Tag Archives: judaism

Jewish-Christian Resources on the ‘Net

Jewish-Christian Resources on the ‘Net

 Ancient Jewish Accounts of Jesus
Josephus, Celcus, Tertullian, Talmud, Toledoth Yeshu – full texts with introductions..
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Topics/JewishJesus/

Several books on Jesus and Judaism collected by Messianic Jews
– incl. Christianity in Talmud and Midrash by R. Travers Herford
and Jesus Christ in the Talmud, Midrash, and the Zohar by Gustav Dalman
(which both deal with the censored Talmudic passages about Jesus)
http://www.saltshakers.com/lm/

TRENT – Traditions of the Rabbis in the Era of the New Testament
– earliest traditions dated and explained, esp for NT relevance
Preview at http://www.T-R-E-N-T.com

Into His Own – Primary Jewish sources for background of the NT
http://virtualreligion.net/iho/index.html

You can find more ancient Jewish resources here.

      

Apostle Peter in Late Rabbinic Judaism

Apostle Peter in Late Rabbinic Judaism

I am not so concerned with how the Apostles are treated, so much so how Christ is treated in Judaism… The blog linked to below will be doing a series of posts on the Apostle Peter in Rabbinic Judaism. The first part focuses on a medieval Rabbi who believed that the Apostle wrote Nishmat prayer.

ht.

What is interesting about both this prayer, the legend and the blog ht’d above, is that they leave off a very important part of the legend,

A curious legend circulated in medieval France and Germany to the effect that Nishmat was composed by none other than the Apostle Peter, who is said to have built the Christian Church in order to remove Christians from the Jewish community, while believing himself that only Judaism is the true faith. (Here)

Maybe they’ll get that part later, but if we are going to be true to history, we should note that Judaism and Christianity, siblings, had a very strenuous association.

      

Eisenbrauns – Manager’s Special for June, Judaic Studies

Eisenbrauns – Manager’s Special for June, Judaic Studies

Eisebrauns is a scholarly publishing house, which you may enjoy. Daily, they announce on Twitter sales (um, daily) as well as week-end and monthly. Today, they announced:

For the month of June, we are featuring selected titles from Center for Judaic Studies-University of Pennsylvania at discounts from 20-50% off retail price. Quantities are limited on some of these titles, and once they are gone they will be out-of-print.

You can find it here:

Eisenbrauns – Manager’s Special.

      

Incarnational Fulfillment of the Prophets – A Conversation (Repost)

Incarnational Fulfillment of the Prophets – A Conversation (Repost)

Rob Reid and Paula Fether have burst unto the scene, or seen?, with a conversation concerning prophecies. He would:

“like to engage in a scholarly dialogue about whether in fact there are hundreds or any direct messianic prophecies in the “Old Testament” (ironically, such a term is pejorative on its face!). Thus, I would like anyone who holds similar beliefs to articulate exactly what was predicted and where in the Hebrew Bible and then argue for how exactly “hundreds” of these were fulfilled. I am eliciting a hermeneutical query. I have no intention on entertaining whether or not Jesus was/is the Messiah. I personally believe he was. However, that is not to say that he is found under every nook and cranny of Hebrew Bible texts.”

Paula self-identifies as one who believes that:

“Jesus is the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament, as proven by hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, his miracles, and his bodily resurrection from the dead.”

I cannot stay away from a good conversation – so I want to input a tiny part of the dialogue. I agree with the statement that Christ is the Messiah expected through the Hebrew Scriptures.

Usually, we think of prophecies as something which is foretold, something hidden in mystery, and shroud in secrecy; however, not once in the Gospel do we find the word προφητεία (prophecy) applied to the signs pointing to Christ as foretold by the Hebrew Prophets. This is our definition of them, and indeed, several times, such as the apocalyptic passages in the Hebrew Bible and the book of Revelation, words fall into our neat category; however, I believe that the early followers of Christ understood the overall sayings of the Prophets in a much different way. Further, if foretelling was acknowledged, it was generally in accordance with the people (apostate Israel) who challenged Christ (cf. Matthew 15.7). Additionally, Christ was encouraged from time to time to prophesy, therefore it is safe to say that the writers of the Gospels knew the word as they employed it in our sense. For them, it was not about foretelling, but retelling.

