What does the book of Acts say about the relationship between Jesus' followers and 2nd Temple Judaism? - part 2

 I've taken the material from my previously published study {What does the New Testament say about the relationship of Jesus’ followers to 2nd Temple Judaism?} and turned it into a series of YouTube videos in order to make its 53 pages of argumentation more accessible to the public, and hopefully encourage further study of what God's Word actually says about this topic on the part of those who have been tempted to take up the yoke of the Law of Moses.

Messianic Jewish congregation Shema Yisrael's answers to teachings of the Hebrew Roots Movement (First Fruits of Zion)

 

To read their FAQ page directly visit the website: Shema Yisrael FAQ

Below are excerpts from Messianic Jewish congregation Shema Yisrael's website that are of particular relevance to countering the false teachings of the Hebrew Roots Movement and the organization within it, the First Fruits of Zion

Question: You wrote that Jews and Gentiles are not required to live in the same way. Do you believe they have a different calling and can live a different lifestyle? 

Answer: Messianic Jews and people from the nations share the same calling – we are invited to live forever in the New Jerusalem with the Three-In-One God and the sons and daughters of God and the good angels. However, Messianic Jews and the people from the nations are not required to live the same way. One example: circumcision. The Jewish people, including Messianic Jews, are required to circumcise their boys on the eighth day as part of our responsibility to the covenant made with Abraham. Gentile Christians are not required to do that. I encourage Messianic Jews to maintain a distinct Jewish identity, which is based, in part, on practices found in the Torah, and pass that identity on to their children. On the other hand, I don’t pressure Gentiles to live like Jewish people living under the Sinai-Covenant.

Question: Will God punish me if I choose to live a Jewish lifestyle like Jesus did? If I choose to live a Jewish lifestyle, I’m not renouncing Him or converting, am I? 

Answer: Your motivation for wanting to live a Jewish lifestyle is crucial. If you’re doing so because you believe that it’s obligatory and God requires you to keep all the laws of the Sinai Covenant that can be kept (and many of the laws can’t be kept since the temple was destroyed and the sacrifices stopped), you are guilty of the false teaching known as Legalism. That means you are sinning and you are in spiritual danger and you may be punished. However, if you choose to live a Jewish lifestyle, not because you believe that God demands it but because you find it meaningful, you should be OK. You can choose to live a Jewish lifestyle, but that doesn’t mean that you have converted or that you are Jewish. In my synagogue, we have Asians, African-Americans, people from a European background and others who serve the Lord within a Jewish lifestyle, but that doesn’t make them “Jewish.” One warning: don’t allow your interest in a Jewish lifestyle to be the focal point of your faith. I have seen many become so absorbed with Jewish roots and Jewish practices that Yeshua gets crowded out. This might sound strange, but Christianity is about Christ. Messiah is our focus. He is our living Head whom we need to be closely connected to and in touch with and empowered by. We need to carry on His mission of world evangelism. A spiritual diet where Jewish identity is the main course and Yeshua is a side dish is a formula for spiritual starvation.

Question: I’m trying to figure out what religion I am. I was raised Christian but think the Jews have some good points; and in my search to find my religion, I was drawn to you. How can there be something in between Christianity and Judaism? From what I was taught, you either believe Jesus is the Son of God or you don’t. Why do you believe what you do? If I am mostly Christian, but think Jesus was just a blessed man chosen by God to perform miracles, would that make me a Messianic Jew? 

Answer: In a way, there is something between Judaism and Christianity. Messianic Judaism is that bridge between those two religions. Why do we believe what we do? On the website, read the teachings under “Apologetics” along with What Is Messianic Judaism?  You ask if you are mostly Christian, but think Jesus was just a blessed man chosen by God to perform miracles, would that make you a Messianic Jew? The answer is that believing that Jesus was only a man, even a blessed man who did miracles, is not enough to make anyone a Christian or a Messianic Jew. A genuine Christian is someone who understands that Yeshua is the Messiah and the Son of God, that He came into this world through the incarnation, lived a perfect life, died on the cross to make atonement for our sins, was buried and resurrected and is alive now. When a person understands these things and makes a commitment to become loyal to Yeshua, he becomes a Christian. I pray that happens to you. A Messianic Jew is someone who is Jewish and knows who Yeshua is and has transferred his loyalties to Him. If you are not Jewish, you can’t become a Messianic Jew.

Question: Do you believe in the Trinity? 

