the inhabitants of Abel from the king's wrath. You certainly don't need to take that literally or believe it all, but, for the record, there really was..."
I've seen this type of caveat many times in FFOZ materials. A bold claim is made that is pulled from extra-biblical literature, the lesson says "you don't have to believe it," and then the lesson moves ahead with that bold claim assumed as fact. The "but, for the record" reveals where the heart of the author of this chapter lies. In case you are wondering, there are plenty of names in the Bible that occur a few times over spans of generations. To assume that it is the same human being who is still alive solely on the basis of the name is NOT a normal exegetical conclusion.
If the interpretation is just a folktale, and whether Serah lived the normal spans of years or 600 doesn't have any real theological significance, why should we care? We should care because FFOZ is using these extra-biblical sources to interpret holy scripture. The other times they use this method are much more consequential. It is part of a dangerous pattern of treating God's Word as if it is putty to be molded and shaped as needed. Do other teachers and ministries also selectively utilize and interpret God's Word to suit their viewpoint? Absolutely, it is sadly far too common. "What about..." is no excuse. All who treat God's Word in this manner should be held accountable.
In the end, Lesson #41 of the Beginning of Wisdom is yet another reminder of why no follower of Jesus Christ ought to entrust his or her discipleship to FFOZ.
After telling us that we need to imitate Jesus by walking "in the way of love," the Apostle Paul now reminds us how incompatible that calling is with continuing to live in sin. As such, Paul reminds us that "even a hint" of immorality, impurity, or greed is too much for God's people.
Imitate God. That's a directive that prompts many questions in response. The Apostle Paul has one particular aspect of God's nature and actions in mind: Love. We are to love others like God loves us. It's that's simple, and that daunting.
As the culmination of his examples of the new attitude that is needed now that we are in Christ, the Apostle Paul proclaims that "all" and "every form" of the previous bitterness/rage/anger/malice, etc. needs to be removed and in its place must be put kindness and compassion that includes forgiving others.
A challenge? Absolutely, things will happen in life that push us toward anger and away from kindness. We need to let them go and follow the example of Jesus with kindness and compassion. Added incentive needed? God forgave you first, go and do likewise.
Having dealt with FFOZ club leaders and followers these past three years who are adamant that FFOZ "doesn't teach that" even after I show them the exact thing they are denying, it is refreshing to see that FFOZ now has a "What We Believe" page that (mostly) reflects what they actually teach. This transparency is a big step in the right direction toward warning pastors and others about the unorthodox/heretical teachings coming from FFOZ.
In the video I break down each of the 15 statements, paying particular attention to the most dangerous (unbiblical) ideas and pointing out one big omission.
As Paul continues to share examples of the new attitude that followers of Jesus must adopt, he turns his focus to our speech. The contrast between unwholesome talk that tears down and helpful talk that builds up highlights the stark change between what we were and what we must grow (with the Holy Spirit's help) to be.
In addition, Paul reminds us that our failures with respect to what we say are a grief to the Holy Spirit. Why? We are ambassadors of Christ, as any misbehaving child would embarrass his/her parents, filthy talk from Christians grieves the Spirit of God within us.
This new teaching, 2025, from FFOZ is a bold new heresy, one utterly rejected by every N.T. author.
In a nutshell, FFOZ is now teaching that the "radial" geography of the tabernacle/temple is eternal. Thus, they teach that gentile followers of Jesus are eternally 4th class citizens of the kingdom of heaven (behind the priest/Levites, Jewish men, and Jewish women) in accordance with the physical layout of the Temple.
There are also two statements that hint toward the conclusion that because the Jewish people are eternally the "people of God," with permanent status of closer access, they don't need to accept Jesus as Savior.
As a follow-up to his command that Jesus' followers adopt a new attitude divorced from our former futile thinking when we were apart from God, the Apostle Paul offers up in these verses three examples of what that will look like: (1) Embracing truth by putting off falsehood, (2) Keeping anger in check so that it does not lead to sin, and (3) Sharing what we have earned rather than taking (stealing) from others.
With respect to anger in particular, Paul frames it as a potential "foothold" that the devil might use to ensnare those who sin in their anger. The same holds true for the other two issues, and really any situation where we give in to temptation. The answer is always the same: embrace righteousness. When we say and do what is right, temptation (evil) has no opportunity to affect us.
Until today I have never heard of the Telepathy Tapes, given that I don't listen to podcasts that aren't on ESPN, and certainly not to Joe Rogen, that isn't surprising. How did I learn about The Telepathy Tapes? First Fruits of Zion's Messiah Podcast in Februrary of 2025 hosted by Daniel Lancaster endorsed them and a concerned former Torah Club member shared the link with me.