The Virgin Birth is a historical and vital sign that Christ is the Messiah promised by God. Indeed, it is the first sign mentioned in Matthew:

Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet:

“BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.” (Mat 1:22-23 NASB)

While the word ‘prophesy’ was in use, this was never the phrase used to signal a completion of the words of the Prophets. The phrase which I wish to briefly examine is, ‘γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθη (took place to fulfill).’ It signals the reader to a passage from the prophets which is about to be completed. Just as Herod did, they began to look for different connections between the here and now to the words of the prophets. This is different from a prophecy about what will happen. Literally, we could translate the phrase as ‘in order to complete.’ The event in the past serves not as a direct foretelling of the thing(s) to come, but as something more like a measuring tool. Isaiah was not prophesying about the Messiah, but his words found completion in the Messiah. It might be better said that events, instead of actual words, were the center of Messianic signatures.

Before we move further, we should note that the office of a Prophet was rarely used to tell the far distant future. Instead, the person acted as a messenger of God for that moment.

Then Amos replied to Amaziah, “I am not a prophet, nor am I the son of a prophet; for I am a herdsman and a grower of sycamore figs. (Amos 7:14)

In Hebrew, the word prophet is ‘נָבִיא’. If we remove the theological language, it would simply be spokesperson, not a fore-teller of things to come. Rarely in what is commonly identified as prophecies do we see an instance of something on the horizon. (Note, 1st Samuel 9.9 indicates an ancient shift between the role of seer and that of the office of prophet.) If you read the Twelve Prophets, they deal primarily with the abuses of Israel and Judah to the covenant, calling for justice for this group or that group, while attempting to at once turn away the wrath of God and warn of the wrath of God. Essentially, they – both men and women – brought a current message.

Let us examine another passage, this time with minimal influence of the Divine (By that, I mean the lack of miracles). In the second chapter of Matthew, we find two markers of the Messianic, both including dreams. First, the Magi and Herod, with a dream from God not to return. Second, we find a dream given to Joseph which drove him to Egypt:

Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is going to search for the Child to destroy Him.” So Joseph got up and took the Child and His mother while it was still night, and left for Egypt. He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON.” (Mat 2:13-15 NASB)

While the matter may be semantics to some, I must force the difference. First, a prophecy, as used in apocalyptic writings is a foretelling wrapped in language meant to be hidden. We find here Messianic signs which are going to be used to judge the Messiah – yet, rarely if ever applied to Messianic Expectation writings.

The above marker comes from Hosea:

When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. (Hosea 11:1 NASB)

This is a passage written to rest squarely on Israel as a whole, much like the Servant’s Song found in Isaiah 53. It does not stand out as a prophecy or a cue to something hidden within the meaning, yet, Matthew felt compelled that indeed, this was a sure sign that this Jesus was the Messiah because of His family’s departure from Egypt. This refers to no one but Israel as the Son of God – and would not, unless relayed by Matthew, stand as anything remotely related to the coming Messiah.

It can be reasonably said that Israel did not always expect a Messiah. Further, we can see a progression through the prophets of the understanding of God’s justice, revealed by the prophets, and then the need of a Messianic figure to liberate Israel – not of spiritual bondage, but of physical bondage, and began to be fully recognized in the ‘inter-testamental’ period. Second, the Messianic figure would be one to establish God’s kingdom on earth, with Israel as the center. But again, this was not really seen in the Hebrew Prophets – until the coming of Christ.

Returning to the idea that statements about a personified Israel can be placed on Christ, we find the Servant’s Song in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 in which we read of the punishment for sins as a near destruction to the body of the Servant.

Throughout Isaiah we find the phrase עֶ֫בֶד (my servant) used in relation to historical figures, such as David, or even the prophet himself.

“But you, Israel, My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, Descendant of Abraham My friend, You whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, And called from its remotest parts And said to you, ‘You are My servant, I have chosen you and not rejected you. (Isa 41:8-9 NASB)

The phrase – unless referring to the examples above – refers to the Israel of Isaiah’s time. Yet, we know that it was transferred to the body of the New Testament Jesus.

