On the Errors of Messianic Judaism
Much of what the reader sees below is what I incorporated in a letter I sent to some adherents of Messianic Judaism. For that reason of the letter's composition, the main points in it that I numbered will seem thematically disconnected, because I was responding to several different lines of argument advanced by those adherents of Messianic Judaism. Not all of what you read below is all that I sent in the letter. Also, in the letter I sent the adherents of Messianic Judaism, whom I had met, I directly addressed them with “you,” and did not refer to them in the third person.
Adherents of Messianic Judaism lay great store on the building of a third literal temple, which they say is according to a prophecy recorded in the book of Ezekiel. However, the prophecy does not have literal fulfillment by the construction of a temple to replace the one that was destroyed by Roman armies in 70 C.E. How do we know that? We know it because we do not read in the Bible that Jehovah has purposed the existence of two priesthoods serving with Jesus the High Priest. His only priesthood is the one authorized by the new covenant (see Hebrews 7:12, 13). (And neither should we imagine heaven to be a place where a literal fulfillment of Ezekiel’s temple vision might occur!) We should find a teaching that Ezekiel’s temple is to have literal fulfillment in the construction of a third literal temple in Jerusalem to be an absurd teaching that extols things both inglorious and contrary to God’s will for the inhabited earth to come. How so? Because in the coming paradise, there will be no stone-walled temple; no slaughtering of animals for burnt sacrifices; no Levitical priests descended from Zadok offering the fat and blood of sacrificed animals; no death of a priest; no woman becoming a widow there; no polity composed of the 12 tribes of Israel with Gentiles living among them, and that polity being geographically located in the Middle East with a temple complex centrally located in its borders; and no personal presence either of Jehovah (cf. 2 Chronicles 6:18) or of his Son (1 Timothy 6:16). To reiterate, there are features mentioned in Ezekiel’s temple vision that can have no literal fulfillment for arrangements Jehovah and Jesus have made as respects the worship that God’s earthly servants give him now, and which they will continue to give him after the destruction of all wicked persons.
Ezekiel’s temple vision has a fulfillment for one of its intended purposes, that purpose being for impressing on God's servants the requirement that they must render Jehovah pure worship. The first ones in considerable number who appreciated the importance of Ezekiel's temple vision were repatriated Jews; they learned from the vision that Jehovah lays emphasis on pure sacred service. The vision, however, was not intended to teach repatriated Jews that they and/or their descendants should expect, per the law of the temple given in Ezekiel’s vision, fulfillment of certain literal constructs appertaining some earthly temple in Jerusalem. God never intended by the vision that any Jews at any time should conclude that there would be a literal fulfillment of Ezekiel’s temple vision—as though such would occur in order that pure sacred service might become an even more splendid reality here on earth than had ever been so before such a literal fulfillment. Indeed, even as respects the second temple where pure worship there by God's faithful servants did take place, that temple never did—and never could have—become more glorious than was so for it on the occasions when the spirit-anointed Son of God taught there; Jesus had great respect and zeal for what were the Law’s arrangements for sacred service in that literal temple. But Jesus also foretold the end in Jerusalem of that literal, earthly center of pure worship of the Father (John 4:23). And because the Father is a spirit, then he has no need for an earthly center of pure worship, as a replacement for the second temple, into which his earthly servants should gather themselves.
Ezekiel’s temple vision, however, cannot literally apply for the sense that Jehovah’s great spiritual temple might have constructs built of literal stone wherein members of spiritual Israel might function as under priests for Jesus their High Priest. One of several things about Ezekiel’s temple vision helps establish that conclusion. For example, the record of Ezekiel’s temple vision presents the requirement that no foreigner living in Israel who is uncircumcised in heart and in flesh may enter Jehovah’s sanctuary. But, in spiritual Israel, there is no distinction to be made as respects Jews and Gentiles (see Galatians 3:26-29), nor as to whether a Gentile believer is uncircumcised in his flesh (see Galatians 6:15, 16); however, in Ezekiel’s temple vision, importance is attached to whether or not one is circumcised not in his heart only, but also in his flesh (see Ezekiel 44:7, 9). So, do those verses identify those who serve in heaven with Jesus? They cannot possibly do so. Consider that it is a heavenly Mount Zion (see Hebrews 12:22) where Jesus and his fellow king-priests are stationed. Jesus was foretold to have with him there in heaven those he had "bought . . . out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation and . . . [he had] made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings [from heaven] over the earth" (Revelation 5:9, 10). And so how does their location in heaven bear upon our understanding about the demand recorded in Ezekiel 44:7, 9 that those gaining entrance into Ezekiel's visionary sanctuary must be circumcised not in heart only but in their flesh, too? Because such requirement for fleshly circumcision cannot have application to "those who were sealed, 144, 000, sealed out of every tribe of the sons of Israel" (Revelation 7:4). That 144, 000 are on that heavenly Mount Zion (Revelation 14:1), about which also Paul wrote to Jewish Christians in Judea. They are spiritual Israelites who have been purchased by the Lamb's blood and are stationed on heavenly Mount Zion for their service to mankind. And heaven is no place for either circumcised or uncircumcised flesh (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:50).
Also, in the apostle John’s spiritual temple vision recorded in Revelation, people from all the nations are seen in the temple, and we know they are Christians with no vested interest in a literal fulfillment of Ezekiel’s temple vision for blessing Christians, seeing as how John saw in vision that those Christians in Jehovah’s great spiritual temple are there to render sacred service day and night, and not just in the daylight hours on certain days (Revelation 7:13-17). It is that very fact among other facts that establishes a contrast with things mentioned in the laws of the temple that Ezekiel recorded (see Ezekiel 46:1-3) as seen against things mentioned concerning Jehovah’s great spiritual temple in the writings of the apostles John and Paul.
No, we ought not to wrongfully expect appearance of a literal third temple just as we ought not to wrongfully expect appearance of new, literal Jerusalem descending from heaven and having literal, fantastical measurements that would make it to cover a territory 14 times as large as modern Israel, and having fantastical measurements that would make it to tower 350 miles into outer space.
Also is the fact that in the recording of Ezekiel’s temple vision, we find references to sacrifices of animals for atonement of sin (see Ezekiel 45:16-17, 22, 23, 25). But as respects Jehovah’s great spiritual temple, Jesus the High Priest entered its Most Holy after he was raised back to life in heaven, bringing with him the value of his sacrificially shed blood once for all time in order “to do away with sin” (Hebrews 12:26). Even those who will survive the great tribulation mentioned in Revelation chapter 7 will not benefit from animal sacrifices for forgiveness of sin unto salvation/everlasting life. These ones will benefit from the blood of the Lamb, not from the blood of a goat or of a lamb (Revelation 7:14-17; John 1:29).
I. "In [God's] Saying "a New Covenant," He Has Made the Former One Obsolete. Now What Is Obsolete and Growing Old Is Near to Vanishing Away" (Hebrews 8:13]) ..... "for We Do Not Have Here a City That Continues, but We Are Earnestly Seeking the One to Come" (Hebrews 13:14).
That city to come is heavenly Jerusalem, a heavenly Mount Zion (Hebrews 12:22), a new Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2). The Law of Moses does not charter the existence of a spiritual Israel. The new covenant does. The Law of Moses does not recognize uncircumcised Gentile disciples of Jesus for their becoming co-rulers with Jesus Christ in the Messianic Kingdom of God, a blessing which was taken from natural Israel as natural Israel, and given to a different nation, spiritual Israel (Matthew 21:43).
The old, Mosaic Law covenant became obsolete when it was replaced upon inauguration of “a new covenant”; it was after the Law’s obsolescence that the Law later vanished away. (The legal basis for such an obsolescence occurred when Christ was nailed to the torture stake on Golgotha, a place located outside the walls of first-century Jerusalem.) But before the Law would completely vanish away, there had first to occur the Law's obsolescence. It did occur, and that even while there was still a Levitical priesthood that was serving in earthly Jerusalem at its temple, yes, even so after the Law’s obsolescence.
Just when did that obsolescence occur? It occurred when Christ brought forth, under a new covenant, a spirit-anointed Israel, the real Israel of God, on the day of Pentecost, 33 C.E. Then is when God formally ended the Law of Moses--and forensically demonstrated as much (see Acts 2:1-11)--for its serving as an instrument informed with terms by which natural Israel might at least have been safeguarded for arrival of the Messiah, this so that enough faithful natural Israelites might have filled up the foreordained number of those who would be with the Messiah as kings and priests in the Kingdom of God. In that way they might have become a people as God’s special possession who had descended from Abraham, and by which all the families of the ground might have, in time, become blessed. Natural Israel, however, failed to get that status as a reward from God by their becoming the sole people for God’s special possession; they failed to become a God-approved Israel. But God will have his Israel, an Israel that results from Jews and Gentiles who by faith become the Israel that God is pleased to own. Any natural Jews, however, gaining entrance into this real Israel of God had first to acknowledge all that Jesus' death on the torture stake could thereby mean for them; they had to exercise faith in Jesus, giving Jesus the obedience that shows real faith in the fact that Jesus' death on the stake served as a ransom sacrifice for releasing them from the curse of the Law. Such was a real forgiveness of their sinful nature inherited from Adam (see Romans 5:19). Only a remnant from out of natural Israel became, along with uncircumcised Gentile believers, the real offspring of Abraham through their faith in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:26-29).