What are The Telepathy Tapes? This review was the best one I could find: The Dangerous Charm of The Telepathy Tapes January 27, 2025 by Chloe Walker. In short, The Telepathy Tapes claim that autistic children, with the help of a parent 'facilitating' "demonstrated his ability to read thoughts, and reported spiritual insights and messages from God." (to quote Daniel Lancaster).
Wait a minute, why is a pro-Torah keeping organization endorsing the idea that autistic children all have miraculous spiritual powers? The answer, it turns out, is simple: They believe this idea will support Jewish mysticism / Kabbalah. Given that FFOZ leans heavily into mystical interpretations of scripture, anything that seems to support that idea is good news. "If the claims presented in The Telepathy Tapes (TTT) are true, they have major implications for science, philosophy, education, psychology, neurology, anthropology, theology, religion, and faith. They also have compelling parallels to both Jewish mysticism and apocalyptic Jewish texts like the New Testament."- Daniel Lancaster (emphasis mine).
In his article, it is clear that Daniel Lancaster buys into The Telepathy Tapes premise all the way: "the existence of telepathy is only the beginning. The listener is quickly catapulted into a world of spiritual revelations reported by the non-speakers. We hear about the pre-incarnate existence of the soul, spiritual beings like angels and demons, revelations from heaven, revelations about heaven, trips to heaven, conversations with God, conversations with Jesus, conversations with departed souls in heaven, visions of the future, precognitive declarations, clairvoyance, divine healings, and many of the spiritual elements typical of reports from those who suffer the classic Near Death Experience." - Daniel Lancaster
As someone who has met Don Piper (Author of 90 Minutes in Heaven), and who hosted him at my church to share his Gospel message, the key issue at hand here is not the possibility of spiritual insights, but that the particular insights Lancaster is so excited about are ones that confirm his pre-existing belief in Jewish mysticism {See: Beginning of Wisdom (Torah Club) lesson #37: More Gnostic Dualism, pre-existence of the soul, and extra-biblical reliance} and is doing so by using vulnerable non-verbal children and their parents as props.
A brief explanation as to why this particular false teaching from FFOZ bothers me so much. When I was in middle school an autistic two-year-old first came to my house after school. My mother ran a daycare and this boy was displaying the signs of severe autism. In the beginning, he was non-verbal and prone to violent fits. Until he graduated high school (the school workers who helped him over the years were amazing), he was at my parents' house five days a week. I taught him how to swim in our pool, holding him through his initial terror at the water, and celebrating when he quickly learned to love swimming. He and his older brother were ushers at my wedding. I'm a better person for having known him, and I love this man who now is in his late 30's.
Children with disabilities, and their often desperate parents just trying to find hope and comfort, are NOT to be used to further economic, political, or religious agendas. These are children of God, and they deserve better. What The Telepathy Tapes is doing is morally unacceptable, and First Fruits of Zion piggybacking off of its popularity is grotesque.
I'll end with another couple of quotes from Lancaster that highlight just how dangerous it is to follow the First Fruits of Zion down their unorthodox path, "Christians will also find the content of TTT troubling, albeit for different reasons. Some non-speakers openly discuss spooky and off-limits subjects like reincarnation, communication with the deceased, and other ideas that invoke New Age mysticism." - Daniel Lancaster.
Yep, we have a problem with elevating the supposed authority of these "spiritual communications" when they are just as likely to promote Eastern Religious beliefs like reincarnation (which apparently doesn't bother Daniel? No idea what he's thinking there by mocking those who find it to be "spooky and off-limits"). That's what set Don Piper apart, whether or not you or I believe that his vision was genuine, his words about it were 100% orthodox in support of the Gospel. By their fruit you will know them. Daniel doesn't appear to be much concerned that some of the fruit of supposed autistic "telepathy" is rotten.
"In view of the sharp as-yet unexplained rise in autism rates, we should be asking, what is God doing in these last days?" - Daniel Lancaster
Well, at least he isn't blaming autism on vaccines. Instead, Daniel offers up the explanation that autism is a sign of the End Times. {And Boaz Michael wonders why I don't just drop my work exposing their teachings. Answer: This! This right here.}
"The Telepathy Tapes...get to the core of what is means to be a spiritual being here on earth, existing in a physical body while in relationship with God and one another." - Daniel Lancaster
Beware of the guy who tells you that a hoax that takes advantage of autistic kids and their parents is at the core of understanding life here on earth.
The Apostle Paul insists to his readers that they cannot live any longer "as the Gentiles do." He then describes humanity apart from God, the result being bleak. Instead, followers of Jesus need a new attitude to replace the old one, one that is like God's "true righteousness and holiness."
How are we to do this? Elsewhere Paul makes it clear that the Holy Spirit's empowerment is our only hope.