As a final example we read the mother’s appeal in Matthew 20.20-23:

Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus with her sons, bowing down and making a request of Him. And He said to her, “What do you wish?” She said to Him, “Command that in Your kingdom these two sons of mine may sit one on Your right and one on Your left.” But Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” They said to Him, “We are able.” He said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.” (Mat 20:20-23 NAU)

Arguably, the question of canon faced not only the Church, at a later date, but the Jews as well. One of the discarded books by the Jews, and held in reservation by the early Church was the book of Great Wisdom (of Solomon). In it, we find a hint at the Messianic anticipation of the mother:

For though in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality. Having been disciplined a little, they will receive great good, because God tested them and found them worthy of himself; like gold in the furnace he tried them, and like a sacrificial burnt offering he accepted them. In the time of their visitation they will shine forth, and will run like sparks through the stubble. They will govern nations and rule over peoples, and the Lord will reign over them for ever. Those who trust in him will understand truth, and the faithful will abide with him in love, because grace and mercy are upon his elect, and he watches over his holy ones. (Wis 3:4-9 RSV)

The reason I use this is to set the example – Messianic Expectation included not the idea that the Hebrew prophets foretold Christ in an apocalyptic manner with prophetic language, but that communities expected the Messianic figure to exemplify, to personify, the words of the Hebrew Prophets found in various writings considered sacred by the sects. In other words, the record of sacred writings was the mirror of the Messiah. If the Messiah could not be said to be the personification of rare and obscure passages of the prophets, then the person was a fraud.

Only later did certain segments become more prophetic in understanding, such as the Balaam’s star (Numbers 24.17-19) and Bar Kochba. It is worth mentioning that with the mention of the star in the East in Matthew, this was not connected to Balaam’s star. We know that apocalyptic communities later focused on the star in Numbers and connected to the Messiah – yet, we do not find this connection in the Gospels; however, do find it in pseudepigraphical writings of the period, including the Testament of the Patriarchs, which came to the final conclusion in the 2nd century after Christ.

And after this there shall arise for you a star from Jacob in peace. And a man shall arise from my posterity like the sun of righteousness, walking with the sons of men in gentleness and righteousness, and in him will be found no sin. And the heavens will be opened upon him to pour out the spirit as a blessing of the holy Father. And he will pour out the spirit of grace on you. This is the shoot of God most high; this is the fountain of life of all humanity. Then he will illumine the scepter of my kingdom, and from your root will arise the shoot, and through it will arise the rod of righteousness for the nations, to judge and to save all that call on the Lord. (Testament of Judah 24.1-6)

Further, we see it earlier in the Qumran Community,

And the star is the seeker of the Law who came to Damascus, because it was written A star has came forth out of Jacob and a scepter has risen out of Israel. The scepter stands for the prince of the congregation. At his coming he shall break down all the sons of Sheth. (Damascus Document 7.18-21)

A meditating time frame, we find the Targum Onkelos (c.110), which does connect Balaam’s Star to the Messiah,

I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not nigh. When a king shall arise out of Jakob, And the Meshiha be anointed from Israel, He will slay the princes of Moab, and reign over all the children of men; (Num 24:17)

I note that by it was during the period which saw the development of the Testament of Judah was finalized and the writing of the Targum Onkelos, Simon Bar Kochba (c132) was declared Messiah, nicknamed ‘son of the Star’ and led the Jewish people into final defeat against the Romans. For many of the later commentators, the star in Numbers is a key sign to Christ – yet, nothing of it is found in the Gospels.

The Gospel writers and the early apostolic communities in the Jesus Way began to see the entire corpus of sacred writings as pointing to Christ – not just segments of obscure language, and not in a foretelling sense, but all of the writings, especially of the prophets. For them, everything the prophets said could be said to be incarnated into the person of Christ. This is highlighted in the words of Christ,

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; (John 5:39 NASB)

Christ was not merely speaking of certain prophecies, but of the proto-canon – it all testified of Him. Further, we see from different authors ques connecting the life of Christ to the story of Israel – not the blatant ones, but ones such as

who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure (ἔξοδον exodus) which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. (Luke 9.:31 NASB)

οἳ ὀφθέντες ἐν δόξῃ ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον αὐτοῦ, ἣν ἤμελλεν πληροῦν ἐν Ἰερουσαλήμ. (NA-27)

Here, we find Luke sees the soon death/departure as a sign of the Exodus – which should have brought to the mind of his readers the release from slavery after the Passover. (Also see the use of ‘ἐδόξαζον τὸν θεὸν’ as a queue by Luke to the Hebrew Scriptures.) For the primitive followers of the Messiah, they were not so concerned with ‘prophecies’ such as those of His returning (which are true prophecies) but of connecting His life and work to the collected writings of the prophets. They didn’t look for foretellings, but retellings. Comparing Him to Moses, Solomon, Jonah, and David was not unheard of in the Gospel. While they were the shadow of things to come, He was the archetype.