Answer: Yes. God is three distinct Persons (not modes or manifestations or ways of revealing Himself). The Father, Son and Spirit share the same divine nature. Being the Son of the Father does not mean that God the Father created the Son, or that the Son was in some way given birth by the Father or is younger than the Father. It means the exact opposite! Just as a human son shares the nature of his human father, the Son shares the same nature as His Father. The Son of God is deity, divine, eternal, uncreated, with life within Himself, sharing all the essential attributes of God with His Father. The Son is equal to the Father in divine nature, however the Father is superior to the Son in position and authority. The Son acknowledges that the Father is superior in position when He calls Him Father and God. The Son sits at the right hand of the Father. The Father sits on the main throne of Heaven, in the place of highest authority. The Son never sends the Father. The Father sends the Son. The Son never commands the Father. The Father commands the Son and the Son always obeys the Father. The Son is the Executor of the Father. Father speaks the word and the Son carries out the word of the Father. An easy way to understand the relationship of the Father and the Son: a distinction of persons; an equality of nature; a hierarchy of authority – the Father being greater in authority than the Son. The Father and the Son – two distinct Persons sharing the same divine nature; sharing the same Spirit (the Spirit is also a distinct Person, although without a body) with the Son submitting to the authority of the Father. That is what the Word of God reveals. That’s what true believers from the earliest times have believed. That’s what true believers still believe.

Question: I understand that I will never be made righteous by the Law, but should Christians be obedient to any part of it because it is good? Does it have a place in the Gentile Christian’s life? 

Answer: One way to understand the Torah is as Israel’s constitution. However, not all 613 laws in the Torah are meant to apply to everybody. There are laws that only apply to priests. For example, the High Priest couldn’t marry a divorced woman or a widow, whereas a regular Israeli could. There are laws that only apply to the king (like writing his own copy of the Torah). There are laws that apply to men and not to women, and vice-versa. Most of the laws directly apply to the Jewish people, but not the Gentiles. All of us are to “fulfill the Law,” but the requirements of the Law are different.

So what relationship does the Gentile Christian have to the 613 laws of the Torah? The book of Acts records that Messiah’s Emissaries (the Apostles) and the Elders of Messiah’s Holy Community met to decide this very issue. This meeting, recorded in Acts 15, is often referred to as “the First Jerusalem Council.” According to the binding decision issued by the Emissaries and Elders, guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit, apart from saving faith in Messiah Yeshua, only four things are obligatory for Gentile Christians to observe (see Acts 15, especially verses 19-20, 28-29). I would also include obedience to the Moral Law – laws such as not murdering, not stealing, and not committing adultery. These are moral laws which God has written on everyone’s heart (see Romans 2:14-15).

If someone wants to observe a Biblical holiday or custom, there is the freedom to do so, but there is no obligation to do so. We have the freedom to celebrate the Passover and the Jewish holidays, but also the freedom not to. If someone says, “Messiah is my Passover and I don’t need to celebrate a Passover Seder” – fine. If someone else says, “I want to celebrate the Passover and better remember Messiah my Passover Lamb” – that’s fine too.

However, that being said, there are many principles for godly living that may be applied from the Torah to the life of the Christian. Torah means “teaching” or “instruction,” and it still serves as a teaching guide for Messiah’s Holy Community of Jews and Gentiles (the Church). For example, should a Christian have a tattoo? The New Testament is silent on the subject, but the Torah teaches us God’s will on this practice (see Leviticus 19:28).

Summarizing the Gentiles’ relationship to the Torah, I would say that all that is necessary for Gentiles is to have faith in Messiah Yeshua. That alone saves us. Then there are the four basic requirements in Acts 15. Then there are the moral requirements of the Law that are already written on everyone’s heart. Anything beyond these requirements is optional.

Question: I understand that the First Jerusalem Council didn’t demand that the new Gentile Believers keep all of the commandments right away, but doesn’t Acts 15:21 teach that as these new Believers matured, they should learn Torah at their own pace, and become more Torah observant? 