What does this new attitude look like? Stay tuned for the next three sermons as Paul gives practical examples of the change that we need to make.
We live in a world that is obsessed with safety. We are more aware of the dangers that exist than our forebearers, and spend more time trying to protect ourselves against them. But what about the Church? What can we do to help protect the Body of Christ from the people/things that threaten it?
One part of the answers offered by the Apostle Paul in these verses is: serve others. The maturity that comes from collectively working to serve others is a natural protective against both (1) false teaching, and (2) lying schemers. Why? When we are doing the will of God, and imitating Christ, we naturally turn away from the things of this world, and that orientation toward God takes us away from the things the false teachers tempt us with and scam artists or charlatans are seeking.
How does a Church grow? In other words, what builds up the body of Christ?
The answer from the Apostle Paul is strikingly simple: acts of service.
In this text, Paul talks about how Jesus continues to give grace to his people, in the form of leadership gifting, in order to enable his people to serve others.
Given what God was willing to do to save you, how should you respond?
The Apostle Paul tells us that we must live our entire lives in a way that is worthy of our calling. Calling from who? From God. Calling to what? To self-sacrifice and service for the sake of the Gospel.
How do we do this? Paul begins to answer that question by telling us to be: humble, gentle, patience, and loving. When we can demonstrate these virtues here among the people of God, it opens the door to being able to share them with everyone we meet.
What is God able to do? More than we can ask or imagine.
What does that mean? Set aside whatever ideas pop into your head about personal enrichment, God isn't in the business of giving you wealth, power, or fame because those ideas as much too SMALL. God's plans and purposes exceed or imagination, they don't fulfill it.
What God will actually do is utilize the Holy Spirit that resides within God's people to continue their process of transformation into Christ-likeness. Remember, when Jesus performed miracles it wasn't the healing that caused the furor from his critics, it was when Jesus forgave their sins. Spiritual miracles are far more impressive than physical ones, and God has committed to this transformation of each and every person that has been redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb.
I'll be honest, it hasn't been easy to be the primary online voice discussing the First Fruits of Zion these past almost three years. I've put a lot more effort and passion into the effort to warn the Church about FFOZ than I ever imagined I would when I first heard about Torah Clubs in the Fall of 2022. From the beginning the entire Franklin Christian Ministerium has supported me, that has been invaluable. My whole church, including my board, have supported me, that has been crucial. But until now, I had only been able to have private conversations with people in leadership at various groups affected by this movement, the public element was missing. Today that changed. The reach of Professor Solberg's platform is roughly 1,000 times that of my own, this dialogue about FFOZ has needed to be moved into the mainstream conversation within the Church, that reality moved much closer with the release of this interview.
If you're new to my blog, or my YouTube channel, note that all of my research has been primary source. I don't write about what people say about what FFOZ says, I write about what FFOZ teaches in their own publications, the things they choose to publish and profit from. You may not agree with all of my conclusions, that's ok, they come from an Evangelical Baptist perspective, I wouldn't expect them to be universally understood and embraced. If my thoughts get in the way, look at the direct quotes, I flood my posts and videos with them. I believe in the priesthood of all believers, and I believe that the Holy Spirit is more than capable of guiding each follower of Jesus Christ into Truth. Weigh what FFOZ is saying against the Word of God for that is the ultimate judge, not me. I am doing my best to apply God's Word to these weighty matters, if I fall short God's Word will not.
The Apostle Paul relates to the church at Ephesus his prayer for them: that they might be strengthened by the Holy Spirit to enable Christ to dwell in their hearts. Paul also prays that they might be fully "rooted and established in love," a necessary step to grasping the full extent of the love of Christ, which is our path to being truly filled with "the fullness of God."
HaYesod is the primary disciple-training material for the Hebrew Roots Movement aligned organization: The First Fruits of Zion
This analysis is from the 2023 edition. My initial seminar warning of the dangers of FFOZ utilized the 2017 edition. As will be shown here, the amount of unorthodox and heretical material has significantly increased from that edition to this.
The following analysis is not based upon this one lesson alone. These same false teachings have appeared in dozens of other Torah Club and FFOZ published materials.
What this lesson reveals is that Torah Club leaders are being taught to embrace these teachings, not gloss over them. The “correct” answers provided are truly damning.
FFOZ has a fascination with, and an allegiance to, the 2nd Temple Judaism of the 1st century. As such, they work to integrate beliefs from that era of Judaism into the theology they’re attempting to bring into churches.
Theodicy is the study of the “problem of evil.” It is a rich field that includes the wisdom of books like Job. However, to say that when godly people suffer it must be because of the sins of other people is a human-centered view that was rejected by Job’s insistence that his suffering was not the result of his sin (or any sin), and by the testimony of Jesus Christ.