Finally, we take as evidence of this case, Jonah.

But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Mat 12:39-40 NASB)

This is not a prophesy of the Messiah, and in no way was thought to point to the coming Messianic figure; however, Christ took history from the sacred writings, and applied it to Himself. No one can easily say that Jonah prophesied about Christ, yet his sign was completed, incarnated, in Christ. It is not that the Gospel writers and the primitive communities of believers backwards wrote the Messiah, but it was only through history that Christ was identified as the Messiah. As Luke recounts,

Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Luk 24:45-47 NASB)

Written where? In one specific passage? Not hardly, but written in the entire corpus of Scripture. It was not minute passages of prophetic material which pointed to Christ, but the entire recognized work. He did not fulfill prophecy, but completed the Hebrew Prophets.

I am sure I have left out a key to the argument somewhere, or perhaps made no argument at all, so feel free to bruise and crush me as you see fit. For those who would desire to see me torn apart and laid upon the altar of pseudo-academia, please remember I bruise easily and I’ve been known to cry if my feelings are hurt.

      

Anti-Intellectualism in the Church

Anti-Intellectualism in the Church

I wrote this post in the first year of my blog, and it has become important to me now to revisit this subject. Recently, I found out that one of the lies being told about me, in regards to my departure from my previous fellowship organization, was that I had become too educated to believe the Gospel. Odd considering that then, when I left, I hadn’t restarted my collegiate career, even looked into Master’s programs, and hadn’t really thought much about finishing my educational degree. I suspect that this was mainly in response to my views on biblical translation (not KJVO, which was widely known) and my habit of questioning my ‘leaders,’ however, anti-intellectualism does go deeper than that.

Many fundamentalists abhor biblical education of any kind. They wouldn’t dare learn a biblical language, or study anything but the KJV-1611 (which I find laughable because those that preached such things didn’t themselves use the 1611), using nothing else but Webster’s 1828 Dictionary. Imagine their surprise when I used Greek to defend positions, looked to the Church Fathers – and yes, even the Reformers – and challenged them and their need to trivialize the bible for children. The break, of course, was over none of this – it was over something very different; nevertheless, this is one of the rumors which was shared with others on why I had left. I reckon that bothers me, that much more so because I have never denied the essentials tenants of the Faith.

I wonder what they will say when I get my BA in the Summer, start my MA in January and push on to my ThD sometime after that? Does education make anyone ‘better’ in the Church? No, I don’t think so. I know that for myself, educated or not, if someone loves God, then that trumps a lot of things. Of course, most people will seek to better themselves, or to study to show themselves approved, as it were. My original intention with this post was not to be taken as criticism of them or anyone except those that deny the rightful place of education and learning in the Church. What I had hoped to do with this post was to provide a Scriptural foundation against anti-intellectualism.

Rick M. Nañez, in an interview sometime ago said,

Anti-intellectualism keeps us from affecting our institutions and their various departments with solid Christian thinking. It hinders our ability to think in terms of worldview, that is, to understand the hundreds of otherwise fragmented areas of life in a coherent way. If we are suspicious of the intellect, we are hamstrung when it comes to providing well-thought-out answers to difficult questions from critics and skeptics. Anti-intellectualism can also lead to dangerous forms of mysticism and a type of superstitious faith.  

I believe that anti-intellectualism tends to lead Christians into relatively superficial spiritual lives, at least, in comparison to the impact they could make if they engaged in “thinking on purpose” for the glory of God. Also, mediocrity in the “life of the mind” leads the Christian subculture to criticize, fear, and condemn the secular institutions that their anti-intellectual, evangelical, and Pentecostal parents and grandparents abandoned the generations before.

He points to the root cause as,

Though Pentecostalism has built within it some elements that make its adherents more susceptible to anti-intellectualism, I think that evangelicals struggle with the problem almost as much as we do. We have common roots in the pragmatic, revivalistic, and romantic era of America in the 18th century, so both our nation as well as our nation’s homegrown movements tend to battle with the temptation to pit doing against thinking, and spirit against mind.