But when did the Law of Moses completely vanish away as respects natural Israel's making pretense of fulfilling the Law? Well, remember that real fulfillment of all the Law was the requirement if the nation were ever to become blessed by coming into possession of a divinely ordained existence as a people ruling over all the other nations on earth. With the nation’s murder of Jesus Christ, however, the nation thereby showed itself to be a nation that, as a nation, deserved not just loss of that potential blessing for becoming the Kingdom of God. No, it deserved far more than that: it deserved destruction (Matthew 21:37-44; 22:2-8). Natural Israel, then, was a nation that could not truthfully lay claim to a destiny that it should solely become the Messianic Kingdom of God. Such pretense per force ended in 70 C.E. With the temple’s destruction in 70 C.E., there came completion to the vanishing away forever of men (priests) on earth offering gifts according to the Law of Moses, the old covenant (Hebrews 8:4; 9:1, 10; 13:12-15).
II. "All Those Who Depend on Works of Law Are Under a Curse" (Galatians 3:10).
All those who were “out of” — all those who were identified by their advocacy for — works of the Law of Moses as basis for a fine relationship with God were Judaizers; they wrongfully taught new Gentile converts that they, too, like themselves, should trust in their doing/making/fulfilling the works of the Law for salvation. But the Law begets a knowledge of sin because it was made by God for, among other things, teaching all men God’s estimation of sinful human nature (1 Timothy 1:8-10), and that all men are born under curse of deserved death; we are all naturally powerless to escape it.
God’s undeserved kindness for all those who trust in the ransom sacrifice of Jesus’ death on a torture stake (Ephesians 2:16) was first made available to natural Israelites, both appropriately and as result of a matter of irony for Israel. How was it appropriate? It was appropriate in that God should make available undeserved kindness first to natural Israelites out of his love for his faithful friend Abraham and love for his descendants through Isaac and Jacob, this so that Israelites might fill up to completion the foreordained number comprising spiritual Israel. Natural Israel failed to do so.
But how did that undeserved kindness, being made available first to Israelites, come about as a matter of irony? It turned out to be an irony for natural Israelites because even though they hoped for the Messiah’s coming, yet the nation became responsible for putting the Messiah to death on a torture stake (Acts 2:22, 23). Yes, the hard truth was that even though they were ones who trusted in the Law for salvation—they trusting in a Law that does not require that citizens of natural Israel be only those Israelites who adhere to faith—, yet they were nevertheless the very ones who stumbled ruinously over the Messiah by putting the Messiah to death on a torture stake (see Romans 9:30-33). But all this worked out according to God’s will that Jesus the Messiah and Son of God should become the very person murdered by Israel, so that God could grant (to as many Israelites as would choose it) repentance of their generation’s nation-ending crime (see Acts 2:36-39), by their trusting in Jesus’ teachings and ransom sacrifice. Those doing so were appropriating to themselves God’s undeserved kindness so that they became a remnant in natural Israel saved for becoming part of spiritual Israel, saved for becoming part of the promised Messianic Kingdom of God. That remnant would be the first ones released from what the Law had proved against men, namely, condemnation to death because human creation is not intrinsically worthy of eternal life, death being the wages of sin. Mankind has proved itself worthy of extinction because of its inherent sinfulness. Presently the human race’s sinful existence stands as an effrontery against God’s original, holy purpose for mankind’s existence. In “the inhabited earth to come” (Hebrews 2:5) — after Jehovah has destroyed willfully wicked men from off the surface of the earth —, then is when Jehovah’s Son Jesus Christ will shepherd men to “springs of waters of life”; the human creation will become liberated from sin and death (Revelation 7:13-27; 21:1-5; Romans 8:19-21).
III. Has God Proscribed Our Taking the Meat of Certain Animals for Food?
"Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. Just as I gave you the green vegetation, I give them all to you" (Genesis 9:3).
Was there any moral proscription that God had ever imposed against our eating certain kinds of green vegetation? No, but the only kind of impediment against our eating certain kinds of green vegetation is a natural impediment, not one born as a matter of revelation from God for us to obey. And even then, such kind of natural impediment might be overcome by knowledgeable persons able to render edible what previously had been naturally inedible. Therefore, some kinds of green vegetation we do well to continue considering as inedible and dangerous until such time as men might learn how to render them edible, which has, however, occurred as respects certain kinds of naturally inedible vegetation. For examples, we should not eat raw lima beans until first they have been boiled for 15 minutes; we should not eat unprocessed bitter cassava, which can kill; we should not eat raw kidney beans until they have been boiled--not slowly cooked--for 10 minutes; we should not eat poke sallet (polk salad) until it has been boiled in water 3 times in order that the toxins be cooked out.