John 9:1-3 (NIV) As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. 2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” 3 “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.
Because suffering and sin are not directly corelated, the entire premise of the so-called “Law of Atonement” is false. Even if the righteous suffered for the sins of others, there is zero biblical evidence that such suffering is connected to, let alone effective at, sin atonement. On what basis is this claim made?? The suffering and death of human beings never atones for sin. It cannot, at all. We are not a spotless sacrifice.
1 Peter 2:20 (New American Standard Bible) For what credit is there if, when you sin and are harshly treated, you endure it with patience? But if when you do what is right and suffer for it you patiently endure it, this finds favor with God.*
[* “finds favor” is not a universal translation, it was chosen to connect to the story of Moses that is coming. Beware of theology built on cherry-picked translations.]
The use of 1 Peter 2:20 is an out-of-context abuse of Peter’s original intent. There is zero reason to assert that Peter believed that the suffering of Jesus’ followers could atone for their own sins, let alone those of anyone else. This whole concept is antithetical to the Gospel message: Only the Son of God is worthy.
“An innocent person who suffers and dies accrues extra merit and favor with God. This merit can be credited to someone else’s account.” This is blasphemous and deeply heretical. No human being has ever had enough merit to earn God’s favor, let alone extra. There is ZERO hint in God’s Word that a human being could apply merit, even if he/she had extra, to anyone else. Note that FFOZ simply makes this massive claim with zero attempt to support it from a single scriptural source, or even from their usual trope “the sages.”
FFOZ’s hermeneutical methodology is deeply flawed. Word usage determines word meaning, claiming that two words in different languages simply mean the same thing is overly simplistic and misleading.
ḥên occurs 66 times in the OT, where in the NASB it is translated into English as: adornment (1), charm (1), charming (1), favor (51), grace (8), graceful (2), gracious (3), pleases (1).
χάρις (charis) occurs 157 times in the NT, where in the NASB it is translated into English as: blessing (1), concession (1), credit (3), favor (11), gift (1), grace (122), gracious (2), gracious work (3), gratitude (1), thank (3), thankfulness (2), thanks (6).
Too simply say that both of these words mean favor (and only favor), and both are equal to each other, is simplistic at best, misleading at worst. FFOZ uses this technique to mislead…To what end?
To a disastrous redefinition of grace: “The merit and favor a person acquires in the eyes of another.”
The long-standing Christian interpretation of grace as “unmerited favor” is purposefully thrown out, earning God’ favor (that is, earning grace) is in.
Where could FFOZ possibly turn to find an example of a human being earning God’s grace? To Moses.
Note: This house of cards depends upon equating favor in the OT with grace in the NT. The example of Moses earning favor, even if it were valid, leads to a false conclusion because Moses and the Apostle Paul do not mean the same thing when using hen and charis.
Is God saying in Exodus 33 that Moses’ obedience has earned God’s favor? Yes.
Is that favor equal to atonement? No
Is it equal to redemption? No
Is it equal to righteousness? No
Is it equal to salvation? No
None of these ideas that are part of our understanding of Jesus Christ’s sacrifice as the Lamb of God are in any way connected to Moses. In fact, these concepts as they are understood in the NT are not in the OT (See my Torah in its Ancient Israelite Context series on the YouTube channel).
“The LORD agreed to extend His favor for Moses to the entire nation:”
Did God bless others because of the favor in which he held Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Ruth, David, etc? Yes.
Is that blessing in any way connected to the righteousness that is ours because of the atoning power of the Blood of Christ? 1,000 times No.
“The story also demonstrates that grace is not ‘an unmerited gift.’ Moses did merit God’s favor when he interceded with God on behalf of a guilty nation.” – This so-called interpretation of scripture is an abomination.
On the basis of a false equivalence of favor in the OT with grace in the NT, by which FFOZ declares that grace is not “unmerited favor” but instead acquired/earned favor, it has set up a false equivalence between Moses and Jesus, all to pave the way for the coming insistence that Paul’s objection to the “works of the law” is not about legalism at all. This is the goal to which this lesson is striving, to remove the stigma associated with keeping Torah as works-righteousness.
“Remember what happens when a godly and righteous person suffers and dies undeservedly…Through His righteous life and His undeserved suffering, Yeshua merited even more favor in God’s eyes, so much favor that He has an abundance to share.”
{Why is “only begotten son” in quotation marks? Why not simply say, “As the Son of God,”? Given their track record of denying the Trinity, such things make my Spidey-sense tingle}
Jesus is the only person to ever earn the righteousness that atones for sin, full stop. No solely human being could earn atonement, it is impossible. When you put atonement, favor, and grace in a mixer as FFOZ has done here, the result is grotesque.
In this section, FFOZ argues that Paul’s only issue is with full-on adoption of Jewish identity through the conversion process.
“It’s not a question of working to earn eternal life by keeping the Law. It’s a question of whether someone needs to become Jewish to be eligible for eternal life.”
They make this specious case by saying that when Paul writes about the, “works of the law” it always means only Jewish identity (i.e. circumcision, full conversion) never Torah keeping (Sabbath, kosher, festivals).
In order for this line of reasoning to hold water, every usage of “works” and “works of the law” by Paul would need to be about full-conversion only, never about legalistic attempts to keep Torah to earn righteousness.
That, of course, is not a tenable position, but when FFOZ interprets Galatians, for example, it does so assuming Paul only cares about full-conversion, they claim he was 100% in favor of Torah keeping for Jew and Gentile as long as it didn’t lead to conversion for Gentiles.
Faith does not equal belief?
True, faith does not ONLY equal belief, it is more than just belief as James rightly clarifies, but given FFOZ’s stated hostility toward the Early Church credal statements…
Where is this going? To a butchered paraphrase of Ephesians 2:8-9…
“By God’s favor, you have been saved for eternal life though your allegiance to Yeshua as the Messiah, but that favor is not something you earned. It is the gift of God, not as a result of the works of conversion. So no one, neither Jews nor Gentiles, have anything to boast about.”
“Paul sometimes used the term ‘works’ as shorthand to argue against Gentiles becoming Jewish.” – p. 2.8
Once again, we see the effort to drive a wedge between full conversion (including circumcision) and Torah keeping with respect to “works.” In FFOZ’s warped view, human beings can earn God’s favor (which they say equals grace), and relying on works is ok provided that they are the Torah-proscribed ones. Do you see why they want to downplay Paul’s concerns about legalism?
And what are the “good works” of Ephesians 2:10? What has God prepared in advance for the followers of Jesus?
“These ‘good works’ are the good deeds and acts of obedience described by the Torah’s commandments.” – p. 2.10
Once you divorce “works of the Law” from Torah keeping, the next goal is to transform it into a substitute for the Fruit of the Spirit. Once legalism has been downplayed, Torah keeping can become the new test of true discipleship.
“When a righteous person dies unjustly, they accrue favor with God.”
“This favor can be bestowed on someone else.”
So absurd that followers of Jesus ought to run screaming from this madness.
“Paul refers to the process of becoming Jewish as the ‘works of the law.’”
‘‘’We are not saved by works’ means that we are not saved by becoming Jewish.”
To reject Paul outright is too obvious, redefining him into a pro-Torah keeping champion is a much more dangerous approach.
“Is grace unmerited favor? If not, how does one acquire it?”
“No; grace is earned. One acquires it by doing good and living a difficult life or having it bestowed on them by someone else who earned it.”
Is the utter rejection of the Gospel by FFOZ not fully evident yet? What further evidence is needed?
Conclusion: FFOZ ought to be labeled a dangerous cult for their views of the Trinity alone…
The HaYesod discipleship manual proves once again that they teach equally dangerous and heretical falsehoods about grace, atonement, faith, works, and the Law of Moses.
Paul interrupts his own thought about being a prisoner of Christ Jesus to reflect upon the journey that brought him to the place of being the Apostle to the Gentiles. That act of God's grace was part of the revelation of the mystery of Christ: God's plan to include the Gentiles in his covenant people by calling all men equally to repent and believe in Jesus.
20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.
One of the reasons why the aims and hopes of 'Christian' Nationalism will always disappoint is because any success that may be achieved in this world with respect to the Kingdoms of This World will always turn out to be Fool's Gold. The true gold of a pure and righteous kingdom is impossible in this age. The entirety of Creation, Paul tells us in Romans has been "subjected to frustration," a status that it will continue to suffer under until that day when Christ returns and establishes his kingdom, the Kingdom of God.
Because of this foundational truth, power in this world will always be tainted, it will always come with warning signs and caveats. Don't get me wrong, this world needs righteous people in its leadership, we have had more than enough of evil men wielding power, but ultimately all such efforts at human self-improvement will come to naught. There is value in nonetheless striving to build and maintain more ethical governments, but such efforts need to be recognized as at most a stewardship until the final triumph of Jesus Christ.
'Christian' Nationalism unfortunately, and dangerously, sells its followers on the idea that if "we" were to wield power things would be different. The false hope is that a panacea on earth is right around the corner, if only "we" had more power. "They" are not to be trusted with it, but "we" could be. In reality, disciples of Jesus Christ ought to know better. We are sojourners in this world, our citizenship is in heaven, and our service is that of self-sacrifice on behalf of the Kingdom of God that is coming.