Anti-intellectualism leads to a faulty foundation for the Church, based solely on tradition – tradition that is generally only a generation or two old. Many point to the reaction against modern science, such as evolution and even biblical translation as causes of this anti-intellectualism; however, these sciences must be explored and whenever possible, embraced. We shouldn’t be afraid of any science – evolution, archeology, or any other for that matter. Further, we can look to the advances biblical languages, culture, and customs and create a truer translation of the very Word of God instead of holding blindly to a 17th century translation. And in studying the very Word of God, we can hear the words of Peter and Paul, John and James, as they tell us their theologies and their stories of Christ. In studying the biblical languages and the surrounding environment, we can be in the audience as Christ teaches the parables. We do not need to fear today’s knowledge.

This anti-intellectualism is based in misunderstood passages found in the bible, such as the one listed below.

Now as they observed the confidence of Peter and John and understood that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus. Acts 4:13 NASB

The members of the council were amazed when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, for they could see that they were ordinary men with no special training in the Scriptures. They also recognized them as men who had been with Jesus. Acts 4:13 NLT

Θεωροῦντες δὲ τὴν τοῦ Πέτρου παρρησίαν καὶ Ἰωάννου καὶ καταλαβόμενοι ὅτι ἄνθρωποι ἀγράμματοί εἰσιν καὶ ἰδιῶται, ἐθαύμαζον ἐπεγίνωσκόν τε αὐτοὺς ὅτι σὺν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἦσαν,

This is a much used verse to rail against education of ministers in the Church, or to dismiss education outright; however, upon closer examination of this verse, in context of the entire passage, we will see that the ‘ignorance’ of the fishermen was not due to lack of education, but failure to observe Jewish Religious education and the traditions that were enforced by it.

To note, παῤῥησία (parrhēsia), does not mean courage as in boldness, but directly relates to how one speaks to a higher authority. Unlearned (ἀγράμματος, agrammatos) is literally, unlettered. With special reference to Rabbinic culture, which was absent in Peter’s short sermon, it should be noted here that while Peter’s epistles are not without theological insight, John’s Gospel is filled with hard theology, such as the use of Logos. Matthew is connected to the Jewish culture which even now we are discovering. James? James should not be read plainly, or one comes away with a contradiction with Paul. In the Apocalypse, nearly every phrase is coded so that solid listeners could understand where as truly unlearned could not. We find the NT texts connects to the thought world of the time, more so than the connections to today’s world. Unless we start to understand the depth of the bible, we may very well miss something important.

Literacy, of the lack thereof, has been shown to be very low, and usually restricted to those classes that needed it. Crossan (Jesus and the Kingdom, in Jesus at 2000, ed Marcus J. Borg, p.53) cites anonymous “experts on literacy in the ancient world,” as placing literacy in the area at the time at around three percent. However, the NET bible translators tells us, Uneducated does not mean “illiterate,” that is, unable to read or write. Among Jews in NT times there was almost universal literacy, especially as the result of widespread synagogue schools. The term refers to the fact that Peter and John had no formal rabbinic training (See Louw-Nida) and thus, in the view of their accusers, were not qualified to expound the law or teach publicly. Yet, tradition credits these men with some of the most profound of the New Testament writings.

This does not mean that Peter and John were unlearned, but only unlearned in the area of Jewish Religious teaching which was of the same party that had crucified Christ.

Ignorant (ἰδιώτης, idiōtēs) has a general sense of being a private person. Originally, one in a private station, as opposed to one in office or in public affairs. The idea is that the person does not have professional knowledge, something that the Rabbis easily said about the Apostles. (see below) In 2nd Corinthians 11:6 Paul uses to refer to himself as one unskilled in public speaking. Paul, who was perhaps the most educated New Testament writer surely could not be called ignorant.

It should be noted at least John, a son of Zebedee who was no mere fisherman but an owner of an enterprise large enough to employ not only his sons but others as well, were friends of the High Priest. See John 18:15.

College Press NT Commentary:

The nature of John’s relationship to the high priest has been the subject of considerable speculation among scholars for many years. On the one hand it seems incredible that a Galilean fisherman would be an intimate with one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in Palestine. But, on the other hand, there is evidence that Zebedee, John’s father, had a considerable fishing business (see Mark 1:19-20). If John is the unnamed disciple of John 1:35, there is the suggestion that he was financially capable of leaving home and following first John the Baptist and then Jesus himself. Such a person may have been a frequent visitor to Jerusalem, and if his prosperous family had made substantial gifts to the temple, it is not impossible that the young John had worked his way into the friendship circles of the high priest’s family

If the father of the Apostles John was this wealthy, then it is more than possible that he was well-educated, although again it may have not been in the Rabbinical Tradition, the same Tradition that Christ taught against. Note, He never taught against learning, but the Tradition that developed absent of God.

