A few thoughts on a book I recently finished, Messianic
Judaism: A Modern Movement with an Ancient Past, by David H. Stern. This
isn't a "review" as much as it is a random collection of thoughts I
had while reading. It's messy, but that's probably because my thoughts about
all this are messy. But rather than tidy them up, I think I'll just leave them
in disarray, like a pile of post-it notes. I'm still trying to sort through
ideas and questions. This book is helping, but I have a ways to go.
Speaking of messes, the book itself is a bit of a mess, actually.
Lots of typos, if you can believe. And his style of presentation--Roman numeral
outline (IIIA1, etc.) can get confusing, particularly when he references
sections he previously discussed. I got in the habit of writing page numbers
next to those references, just in case I wanted to go back and read them later.
Also, there are even errors like talking about an Appendix that is in the book
but not in the Table of Contents. Anyone else would have thrown up their hands
and tossed the book (or contacted the publisher and offered her editing
services, which I almost did). But apparently, I'm a highly motivated and
somewhat patient reader, because I read cover to cover, with pencil in
hand.
The best thing I can say about the book is it represents a movement, possibly a significant movement, in terms of Jewish and Christian history. Stern and other Messianic Jews seem to have a sense of purpose, perhaps a calling, to bridge the divide ("the middle wall of partition" mentioned in the New Testament). He explains that "much of this book is occupied with correcting Christian misimpressions of Jewish ideas and practices." Beyond the broader question of whether the Christian church should embrace the Jewish roots of Christianity, Stern advocates for what he calls a "Messianic Jewish Systematic Theology," which he believes will bridge the schism that began around the 1st century when the largely Jewish (Messianic) church began to reach out to Gentiles ("grafted" in to the olive tree, according to Romans 9) and widened around the 4th century when the church, by then comprised predominantly of Gentile believers, insisted that Jews renounce their Judaism if they wanted to be part of the church. That schism obviously persists today, though Stern and others believe there's a renaissance of sorts taking place which they believe will ultimately culminate in "all Israel being saved" (i.e., the nation of Israel will acknowledge Jesus [Yeshua] as Messiah, though not all Jews individually will do so).
Theology aside, however, I read the book with a personal agenda. Am I a Jew? I've read enough to know that, according to rabbinical teaching (Orthodox), I'm not. Orthodoxy teaches that Jewishness is passed down through the mother, not the father. Nevertheless, this is an issue I continue to struggle with. I'm fairly pragmatic in my thinking, and I try to work things out logically, if I can. And logically speaking, Jewishness is at least partly an ethnicity, though it's also other things (a religion, a culture, an identity, a system, a doctrine, a nationality). Focusing specifically on ethnicity, I refer to analogy. My husband is Japanese; I am not. Therefore my children are half-Japanese. Done and done. My dad is Jewish; my mother was not. My dad may be a non-practicing, secular, atheistic Jew, but belief in the God of Abraham and observance of Torah does not make one a Jew. Ethnically speaking, a Jew is a Jew, despite his rejection of Judaism, the religion. It's blood, it's genetics, it's ancestry, it's ethnicity. Therefore, the way I see it, the son or daughter of an ethnic Jew (father or mother) is half Jewish.
An acquaintance, who is Jewish by birth and practice but who also believes that Jesus (Yeshua) is the Messiah, told me that the rabbi of her Messianic Jewish congregation is himself, like me, half Jewish on his father's side. Nevertheless, he considers himself a Jew. There's some difference of opinion here, particularly as I read Stern's explanation for what it means to be a Jew in his discussion about the Law of Return, what's known as making aliyah. My friend told me that according to Israel's Law of Return, any one who has a Jewish grandmother is allowed to make aliyah (so that would include me). However, evidently, it's not that simple, and Stern goes into some detail about how even Messianic Jews, who may be 100% Jewish, i.e., who are descended from two Jewish parents and who practice the tenets of Judaism, are denied the right of return if they admit that they are Christian. He writes:
No other group of
Jews is subject to such discrimination in Israel. Jewish Buddhists and Hindus
can make aliyah. Jewish members of any 'new age' sect, no matter how odd, can
make aliyah. Jewish idol-worshippers can make aliyah. Jewish atheists can make
aliyah. Even Jewish known criminals can make aliyah. ...We Messianic Jews would
have died in Auschwitz, so why can't we live as Jews in Israel?
That last sentence makes it pretty clear to
me. Blood is blood. Orthodoxy may say I'm not a Jew, but I'm my father's
offspring, my lineage can be traced to my paternal grandparents and their
parents who emigrated to America from the Ukraine. I may not be a Jew
"officially," but there's this thread, frayed, perhaps, but intact,
that connects me to that ancestry.
Does it matter? Will I or would I ever
"convert"? I don't know. Probably not, at least not now. All I know
is there's a connection to my Jewish ancestry, and I'm trying to put it all
together with my belief in Christ, which I have no interest in abandoning. I
continue to believe he's the Jewish Messiah, though I realize many believing
Jews are either offended by this or view this as a heresy.
Back to Messianic Judaism (the
book). Here are some key takeaways:
- Christianity is Jewish.
- Anti-Semitism is un-Christian.
- Originally, it was the Jews who brought the gospel to
non-Jews, not the other way around. Neglecting to evangelize Jews is
anti-Semitic.
- The word "Christian" has a very specific
meaning: it refers to Gentile believers in Yeshua. Jewish believers are
not called Christian--they're Messianic Jews.
- Messianic Jews are "Jews who follow Jesus [Yeshua]
and maintain a loyalty to their Jewish heritage."
- People who have at least a rudimentary understanding of
Christian theology may be familiar with the terms "replacement
theology," and "two-covenant" theology. The former refers
to the notion that the Jews are no longer God's people--they have been
"replaced" by Christians. The latter refers to the teaching that
"Jesus brought the covenant through which Gentiles emerge from
paganism to know the one true God . . . [since] Jews already have the
covenant through Moses . . . they do not need Yeshua the Messiah."
Stern rejects both of these interpretations.
As for who or what I am? I think I found my
answer in the section I referred to earlier, on Messianic Jews and Aliyah.
Stern writes, "Incidentally, if your mother is not Jewish, then, according
to both halakhah [collective body of Jewish religious laws]
and the Law of Return, neither are you."
So, I'm not a Jew. I knew that. He
continues. "However, if you have a father or grandparent who fits the Law
of Return's definition of 'Jew' [which I do], then, even if you are openly
known as a Christian [which I am], you have the undisputed right to immigrate
to Israel under a special provision of the Law of Return dealing with
non-Jewish descendants of Jews."
Ah ha! Who or what am I? I'm a
non-Jewish descendant of Jews!
Some additional thoughts: Dr. Stern is also the translator of
the Jewish New Testament and the Complete Jewish Bible,
as well as the author of a commentary on the Jewish New Testament.
I purchased and have begun reading the Complete Jewish Bible. One
thing I like about the translation is that it's a single book, by which I mean,
pagination is continuous. The "old" testament doesn't end on page
1,222, and the "new" doesn't begin on page 1. Rather, the first book
of the New Testament (Matthew, or Mattityahu) begins on page 1,223. The two
books are one, as Dr. Stern explains in his Introduction:
Thus the New Testament apart from the Old is
heretical, and the Old Testament apart from the New is incomplete--two
testaments, one Bible. The Complete Jewish Bible graphically presents this
unity by eliminating all separation between the Tanakh [the Old Testament] and
the B'rit Hadasha [the New Testament] . . . There is no need to collect the
first three-quarters of the Bible into the "Old Testament" and the
last quarter into the "New." Rather, the Bible is presented as a
seamless whole, a unified Word of God, a complete Jewish Bible for all humanity
(xx).
I actually love this. I have more to say on this, in fact. Some
other time, perhaps.