Now, did God announce to Noah a moral proscription that should attach to certain kinds of animals for thereby causing his obedient servants to reject them for consumption? No, but he said expressly that every moving animal might serve as food, and in saying so, he did not attach any moral proscription against eating just certain kinds of animals, which is also how he had given men all kinds of green vegetation. Yes, all green vegetation was given apart from any moral proscription that must categorically apply just to certain kinds of green vegetation.
The only proscription that God told Noah must attach to an animal taken for food is such that must attach to any kind of animal taken for food, namely, no animal may be taken for food and its meat then eaten together with its blood. Other than that proscription, Noah and all mankind descended from him were free to eat all kinds of animal flesh, until the time came when Jehovah God did see fit to make certain dietary restrictions for Jacob's descendants whom he had redeemed from Egyptian slavery; those dietary restrictions helped to sanctify Israel; they set the nation apart from Gentiles (cf. Psalm 147:19, 20). The Law worked to preserve Israel's national identity until the Messiah appeared in Israel and became shown by Law to be a sinless Israelite. In being so revealed by Law, he showed that he qualified as the mediator of a new covenant; his shed blood inaugurated a new covenant for replacing the Law of Moses. The law of the Christ does not have proscription against our taking for food the meat from certain kinds of animals. We reject the commandment of those men who "command [us] to abstain from foods that God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving by those who have faith and accurately know the truth. For every creation of God is fine, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified through God's word and prayer over it" (1 Timothy 4:3-5).
IV. “God Sent His Son Who Was Born of a Woman and Who Was Under Law” (Galatians 4:4)
Jesus could not do anything in disobedience to the Law of Moses. He could not speak against the Law’s requirement for circumcision. Although Jesus ever remained the same in his godly devotion, that did not mean that after the Law had ended, he had still to require circumcision for Gentile converts who were turning to God after Peter preached to Cornelius. Before Cornelius’ baptism, the only way a Gentile male might become a Christian is if he, before his conversion to Christianity, had been a circumcised proselyte, as was the case for the Ethiopian eunuch. Also, Jesus could not teach against the Law’s tithing requirements; however, that does not mean that in the Christian economy Jesus requires his disciples to give tithes. We have no record of such a requirement. Also, the Law required that a man healed of his leprosy should obey the arrangements whereby he would become ceremonially purified (Leviticus 14:1-32). Accordingly, Jesus instructed that the ten lepers whom he cleansed should obey the Law for their purification. It involved the leper’s offering of certain clean animals the healed leper would bring to a priest for him to sacrifice the animal. Were Christians living in first-century Judea ever expected by the glorified Jesus that they should go up to the temple should they have been lepers who had become healed? The spirit that came to prevail in the Christian system of things could not have required it. Moreover, Jesus kept the festivals, the sabbaths, etc. That does not mean that Jesus ever remained of a mind such that he required that his disciples keep observing such days. That is why a Christian could esteem “one day as all others” (Romans 14:4-6).
But in the Christian system, the Law of Moses has an educative function for alerting us to what must always stand as testimonial to God’s love, mercy, and holiness.
Jewish Christians were already acquainted with the writings of Moses (Acts 15:21); therefore, their Scripturally trained conscience should already have given them basis for them to appreciate that certain of the laws in the Law of Moses had necessarily to be repeated for all Christians. Why? Because such laws as must needs be repeated in the law of the Christ would be laws based on the eternal principles of God’s holiness and love. But Gentiles newly converted and who had no history as “God-fearers”—no history of acquaintance with the Law of Moses and therefore having no conscience made sensitive as to how God viewed fornication, idolatry, or eating blood—should not conclude that they were not under law towards God through Jesus Christ. There were certain laws being necessarily imposed on them: law against idolatry, law against sexual immorality, law against eating blood either present in meat not properly bled, or as blood itself sought after as an item of food.
All true Christians have the responsibility to initiate conversation for purpose of bearing witness to the good news of the Kingdom, and to do so in the manner commanded by Christ. Also, true Christians have the responsibility to make a response to everyone who demands of them a reason for the hope within them. I know of no international brotherhood besides Jehovah’s Witnesses who fulfill Christ’s commands for giving a preached, verbally declared witness to the Kingdom that men should hear (Matthew 24:14; Romans 10:14, 15). Indeed, they are the ones who have responded to the urgent invitation “let anyone hearing say “Come!” (Revelation 22:17).