Anti-intellectualism is very broad in its focus. If, on the other hand, intellectualism was tempered with the Spirit of God, as it was with Peter and Paul, then it would be serve to build a firm foundation. We must not eschew learning, else we find ourselves standing against a Paul or a John.

Granted, there can be a focus on intellectualism which would prevent a sincere believer from participating, and that too is a crime, but it is many experience to which I speak. I never want to stop learning just how much I don’t know.

      

Should We Celebrate a Passover Seder?

Should We Celebrate a Passover Seder?

Rev. McCain points a question to the Lutherans, but really, to us all:

“Is it appropriate for a Lutheran congregation to celebrate a Passover Seder? This is not an unimportant question since the practice has become rather widespread in our Synod. In fact, it has even been promoted (complete with Eucharist!) by the Synod’s Board for Evangelism (A Passover Haggadah for Christians , ed. Bruce J. Lieske, no date). But can it be historically or theologically sustained?

“The historical question is rather complex, as the history of liturgical forms generally are. To begin with, we have no manuscript of a Seder Haggadah which is early than the tenth century A.D. (Siddur Rav Saadya Gaon ). Nearly a millennium exists between the time of Jesus and the earliest extant text. Passover Haggadoth have never been standardized but have always been shaped and reshaped by circumstances and time. The ritual has been extraordinarily versatile since the tenth century A.D. and in all likelihood was just as versatile in the preceding centuries. The claim that any ritual now in existence is identical with that used by Jesus is both anachronistic and historically suspect.

Read the rest here:

CyberBrethren-A Lutheran Blog » Why Christian Congregations Should Not Celebrate a Passover Seder.

Various sects of Christianity are ‘discovering’ their ‘Jewish/Hebrew’ roots not realizing at sometimes, those very Jewish things originated long after the time of Christ. While we should, I believe, endeavor to not forget that Christianity was a sect of Judaism, we are very much Christian. While our Eucharist is connected to the Passover Seder of the 1st century, as are our other rites and doctrines (of perhaps should be) we cannot forget that the Church took a different route, namely to follow Christ.

      

Melito of Sardis – Deliverance of Mankind through Christ

Melito of Sardis – Deliverance of Mankind through Christ

In studying Melito of Sardis, I happened upon his preaching on the Passover (which I am reposting for this Easter). This is the oldest surviving sermons outside of the New Testament, and as such provides much insight into the heart and mind of this little know Preacher. From time to time, I will offer segments of his Passover Sermon.

The entire sermon is laced with Doctrine, but the central point of it is the Gospel message, that Christ was crucified, buried, and resurrected on the third day to provide Salvation for humanity. This is the Gospel. In drawing out the connection between the Passover of the Jews and the Passover of the Church, he brings to the mind the connectivity between the Old Testament and the New, of Israel and the Church, of the union of the Body of Christ.

Read the rest of this entry →

      

Easter with Melito – Typology in the Old Testament concerning Christ

Easter with Melito – Typology in the Old Testament concerning Christ

This week, I am going back through my old posts on Melito of Sardis. So, here we go, a bit more from his Passover Homily.

Read the rest of this entry →

      

Conflicts Between Religious Belief and Scientific Thinking

Conflicts Between Religious Belief and Scientific Thinking

Thought this article might be of interest to you:

Just over sixty years ago, the Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists was founded to resolve “the apparent points of conflict between scientific theory and Orthodox Judaism.”[1] The claims of paleontology, cosmology, and especially evolutionary biology exposed contradictions with traditional beliefs that were hard to overcome-so hard, indeed, that Alvin Radkowsky (an eminent nuclear physicist and leading member of the association) described the challenge as “a test of faith comparable to that faced by the biblical Abraham.”[2]

Today, evolution is no longer a hot topic amongst Modern Orthodox Jews. Few feel anxiety, let alone an impending Akeidah, at the challenge evolution poses-and even fewer would follow the advice of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and tear the offending pages out of schoolbooks. Even in the Hareidi community, rejection of evolution is no longer universal. When a ban was issued against the books of the “zoo rabbi” Nosson Slifkin for questioning the scientific judgments of the Talmud, opposition was intense-yet several prominent rabbis rallied to his defense.

Torah min haShamayim: Conflicts Between Religious Belief and Scientific Thinking | Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals.