Pervasive “anti-rabbinism” must be rooted out
Messianic movement has a disease, a festering sore. It’s called “anti-rabbinism.” In reality, it should be called “hypocritical anti-Judaism,” simply because while chiding the “rabbis” for their many “faults” many of those same critics base most of their “Messianic Judaism” on “Rabbinic Judaism” with Evangelicalism thrown in to make it “kosher” enough for messianic use. This ailment in insidious and penetrates every segment of Messianic Jewish life, to one degree or another. One often hears, even from some messianic Jewish leaders, “Oh, it’s rabbinic!” It’s an inherited condition which we inherited from Christianity’s almost two millennia of derision of all things “Judaism” and by default, all things “rabbinic,” and therefor it’s closely related to antisemitism. It’s time to heal ourselves. No human being is above criticism, and rabbis are not an exception, but deep-seated “anti-rabbinism” by any Jewish person is self-hatred.
Below you will find an article titled Seeds, Weeds, and Walking the High Wire: The Weed of Anti-Rabbinism, by R. Stuart Dauermann. It originally appeared on MJTI website.
A third, closely related weed, is anti-rabbinism—opposition to “the rabbis” as a class. The way the term “the rabbis” has been used in Messianic Jewish circles, although less widely than formerly, demonstrates a polemical disdain fit only to be uprooted and discarded. A quick search of one Jewish mission website using the search term “religion of the rabbis” turned up quotes such as the following:
When I talk about being a Jew, I’m talking about something that is different from the religion of the rabbis. I’ll be quick to tell you that I do not follow the Jewish religion.
You might be surprised that the Jewish Bible, the T’nach, does not mention rabbis. According to Scripture, the priesthood was to be in charge. What is now considered “traditional Judaism” began at the Council of Yavneh, when a group of rabbis met and made certain decisions in light of the destruction of the Temple and the growth of Christianity. What decisions they made, we can only surmise. But after Yavneh, rabbis were in control of the religion.
Regardless of the degree to which one agrees or disagrees with the author’s historical reconstruction, we find here an appalling categorical hostility toward Judaism, toward the rabbis, and their religion. Can the rabbis be wrong? Certainly! Has the rabbinical establishment been almost entirely opposed to Jewish Yeshua-faith? Surely! But should we therefore distrust all rabbis and all rabbinic writings as has commonly been the case in our thinking, discussion and polemical rhetoric? Must we consider the rabbis and their teachings to be guilty until proven innocent? Should we consider all of them to be seducers and enemies of Yeshua-faith, to be avoided by all who would exercise due caution? Must we assume, as some have stated of us, that those seeking irenic relationships with rabbis do so only to pander for approval, prepared to sell out the gospel as a means to that end? In the service of truth, I cannot go there. In fact, this weed nauseates me.
This antipathy to “the rabbis” extends beyond distrust to disdain. A typical mission publication states, “Unfortunately, most rabbis have accepted the role of an apologist for Judaism, rather than a spiritual authority who can aid in or inspire a true encounter with God.” Will you join me in finding this comment presumptuous? How do we know the motivations of “most rabbis?” Where do we sign up for a dose of such omniscience concerning the motivations of the majority of an entire class of people? I submit that what we are hearing are echoes of Justin Martyr and the Adversos Judaeos tradition.
We ought not comfort ourselves that these are someone else’s statements, not our own. Axiomatic suspicion of and distancing from the rabbis and their religion lingers in the air like a stench of a corpse only recently removed from the room. Things are better among us, but not well–not yet.
As another case in point, consider our respected friend Dr. Michael L. Brown. One of his recent blog postings includes ample evidence of the weeds of categorical anti-Judaim and anti-rabbinism persisting in our ranks. For example, he states that he has “come to the conclusion that rabbinic traditions have little or no place in our private lives or public services.” Brown continues, “While it is one thing to follow the rabbinic calendar as a matter of convenience, it is another thing entirely to pray the prayers of the rabbis or utilize their varied religious expressions and methods.” He asks, “How can we pray the prayers of men whose very faith presupposes that Yeshua is not the Messiah?” These positions will sound very familiar to most of us in the Messianic Movement, because this viewpoint is not his alone.
I am asking all of us to reconsider our attttudes and to spread the word: “The rabbis” should not be used as an epithet of scorn. We need to recognize and repudiate the tradition of anti-Judaism and anti-rabbinism as weeds, not wheat. Uproot them.
I think what you call “anti-rabbinism” is really just a lack of understanding which is tied in to the concept of the “sufficiency of the scriptures”. Most people in the Messianic movement (even Jews) come from a Christian background and part of that background is to depend on Scripture as your only authoritative document and to treat commentaries as commentaries. Christians don’t understand the entire construct of Rabbinic authority or how it works and, since it’s generally not taught (at least not competently) in the One Law world, it tends to be disregarded.
This isn’t anti-Jewish thought, it’s a point of view. These people don’t hate Jews, they just don’t understand why Rabbinical opinion is such a big deal, especially when a lot of it seems so obscure, counter-intuitive, and mystical.
I think I did a reasonably good job of trying to explain the different aspects of Torah understanding in my blog post What did Jesus Change: Ritual?, but my wife is taking a class on this topic from the local Chabad Rabbi and she shared her understanding with me (I’m somewhat “restricted” from taking the class myself because of who I am and where I worship).
The other part is that, even if Gentiles in “the movement” were to gain a better understanding of Rabbinic authority and writings, how much of it would apply to non-Jews? If (as the Rabbis state) Gentiles aren’t supposed to observe the Shabbat at all or, if they are allowed to, they are not to observe the Shabbat in the same way as a Jew, would the Rabbinical authorities have any relevancy for Gentiles since the “audience” for the Rabbis are, by definition, Jews?
James, you make good points – true, much of this stems from general ignorance of Jewish concepts of authority and scriptural interpretation than outright hatred. However, I’ve seen it EXPRESSED as hatred.
As far as Gentiles being “anti-rabbinic,” as I made clear in my post I’m much more bothered by Jews being “anti-rabbinic.” If Jews themselves feel this way, who can blame Gentiles for doing the same?
However, I do wonder how much authority should rabbis (including “messianic” ones) have over non-Jews? I mean, were not the elders and apostles out of Jerusalem making rules for the Gentiles in “churches” world over?
The problem here is that all we really know about the development of “rabbinism” comes from the writings of the rabbis themselves. When we speak of “notmative” Judaism, it is a fact that we depend on the rabbis own testimony. No other contemporary party of Judaism has left any literary evidence. When one sees for example in the state of Israel where all this led to-a total religious coercion-one tends to believe that opposition to rabbinical is sometimes called for. Dauermann is wrong in classifying opposition to the Rabbis as anti-Judaism.
“Dauermann is wrong in classifying opposition to the Rabbis as anti-Judaism.”
I think that he means that a general opposition to “rabbis” (as one can see in Christianity and in some other circles) is “anti-Judaism.” This because our rabbinic sages and rabbis do represent just about the ONLY Judaism there is (yes, I am aware that there is a tiny remnant of Karaites, which themselves, at one point, grew out of Rabbinical Judaism, like Protestantism out of Catholicism).”
Anti-Judaism is not just any criticism of a particular rabbi, a group of rabbis, or even of certain actions of a particular rabbinical organization – it’s OK to be [constructively] critical of anything and anyone one finds unjust. Rather, it’s a wholesale opposition to mainstream Judaism (that rabbis lead) that says that Judaism of the rabbis (those who sit in the “seat of Moses,” since they DO make religious decisions for our people to this day) is no longer Judaism of Israel because it failed to live up to some expectations (i.e. recognize Messiah during his visitation) or because one doesn’t agree with certain halachic rulings.
Gene,
I think you are confused. The Judaism of the Rabbis who deny Yeshua is NOT the Judaism of biblical Israel. I know it hurts, but it is true. They deny our Messiah!
What did our Messiah say? “Whoever denies me, I will deny him before My Father..”
I will rather follow Yeshua, not Dauermann.
Dan, I think you are the one who is confused here, especially about your Matthew 10:32 interpretation. To deny Yeshua, one has to have actually known, believed, placed their trust in and/or witnessed in the past that he’s in fact the Messiah. Remember Peter and his denial? Yeshua is speaking about apostates here, specifically, those who knew and rejected him. He’s not speaking about the Jewish people (or the rabbis) in general like you do, or the judicial blindness of Israel to Yeshua’s Messiahship (not just the rabbis’) that actually was meant by G-d for the salvation of the Gentiles.
The way you judge rabbis and consider anti-rabbinisim/anti-Judaism as a good and right thing for anyone to do, one can say that you are “anti-Jewish people” as well, since most of them, NOT just the rabbis, also “deny” Yeshua, according to your definition!
In fact, Paul writes in 2 Timothy 2:12:
“If we endure, WE will also reign with him; if WE deny him, he also will deny US.”
Do you see that Paul is talking specifically about those who KNEW him, he’s talking in first person (WE and US)?
“I will rather follow Yeshua, not Dauermann.”
And I would rather follow Yeshua, not Tim Hegg.
Gene,
I can recomand a ggod orthopedic Doctor in case you hurt yourself stretching…..
Don’t you see that you are defeating your own argument? It goes both ways…
“I can recomand a ggod orthopedic Doctor in case you hurt yourself stretching…..”
Thanks, but I already have a real G-d who heals:)
So you admit you are stretching?…..LOL!
“So you admit you are stretching?…..LOL!”
Dan, you are the one who knows the “ggod orthopedic Doctor!”
Anywho… Dan, it’s OK. You have a role to play – someone in this world [well, I do agree that most people in the world would side with you regarding this subject instead of me] has to be “anti-rabbinic.”
You should be thankful, I am increasing your comments count…..Barabing!!!!Barabang!!!….
Ha ha:) Dan, but if I was simply after some count, and not the substance, I could have just as easily made a bunch of fake comments from fake visitors.
So, stick to the substance and comment away!
BTW, do you think that if Jewish people in general (not just the state of Israel) completely got rid of all rabbinics with all their rabbinic rituals and teachings, defunded the rabbis, stopped sending their kids to their shuls, their yeshivas, ignored their beis dins, stopped using rabbis for their religious services (bris, marriage, divorce, burial, bar-mitzvah) – do you think Jews would be better off as a people and as Jews?
I am not talking about religious freedom here from any coercion by the rabbis in modern Israel. What I am asking is: do you think that if Jews stopped practicing Rabbinic Judaism (or “Judaism of the Rabbis who deny Yeshua,” as you call it) would Jews be better off today? What if they stopped listening to their rabbis a thousand years ago while living say in Christian / Catholic Europe – would they be better off as Jews today?
I know you have a disdain for rabbis (who “deny Yeshua”), but please think carefully before you answer.
Well, as usual you misrepresent my thoughts and beliefs, but i forgive you, you are just a kid…..
I do not desdain the Rabbis for denying Yeshua. I am, unlike you, being careful not to follow them blindly. I can also turn the tables on you and ask you: By keeping all rabbinic rituals, and teachings, funded the rabbis, keep sending their kids to their shuls, their yeshivas, submit to their beit-Dins, continue using rabbis for religious services—do you think JEWS WOULD HAVE LEARNED TO KNOW YESHUA?
I rest my case…..
Thanks for the patronizing “forgiveness,” Dan.
Let me ask you – was Shaul prevented, by his rabbinic education and even observance of ALL traditions of the fathers (as he claimed), or even by his former unbelief and persecution of believers, from knowing Yeshua? No! Unless G-d reveals himself to someone, as he did for Shaul, the blindness will persist, especially after two thousand years of Christian persecution in the name of Christ.
Don’t you think G-d has a plan with Judaism, and that through Judaism and Jewish leadership of the rabbis over thousands of years (way BEFORE any secular Zionism came along) that kept our people together, G-d has preserved our people as a distinct people until today, so that one day they may receive Messiah? I already know your answer.
Even Yeshua himself recognized the leadership of rabbis of his day over Israel, even those who were hypocrites, even those who laughed at him.
Dan, what’s more – if it wasn’t for OUR rabbis and their traditions, if it wasn’t for them keeping the Hebrew tongue alive in their “liturgy,” if it wasn’t for them passing down the longing for Zion, brising generation after generation of Jewish children, officiating Jewish marriages and preventing intermarriages, preventing assimilation into Christian culture, preferring death and expulsion rather then converting to Christianity or Islam, etc. – me and you, we wouldn’t even be talking here, there wouldn’t be Jewish people, and there certainly wouldn’t be Israel from where you wish rabbis were gone. We’d be Catholics or Muslims somewhere in Rome or Cairo.
Gene,
It may surprise you to find out that I actually appreciate the job the rabbis have done over the centuries. Whether or not they put their trust in Yeshua as Messiah is one thing, but it does not erase all of the good things that have come about for the Jewish people due to their efforts.
Without the rabbis dedicating their lives to the Torah of YHVH and the Jewish communities they lived in, the Jewish people as a distinct people may have very well disappeared from view. Their sacrifice, those of the rabbis, for their people has not gone unnoticed by all who claim to be “messianic” in their faith.
Have you read the book, “Have a little faith” by Mitch Albom? Through that little book he has provided a closeup look into the life of a modern rabbi who loved his Creator and the people around him. If you haven’t read it I would like to recommend it to you.
Yes there have been problems. Tell me of someplace where there isn’t any trouble. But I think it would be a good lesson for many Messianic believers to make a careful estimation and judge a righteous judgment instead of reacting to the stories and teachings that are negative regarding rabbis and thrown about by circuit riders for general consumption. Each person is different and there are many rabbis who display a love for their people that should be the envy of all who say they trust YHVH with their lives.
I hope someday that I have the privilege of meeting and getting to know one of those rabbis. I think it would be an honor.
Ef
Your replies have been excellent gentlemen. Thanks to the rabbis we have a state of Israel today, we have Eretz Yisrael where Yehoshua Ben David will come back to reign. Thanks to the rabbis we have Judaism amongst us and not only “christianity” and “islam”. We must pray for all those rabbis who gave up their lives and taught to live according to Torah. Yehoshua told the young man in Mattityahu 19:16 to keep the Mitzvot if he wanted to inherit life. We need to see Yehoshua as Moshiach Ben Yosef, and this is according to the oral tradition of the rabbis. Yehoshua came as Moshiach Ben Yosef and will come back as Moshiach Ben David to rebuild the Temple and bring forth the Messianic Era as it was promised by the prophets. May Elohim bless all the rabbis thru all the centuries since the destruction of the Beit Mikdash. Shalom!
Roger I’d like to hear your thoughts on why you believe Moshiac Ben Yosef came first.
Dan it’s actually a good thing that the Rabbis deny Yeshua for a time, the hardening of heart has happened for a reason. If all Israel accepted the Messiah as you wish then we gentiles would be kaput, but fortunately prophecy paints another picture of Gd’s plan.
I agree with you, Roger! First as Ben Yosef, then as Ben David! Amen BeShem Yeshua.
@Arik
What makes you think that it was Ben Yosef first? Upon first glance it may seem that way, but consider what Yeshua said in Matthew 10: 34—“Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.”
Conversely we see later that Yeshua brings a sword of truth that destroys the enemies of Israel and brings peace throughout the world. He’ll be called Prince of Peace, etc. To me it seems this more fitting that Ben Yosef has yet to come. Anyways I’d like to hear some more thoughts from anyone..
Benicho…
I’ve already discussed Ben Yosef at length in my post Messiah who dies and doesn’t usher in peace.
Our sages said that he was to prepare the way for Ben David and then he was to die in a battle (which may be a spiritual battle against the forces of evil – certainly, Yeshua fits the bill in his defeat of Satan). So, since his mission is to prepare Israel spiritually for the coming of Messiah, Ben Yosef must come before Ben David.
Everything aside, can you point specifically in Tanakh where the sages derive that b. Yosef will prepare the way for b. David? How do they distinguish the two?
I hate to bring this topic up again as it was discussed not even two months ago, but…do you find it odd that Gd would mention Gog as enemies of Israel yet mean it in a purely spiritual form? Seems unnecessary to use the name of one of the sons of Japheth as an enemy of Israel if it were purely spiritual. Not simply Japhites, but Gog… Of course the Swedes (where ethnic “Germans” migrated from) trace their lineage through Magog.
“Everything aside, can you point specifically in Tanakh where the sages derive that b. Yosef will prepare the way for b. David? How do they distinguish the two?”
Benicho… our sages read those very same verses in the prophets that you and I read, that is those scriptures that speak of Messiah suffering on behalf of many, dying at the hands of his enemies and Israel mourning for him (I don’t need to quote those for you). So, in their wisdom the sages interpreted the significance of those verses in the way that made most sense to them: when Messiah eventually comes to Israel in culmination of this age he will reign as a triumphant king and there will be peace on earth. However, taking those facts into account the sages interpreted the verses that speak of Messiah suffering and dying as a wholly other event in another time, and they understood that some other Messiah must be precede the Messiah’s who is to come in glory.
How did the sages come up with the name “Messiah ben Joseph” for the first messiah? This part is a matter of debate and its origins are inconclusive (it’s, for example, mentioned in apocrypha works such as “Apocalypse of Zerubbabel” and in midrashim by sages Saadia Gaon and Hai Gaon – but earlier origins have been hard to trace).
Could it be that this idea somehow took root through the coming of Yeshua himself?
“I hate to bring this topic up again as it was discussed not even two months ago, but…do you find it odd that Gd would mention Gog as enemies of Israel yet mean it in a purely spiritual form? ”
I believe that physical earthly armies and whole nations had/have spiritual beings and their physical actions have unseen spiritual actions behind them. It’s always a combination of physical and spiritual, not purely one or the other. Gog-Magog could also be representative of both, just like the Amalekites, once an actual physical people (perhaps still are, somewhere?) who themselves descended from Amalek, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau, also represent the SPIRIT of persecution and treachery that could encompass many nations.
“So, in their wisdom the sages interpreted the significance of those verses in the way that made most sense to them: when Messiah eventually comes to Israel in culmination of this age he will reign as a triumphant king and there will be peace on earth.”
I’ll point out some interesting things as I’ve been getting more and more into Talmud.. I’m reading more commentaries on it, but the debate between Messiah and resurrection was far more divided than I ever thought after reading the Sanherin Tractates (99a-b).
When referring to b. David:
“R. Hillel said: There shall be no Messiah for Israel, because they have already enjoyed him in the days of Hezekiah. R. Joseph said: May God forgive him [for saying so]. Now, when did Hezekiah flourish? During the first Temple. Yet Zechariah, prophesying in the days of the second, proclaimed, Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion, shout, O daughter of Jerusalem, behold, thy king cometh unto thee! he is just, and having salvation, lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”
Seems as if R. Joseph suspected Zechariah 9:9 to be b. David reference (the King giving salvation to his people), yet it aligns with our idea of b. Josef as Yeshua. If you continue reading (all of tractate 99 is great) you’ll see that the idea of b. Josef and b. David seems to be convoluted. The sages were indeed wise which is what makes Talmud hard to put down, but there was certainly nothing of a consensus on b. Josef and b. David. So I’ve been picking through trying to figure out who the sages thought b. David and b. Josef to be. The whole point of this is that there is no definitive list in Talmud of who b. Josef was, nor his traits (Sanhedrin had a hard enough time agreeing on a Messiah and whether or not resurrection would occur to make a list of traits) and same applies for b. David. When you read the scriptures there is nothing that separates thoughts of b. Josef and b. David, obviously, so later commentaries on this are basically their own thoughts and beliefs on how it would work. The sages simply didn’t agree on who b. Josef and b. David were.
I’ll be reading more into later commentaries, from the middle ages for example, but it’s a bit misleading to read later commentaries before reading the original sources of b. Josef and b. David for obvious reasons. If you haven’t read Tractate 99 I’m sure you’d like the dialogue a lot.
“Could it be that this idea somehow took root through the coming of Yeshua himself?”
Seems that this idea was in the works before Yeshua came along, which could be Gd working through the thoughts of the Jewish people to fulfill as many expectations as possible as he often does. But then again I’m no expert..
“Gog-Magog could also be representative of both, just like the Amalekites, once an actual physical people (perhaps still are, somewhere?) who themselves descended from Amalek, son of Eliphaz, son of Esau, also represent the SPIRIT of persecution and treachery that could encompass many nations.”
You had an interesting thought about spirits being behind peoples and nations. The same spirit behind the Amalekites could have been behind the Europeans (Germanic peoples more specifically). Although it is interesting to note that the Germanic peoples (Swedes/Njords/Finns from whom the Germans came) directly trace their lineage to Gog. The monarchs of Sweden had recorded their lineage to Gog for quite some time. I’m sure that tradition died out as a result of Christianity spreading in Scandinavia as Gog wasn’t a particularly good name to carry in a Christian nation.
I don’t know if you’re familiar with this blog, but it has great insight and thought (at least for my uneducated mind):
http://mashiach-awareness.blog.ca/2011/04/13/two-matzahs-two-mashiachs-10999489/#c15719535