Answer: There is a better way to understand Acts 15:21. Acts 15 records the decision of Messiah’s Emissaries (the Apostles) and the Elders of Messiah’s Holy Community (the Church) regarding the relationship of Gentile Christians to the 613 laws of the Torah. In Messianic circles, this meeting is often referred to as “the First Jerusalem Council.” According to the binding decision issued by the Emissaries and Elders, guided and inspired by the Holy Spirit, apart from saving faith in Messiah Yeshua, only four things are obligatory for Gentile Believers to observe (see Acts 15, especially verses 19-20, 28-29). It was understood that obedience to the Moral Law – laws such as not murdering, not stealing, and not committing adultery, which God has written on everyone’s heart, were also included (see Romans 2:14-15). After these four requirements were given, in the very next verse (15:21), Ya’akov (James) said: For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath. James, the Messiah’s brother and the head of Messiah’s Community in Jerusalem, was not saying that Gentile Believers should start off slow, with just the four requirements previously mentioned, and then move on to more Torah observance, and learn about Torah observance from those in the synagogue. No, Ya’akov was summarizing the Council’s position and making the very same point, but in another way – that all 613 commandments are not required of the Gentile Believers – only those four things mentioned (along with the moral laws that God has written on everyone’s heart), and that this is what Moses taught, and what the synagogues teach. Even today, non-Messianic synagogues teach the same thing – that Gentiles don’t need to become Jews, or follow all 613 commandments, in order to be right with God.

Question: I am a Gentile believer in Yeshua and I have a question about Torah observance. Would it be wrong to follow Torah if I am not a Jew? I believe that salvation is only though faith in Yeshua and not by works of the Law, but I have been feeling convicted to follow the Law. I know it won’t make me more holy or save me, but I don’t know what to do. 

Answer: While it is not wrong for a Gentile to follow the Torah, after observing many people trying to do that for a number of years, my opinion is that it’s not spiritually profitable. It’s trading one lifestyle for another. And it can be dangerous. Why? I have seen people lose focus. Their focus becomes Sinai-Covenant observances, rituals and ceremonies, and not Yeshua and the Gospel. Yeshua gets crowded out and “Torah observance” becomes the focus. As they get deeper and deeper into it, they get more and more legalistic, and they get disconnected from the rest of the Church. I have known some who have denied Yeshua altogether. Keep in mind that the Sinai Covenant is a broken covenant, and there is no way to live a true “Torah-observant” life.

Question: Why has the Church rejected God’s laws and substituted pagan practices? Doesn’t that make the Church pagan? 

Answer: No, the Church is not pagan, although there are a few pagan practices that should be eliminated. The early Gentile Christian leaders understood that salvation came through faith in Messiah alone, and that Yeshua was sufficient for them. They also understood that they didn’t need to adopt a Jewish lifestyle to be part of the people of God. They understood the decision of the First Jerusalem Council, that Gentile Believers were not obligated to observe Jewish customs and days. Apart from faith in Messiah Yeshua, only four observances were considered obligatory for Gentile Believers (see Acts 15, especially verses 19-20 and 28-29), along with obedience to the Moral Law – laws such as not murdering, not stealing or committing adultery – laws which God has already written on everyone’s heart. They understood the admonition of Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles: “as any man called already circumcised? Let him not be uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised … Let each man remain in that condition in which he was called (1 Corinthians 7:18, 20). Jewish people don’t need to stop living the lifestyle and calling to which God has called us, nor do Gentiles need to start living as Jews. The early Gentile Christian leaders understood that the best way to reach their own people with the Good News about the Jewish Messiah was to frame that message within the context of their cultures. So, instead of eradicating certain pagan practices, they felt the Kingdom of God would be better served by introducing and integrating Messiah into those practices.

Rethinking the Five Solae - by Jacob Fronczak, First Fruits of Zion's failed attempt to label Protestantism as inherently anti-Semitic

 

Before I begin, an important reminder: The First Fruits of Zion (and the larger Hebrew Roots Movement) is NOT a part of Messianic Judaism, the book discussed below claims to speak on behalf of that perspective, but the author and the organization he represents do NOT belong to it {"FFOZ does not represent the messianic Jewish movement", a quotation from an email I received from a Messianic Jewish Rabbi serving in leadership with the International Alliance of Messianic Congregations and Synagogues (IAMCS) He also wrote, "Messianic Jewish leaders universally reject One Law theology. FFOZ is not a messianic Jewish organization or ministry."}

One of the primary defenses of those leading and participating in Torah Clubs here in Venango County has been, "it's just a Bible study."  As pastors, when attempting to do our duty before God of protecting the flock from dangerous theologies and attempts to divide our congregations and Christian community, it is important that we don't use hyperbole by claiming that bad ideas are heretical ones, or that things that we don't personally agree with are actually affronts to God.  That sort of foolishness happens all too often, and people are rightly wary when a religious leader warns those in his/her charge to completely avoid an idea, organization, or movement.  If you're familiar with my blog, you know how often I've warned against the all too common habit in America today of labeling those on the other side of an issue as evil or claiming their ideas would destroy the nation or church.  With that perspective in mind, and the, "Why are you calling a Bible study unorthodox?" question in firm view, continue reading.

When it comes to the First Fruits of Zion (Torah Clubs), the evidence continues to mount that the warning from the Franklin Christian Ministerium was both warranted and on target {The Franklin Christian Miniserium's warning against the Torah Clubs and the First Fruits of Zion}.  After learning about this book (I just came across it yesterday), the case has only grown that much stronger.

Should Christians really participate in a Bible study designed and created by an organization that believes that each of the churches that you belong to are founded on inherently anti-Semitic beliefs?  If FFOZ doesn't actually believe such a loaded charge, and few accusations could be as damning if they were proved to be true, why would they publish a book built upon that premise?

The following quotations and commentary from Jacob Fronczak's book are pulled from the review of it by Rich Robinson as published in the journal Mishkan in 2021, you can read the full review here: Book Review of Fronczak, Why Messianic Judaism is Incompatible with the Five Foundations of Protestantism - by Rich Robinson {The quotations from Fronczak's book will appear in italics, the commentary from Robinson in bold, and my comments on both in ordinary text following them.}

In the preface to Rethinking the Five Solae, author Jacob Fronczak proffers the thesis that the five solae (or as more often anglicized, solas) of the Reformation are “themselves the root of Protestant anti-Semitism” (p. 2) and that “as they are normally understood, are designed to exclude Jews as much as Catholics from any definition of true and biblical religion” (ibid). These are serious charges, and so the book’s aim is “to re-examine the Five Solae from a Messianic Jewish perspective” (p. 3). Fronczak is himself non-Jewish, though moving in Messianic Jewish circles.

My comment: Is that not a serious charge!  That the very foundations of Protestant thought are the cause of Protestant anti-Semitism!  Let me be clear, the Church as a whole, Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant alike, has a horrific and evil history of anti-Semitism, I will not minimize nor excuse an ounce of it, and have on numerous occasions called out and denounced its modern manifestations.  Each and every cause of Christian anti-Semitism should be examined and reckoned with.  But to say that the theology of the five solas are themselves the cause of the sinful anti-Semitism in Protestant history is to label the entire movement's premise as evil.  Again, hard to say that the Torah Clubs (FFOZ) are just organizing and leading Bible studies meant to enhance the Church, when this is what they are willing to publish about Protestantism.

For those who need a refresher on the Five Solas (or Solae), here they are: sola scriptura (according to Scripture alone), sola fide (by faith alone), sola gratia (by grace alone), solus Christus (by Christ alone), and soli Deo Gloria (to the glory of God alone).

So, what powerful evidence of inherent anti-Semitism does Fronczak follow-up his explosive claim with?

Unfortunately, what the author really ends up addressing is misunderstandings, or misuses, of the solas rather than the way they are understood and utilized by responsible interpreters.

My comment: If all you have are examples of the ideas of Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and the rest being twisted and used in ways they themselves would have rejected, it becomes rather ludicrous to say that their ideas are the problem.

"I aim to show here that when a proponent of sola scriptura studies the Bible, he is relying on something other than the inspired Word of God, whether he realizes it or not. Furthermore, I seek to show that those who malign the investigation and examination of traditional Jewish literature to illuminate the text of the Scripture are themselves ignorant of their own reliance on tradition and the usefulness of extra-biblical literature." (p. 8) In these examples I find the author to be tilting at windmills. Who denies that we should look to extra-biblical sources (Jewish, Greco-Roman, ancient Near Eastern) to arrive at an understanding of Scripture? Sola scriptura teaches that the Scripture is the final, not the only, authority.  And who are these people who “malign” using Jewish sources? They are not scholars, and I’m not sure that I know of any pastors or lay people who would argue that way.

My comment: Tilting at windmills (nice literary reference there), indeed.  It is a rare Protestant who thinks that a high view of the authority of Scripture negates the role of scholarship, archeology, history, and a host of other disciplines that help the Church fully understand what God was trying to say to his people when the Word was given to its original audience, and how that truth can in turn be applied in our world.  Each an every week I lead two Bible studies where we go verse by verse through the Word of God.  Those who have attended (and you can listen to the audio of them here: Bible Study Podcasts) will tell you that we spend an awful lot of time talking about historical context, cultural settings, textual and translational issues, and more, all in the pursuit of that very Protestant belief in sola scriptura.  Like Rich Robinson, I am at a loss as to who Fronczak is thinking of when he claims that Protestants don't utilize or malign extra-biblical Jewish sources as potential insights into the text of Scripture.