Leave it to God's grace to go far beyond our expectations. The Apostle Paul begins by telling the Gentile followers of Jesus at Ephesus that because of Jesus they are no longer foreigners and strangers, but instead citizens of God's kingdom, AND members of God's own household. This would seem blessing enough, it is a tremendous boon to all who come to Jesus by faith. And yet, Paul goes further, telling us that not only has God made us citizens of his kingdom, and members of his household, God has gone much further by choosing to dwell within us.
In the Ancient World, having God dwell among us would be a big deal. The tabernacle and Temple reflected this blessing. Having God literally take upon himself humanity, in the Incarnation, was an shocking step forward. This is more. God isn't just WITH us (amazing as that is), God is WITHIN us. The implications are many and varied, all wondrous to consider.
Having made peace with God through his own sacrifice, how does Jesus envision his followers moving forward? Jesus sees us as one humanity. All divisions, distinctions, barriers, and whatever else the human heart may attempt, are made null and void. In Christ we are one.
In Paul's day the focus was upon unity between his Jewish brethren and the gentile believers who had come to God through Jesus. The Covenant of Moses at Sinai stood between the two groups, which is why God as its original author chose to set it aside in the New Covenant.
“The sages said that the Messianic Era might have commenced at that point, but the children of Israel lost the opportunity. Likewise, in the days of the apostles, the kingdom was again at hand. If the generation had heeded the message of Yeshua and the twelve disciples, they could have entered the Messianic Era. They failed to do so. They lost the opportunity.” – p. 4
So, unnamed “sages” think that had Israel while journeying out of Egypt been more obedient God would have sent the Messiah right then and there. That’s a bold theory, it certainly isn’t derived from Scripture. Likewise, FFOZ is teaching that the Jewish community to whom Jesus came had the power to usher in the Messianic Era immediately after the death of Jesus? How is this supposed to work? If they had accepted him fully, the Kingdom would have been founded without his death? But if he was rejected, as the prophets foretold, how exactly was there ever a chance of the Kingdom being founded right away? I have no idea why they want to teach this, but they’re not getting it from the Word of God.
“Then they gathered around him and asked him, Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom of Israel?” – Acts 1:6
“The soul descends into this world on a mission. Why does it leave a place of comfort and repose to enter a world of hardship and struggle? Only to take advantage of this world’s opportunities to serve God, seek His presence, and love others…the soul knows there are no guarantees of success. The soul enters the world at great personal risk.” – p. 5
Once again, we have theology being built upon the heretical teaching of the pre-existence of the human soul. For whatever reason, FFOZ/Lancaster believe so much in this idea that it comes up over and over again in lesson after lesson. The whole idea doesn’t make any sense. God and our souls were dwelling together “in comfort and repose” but decided to risk eternal separation from God by becoming ignorant of that past and living here on the chance that they would find their way back to God?? Do the people who were raised in the Church and now sit in Torah Club meetings really buy this nonsense?
“How many opportunities to experience the Messiah and contribute to the redemption do we forfeit every day? He stands at the door and knocks, but the slumbering soul, comfortably tucked inside the physical body, does not want to get out of bed.” – p. 7
You are a whole person: body, soul, and spirit. You do NOT have a spirit “tucked inside” your body. You are every part of you, indivisible. The irony of these ideas borrowed from medieval Jewish mysticism is that they have far more in common with Greek Gnostic Dualism than with 1st Century Judaism. Also, we say “no” to Jesus because our soul is too lazy and comfortable?? That’s no version of the sin nature that I’ve ever read in scripture. Hold that thought…
“Whenever you have a difficult choice to make, choose the harder thing. The harder thing usually turns out to be the better choice. The more lenient path should always be viewed with suspicion.” – p. 11
This fits right in with someone trying to replace Grace with Law, Faith with Works. You need to work harder to please God is what they're selling to you. Don’t get me wrong, Christian discipleship is very hard work, but that’s because we’re trying to purge our hearts and minds of the sinful nature we were born with, not because we’re supposed to default to the “harder thing.” FYI, this is not how a moral compass works. We are supposed to do the right thing, the righteous thing, whether or not it is easy or hard.
“For example, suppose you were thinking about hosting Sabbath guests on a Friday night…This isn’t a good week for that? I have a busy schedule this week, and the house is a mess. I would have to spend extra on groceries. And who knows what their dietary standard might be? My kitchen’s surely not kosher enough for them. It’s exhausting to even thing about cooking in this heat, Shabbat starts so late at this time of year…” – p. 12
And here we have a casually inserted example of the thing that so many Torah Club members insist FFOZ isn’t doing: Convincing Gentiles to live like Jews. Why this particular example of something that is hard that we may be too lazy to do? Why is the context kosher eating and Sabbath keeping? If you are lazy, that is, a bad disciple, you won’t put in the effort to obey the Law of Moses, but if you’re really dedicated like Boaz, Daniel, Aaron, Jacob and the rest, you will gladly take upon yourself the yolk of the Law. The proof of their goal is right on the page!
“If his bodily movements are sluggish, the movements of his spirit also become dull and lifeless. This is verified by experience.” – Rabbi Moshe Chayim Luzatto, The Path of the Upright “The sages teach, ‘One sin leads to another sin’…The sages teach, ‘One mitzvah leads to another mitzvah.’ Soon both the spirit and the flesh are strong.” – p. 14
In an effort to equate physical activity with spiritual health, this lesson goes so far as to quote Benjamin Franklin. But that’s not the reason to note this section. This may sound like a broken record, but once again we have a Torah Club lesson that quotes “the sages” without ever saying which one, when, or where. That’s just sloppy scholarship and the kind of thing one can’t ask in follow-up, “Do they really teach that?” It is also another lesson where not a single Christian theologian of any century is quoted, rather Rabbi Moshe Chayim Luzatto’s book is quoted twice at length. Was this Rabbi a follower of Jesus? Actually, he was an 18th century mystic who claimed to have received direct divine revelation. Is this someone whose ideas the followers of Jesus ought to study uncritically? Should we be taking advice on Christian discipleship from this source? Significant danger signs that FFOZ doesn't even acknowledge.
“Group Discussion: Read Romans 8:5-14 out loud and discuss. Keep in mind that the term ‘flesh’ is short for the Hebrew idiom ‘flesh and blood,’ an idiom that refers to the physical human body.” – p. 15
{For comparison, what Romans 8:5-14 actually says is below}
Romans 8:5-14 New International Version Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. 9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[a] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you. 12 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. 13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. 14 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God.
No, no, no, a thousand times no. The Apostle Paul is NOT warning the church at Rome about the physical human body. This is a bastardized interpretation of Paul that has no basis in the context of Romans nor the argumentation of Paul in any of his writings. You are a whole human being, not a spirit at war with your physical body. These are heresies that the Early Church soundly rejected when they took the form of Gnosticism. FFOZ is repackaging that ancient heresy, evidently assuming its followers will be unaware that the Church long ago rejected a spiritual vs. physical dualism, or that they won’t care. Either way, this is NOT what Paul is teaching.
“The physical body, which seeks comfort in this world, does not understand the gravity of the loss, but the soul will later lament every lost opportunity…When the soul leaves the body and returns to the place from whence it came…During that accounting, the soul grieves more over the many lost opportunities to do good and carry out its mission on earth than it does over the transgressions and sins it committed.” – P. 20
Where to begin. We have in full force the Gnostic dualism and pre-existence of the human soul that the Early Church rejected as heresy. Here in FFOZ’s Torah Club materials they are taught as facts without any biblical support, one should instead simply trust the extra-biblical sources from which this ideas were taken. Lastly, will we (not just our souls apart from our body as depicted here) regret more the things we failed to do than the sins we committed? That probably depends a lot upon the life a person lived, what they did and did not do. If you’re wondering if this assertion is supported by a text of scripture properly quoted in context, you haven’t gotten the hang of how these Torah Club lessons work yet.
“The mirror analogy describes our experience of life, the universe, and everything. We think of ourselves as seeing the real world, but what are we experiencing? Only electrical sensory inputs channeled through a bio-chemical nervous system connected to a central processing unit of tangled neurons struggling to render some sort of interpretation of those signals. Our brains work like computers to simulate the environment around us. No one sees reality; we see our brain’s best attempt to process sensory input.”- p. 12
“That’s part of what Paul was getting at when he said, ‘For now, we see in a mirror dimly’ (1 Corinthians 13:12). It’s not a polished mirror. We aren’t getting the whole picture. We can see only in part. The world we think of as reality exists only inside our head. Every person creates his or her own personal reality.” – p. 12
“To be in close conversation with Absolute Reality is prophecy at the highest level: the level of Moses. As explained above, the Hebrew world for vision also means mirror. Numbers 12:6 could be translated to say, ‘If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a mirror.’ But it’s not a polished mirror. For most prophets, it’s merely a dim reflection – not the personal experience of God that Moses knew. It’s only an imperfect reflection, many times removed.” – p. 18
“Playing on the double meaning of the word – vision and mirror – the Midrash Rabbah contrasts Moses’ exalted level of prophecy against that of the other prophets. All other prophets saw their prophetic visions dimly through nine mirrors.” – p. 18{quoting Leviticus Rabbah 1:14}
Why do I have the feeling that Daniel Lancaster wants me to take the Red Pill? If that Matrix reference didn’t connect with you, in that 1999 movie Keanu Reeve’s character Neo is told by a guide named Morpheus that the reality he thinks that he is living in isn’t real. Not really real anyway, it is just a computer simulation.
It may seem like a post-modern idea to doubt that reality exists beyond our own perception of it, but in reality, apologies for that double-usage, the idea had its heyday in the 17th and 18th centuries with the Empiricist philosophers John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume. Long before computer special effects, there were philosophers who doubted that we could have any genuine knowledge of what is real beyond our own perception of it.
The great debate between the Rationalists and the Empiricists that set the stage for modern Western thought is too big a topic for this venue, but one effect of the Empiricist’s rejection of the tenants of Rationalism speaks to the danger of what the First Fruits of Zion are teaching here: Individual realities. If reality is an individual construction, not a thing with its own true nature and existence, notions such as Fact and Truth invariably become fuzzy, antiquated, even ridiculed. There is no longer any Truth, just “my truth” and “your truth”.
This example reminds us of some of the deep contradictions and dissonance within the belief system that FFOZ’s leaders have constructed: On the one hand, they claim to represent 1st century Jewish Christian thought and practice, on the other hand, they embrace the individualistic mystical experience of medieval Kabbalah, which of course is full of concepts that were entirely foreign to the cultural stream of 1st century Judaism and/or Christianity. Why is FFOZ teaching extreme individual relativism? Where is this headed?
The second topic in this lesson that jumps out as deeply dangerous is the insistence drawn from the Leviticus Rabbah (Midrash), that ONLY Moses had full and clear revelation from God. The prophets Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist? They only saw a dim mirror, 9 reflections of reality, not “Absolute Reality” itself. The practical, and intended by FFOZ, effect of this foolishness is to elevate the Torah and diminish all other scriptures to a secondary status.
Why? Because to them Torah is eternal. Torah is the essence of God’s nature. Torah surpasses all. Wait a minute, what about the Word of God? What about Jesus Christ, God of God, God dwelling among us? Surely the Gospels have at least an equal level of clarity and wisdom as that given to Moses? Nope, the Torah Club lesson doesn’t say that, “Our highest level of the revelation of God in this current world does not attain the level of Moses.” (p. 19)
The thing is, the Gospels don’t say any of this, FFOZ is saying it. This is what Jesus says about what he is revealing to his followers:
John 14:6-7,9 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.” Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
In addition to diminishing the portions of scripture not given to Moses directly at Sinai, this bizarre “mirror theory” of FFOZ also treats the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church Age as an inferior revelation. How can we know Truth and Reality beyond the Torah? Lancaster tweaks Luke 7:28 on p. 19 to emphasize our limitation in this era, the brackets are his: “Among those born of women, there is no [prophet] greater than John, yet [the prophet] who is least [in the Messianic Era will be] greater than he.” Yes, this is more of Lancaster changing scripture through his own translations to make it fit what FFOZ is teaching, he follows it up with this conclusion: “In the Messianic Era, we will attain the level of Moses – the level of face-to-face.” (p. 19)
Lesson 36 of The Beginning of Wisdom leans heavily on extra-biblical sources {Wisdom of Solomon, Ascension of Isaiah, Talmud, Midrash, and even Irenaeus’ The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching} to sow the seeds of doubt about reality being anything greater than our own perception, and doubts about any/all revelation given by God to anyone other than Moses. In the end, this journey of doubt will leave only one source of Truth standing, by design: the Torah of Moses.
24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. 25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. 26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’
The commercialism of selling toys aside, it is endearing when a child chooses to imitate a parent by pretending to do grown-up tasks with various tools. One aspect of such scenarios to consider is that some children will indeed grow up to do what their parent did, in much the same way. A boy who pretends to build things with his plastic tool set me actually become a contractor just like his dad.
Where 'Christian' Nationalism goes horribly wrong is when those who follow it seek to apply this idea to imitating God. Are we to imitate God's morality? Absolutely, we are commanded to be like-Christ in our usage of the Fruit of the Spirit. It actually isn't optional, we must be like Jesus if we are to truly be his disciples. But that's where our imitation ends. We are NOT called to imitate God by judging others, nor are we called to imitate God's authority or dominion over others. God is God, we are not. We will never be a god in any way, shape, or form.
God, and God alone, exercises divine authority as both our Creator and the Judge of the living and the dead. These qualities belong to God, not us. In reality, God doesn't need our help in these matters, at all. God has called us to be servants, not rulers, to offer our own lives as living sacrifices. In this we imitate the self-sacrificial example of Jesus Christ. The problem is, some folks would much rather imitate God upon-his-throne than Jesus stooping to wash his disciples' feet. So rather than serving, they seek to accumulate power. Contrary to the flattery we feel when our kids want to pretend to do our job, God doesn't find this amusing.
Let's let God be God and focus our passion on the servant's role that has been placed before us.