Furthermore, Fronczak repeatedly insists that because the solas distinguished Protestantism from Catholicism, they were designed to draw circles and exclude others. Defining boundaries, however, is a part of life. If you are some things, then you are also not other things. This is just a statement of fact. It has precious little to do with denigrating Judaism or Catholicism or anything else.

My comment: From 1517 onward, it was pretty important to offer explanations of why Lutheranism differed with Catholicism, why the Reformed differed from Lutheranism and Catholicism, and for fun, why the Anabaptists disagreed with them all.  Can you differentiate your belief system and or group from similar ones with malice?  Absolutely, but that isn't inherent in the process, to claim that the five solae do this toward both Catholics and Jews could equally be said (and equally foolishly) of every effort that any movement in Church history has made to define itself.

In his conclusion, the author writes that, “In considering the Five Solae from a Messianic Jewish perspective, we have at times questioned their usefulness—at least as they seem to be understood by today’s evangelical Protestants” (p. 131). This however, is a far cry from showing that they are at the root of anti-Semitism (they aren’t) and far from showing that as properly understood, as opposed to popularly (mis)understood, they are not useful (they are).

My comment: Again, Fronczak uses a 'we' there that doesn't belong.  He is himself a non-Jew, the organization he represents, and the movement that it belongs to, have been categorically rejected by the largest Messianic Jewish organizations.  That they think they have become Jews, spiritually or otherwise, by following this theological path, is part of the reason why the Franklin Christian Ministerium has chosen to oppose them.

Robinson's review concludes that Fronczak has failed, entirely, to demonstrate at all his explosive premise.  

"It is contradictory to claim to live a Jewish life in Messiah and at the same time deprecate Jewish tradition (sola scriptura), minimize the importance of good works (sola fide), claim that traditional Judaism is legalistic (sola gratia), distance oneself from organizational Messianic Judaism (solus Christus), and refrain from giving honor to those who have gone before one, those on whose shoulders we all stand (soli Deo gloria)." (p. 134) This is simply put, a raw caricature of what the solas stand for.

My comment: To destroy a strawman is not that difficult, but it doesn't help anyone, and it proves nothing.  It is hardly worth explaining why each of Fronczak's charges against each sola is nonsense, it should be obvious to anyone who has studied Protestant theology.  In brief only, then: (1) Sola scriptura puts tradition in a secondary place, it does not depreciate it or ignore it. (2) Sola fide is a summation of the NT's emphasis on faith, neither Paul nor any other NT author diminishes the need for confirming good works to follow it (see for example: Ephesians 2:8-10, where vs. 8-9 declare the supremacy of faith and grace, AND vs. 10 proclaims that God has good works set aside for each of us to do). (3) The theology of sola gratia does not call the Law of Moses legalistic in the way that Fronczak is using the word, but would indeed take issues with the same abuses of 2nd Temple Judaism that Jesus repeatedly crushed the Pharisees for upholding. (4) Solus Christus in no way is aimed at organizational Messianic Judaism, how could it be?  For those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah, Christ alone makes all the sense in the world. (5) Lastly, Soli Deo Gloria directs all worship and honor to God, as it should be, it doesn't dishonor our ancestors in the faith.  The author of Hebrews was more than capable of lauding the heroes of the faith who had gone before him without taking an ounce of God's ultimate glory, displayed in even the triumphs of those men and women, away from God.

When you set out to prove that the heart of Protestantism is inherently anti-Semitic, but only end up trashing Straw Men that we don't even believe, why would an organization publish and promote such a baseless attack?  

In denigrating the five solas, he both fails to understand them and fails to allow Protestants to speak for themselves as to their meaning...I simply fail to grasp his rationale for choosing the solas as his whipping boy.

For the record, I am a Messianic Jew; I’ve been part of both messianic congregations and mainstream churches. I have studied at a Reformed seminary, I learned my basic New Testament as a young believer from a Catholic priest, and I have had many conversations at Hillel in college and over the years during my studies of Judaism and Jewish literature. I have no Protestant grist in my mill to grind about the solas. 

My comment: Why do I see danger signs blaring loudly when I read material published by the First Fruits of Zion (Torah Clubs)?  If you we a pastor, and learned about a 'Bible study group' from an organization that believes these things about the Church, wouldn't you be?