Slade wrote: > Saying the Messianic Movement is of God makes > no sense within the context of this message.
This comment tells me that you have misunderstood my post, because without this context, what I wrote could be easily twisted. This thread began weeks ago. Following is what I wrote on Dec. 23, 2004: ---------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 10:04 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] The Messianic Movement Slade wrote: > You see Hebrew Mindset being placed on a pedestal. > I see more people calling it cultic and dangerous. People often ask me what I think of the Messianic movement. I always start my reply with the statement that I believe the Messianic movement is of God. However, these days I find myself needing to follow it up with a warning of dangerous elements within the movement. There indeed are cultic and dangerous elements there. Sometimes I point out how the charismatic movement was once mostly pure, but as it progressed, many false shepherds entered it and made quite a quagmire out of it. I suppose the same thing can be said of Christianity in general, so we really should not be surprised. I have always appreciated studying the Hebrew mindset because it does at times bring fresh light upon various passages of Scripture. Nevertheless, on TruthTalk there has been numerous comments to the effect that anyone who expresses a Greek kind of thinking must be in error. It is the rationality of guilt by similarity, like saying, "Hitler was a Lutheran Christian so all Christians are like Hitler." While it might be true that an overemphasis upon Greek thought could lead some of us into error, exactly the same thing could be said about an overemphasis upon Hebrew thinking. This becomes especially obvious when we realize that the Hebrew mind, for the most part, rejected Yeshua HaMashiach. <snip> Therefore, I don't think Greek thinking is taboo, neither is Hebrew thinking. God has reached out to all of mankind, first to the Hebrews, then to the Greeks. Each culture has its perspective that makes different aspects of God comprehensible. -------------------------------------- Kay then asked me to clarify my sentence that mentioned dangerous elements within this move of God known as the Messianic Movement. David Miller wrote: >> The dangerous aspects are those within the movement >> who emphasize shadows over reality. Slade wrote: > The problem with this statement is the subjectivity of > your definition of "shadows." You are clearly one who > sees Newer Testament fulfillment of Older Testament > "shadows" as nullifying these OT "shadows" in favor > of NT "realities." I do not believe that observing shadows nullifies reality. So your perception of me is false. Slade wrote: > Again, you make it clear that those of a different > theological slant than you are considered dangerous. No, I do not believe this at all. What I consider dangerous are those extremists who emphasize the shadows OVER reality. Imagine a statue which casts a shadow, and a group of people want to study and understand this statue. Most start looking at the statue itself and handling it and describing it. Someone in the group notices the shadow of the statue and wonders why everyone is ignoring it, so he goes over there and starts describing the shadow. Nothing wrong with that, but suppose he begins to argue with the ones looking at the statue itself that there is no way they will ever understand the statue unless they come down there to where he is and study the shadow with him. In fact, he insists that the actual statue is a distraction, and that all attention needs to shift immediately and permanently to the shadow. At this point, I think that such a person would represent a danger to the groups goal of understanding the statue. This would be analagous to what I was trying to say about those individuals within the Messianic movement who emphasize the shadow over reality. Slade wrote: > I hear "obedience" touted on this board a lot > [by you and Judy Taylor], yet when one claims > to be obedient, they are dangerous. No, obedience is not dangerous, but there is danger in certain types of legalism. You have taught this yourself. Slade wrote: > Are you are being double-minded or setting us > up to fail? Again, this argument is rooted in ignorance. > When Messiah returns, we will be celebrating the > Sabbath, the New Moons, Feast of Tabernacles, > etc., yet you oppose it. I have never opposed celebrating these events. Like I said, you misunderstand me. Slade wrote: > You are suggesting a schizoid faith I want no part of. > I'd rather me pagan. Perhaps Dave Hanson and I have > more in common than you and I. Wow! I did not realize that, but if you say so. David Miller wrote: >> of circumcision of the flesh in addition to >> circumcision of the heart, etc. Slade wrote: > In addition to? Is there a specific order to these > circumcisions are you suggesting is wrong? Context, Slade. I had in mind the Judaizers of Galatians and Acts 15. Acts 15:1 (1) And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. Acts 15:5 (5) But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Galatians 5:2-4 (2) Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. (3) For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. (4) Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. Slade wrote: > Where do you understand Jewish people never > to circumcise their male children? Nowehere. Context, Slade. I was talking about Messianics ministering to Gentiles. Jewish people should circumcise their children. Gentiles also may circumcise their children, but they should not do it in order to be justified, made more righteous, or to be saved. I thought we agreed upon this. Slade wrote: > Do you not know that Moses required > circumcision of the heart as well? Yes. Slade wrote: > You insist upon using Greek and English names! No, I don't insist upon this. I try to speak in whatever language is understood by the hearers. Slade wrote: > No one here has renounced the Trinity to > my knowledge. It has been awhile perhaps. I had in mind Messianics who are not participating in this forum. They also consider me to be a false prophet, but more than that, not their brother in Christ. Slade wrote: > Perhaps your greatest difficulty is with the > Oneness Pentecostal movement and not > Messianism after all! There will be some in this movement who I would have concerns about, but not all. I believe that both Arianism and Sabellianism has its place in Christianity for helping us balance our understanding of the Godhead. Slade wrote: > Perhaps you are speaking of my refusal to be > dogmatic about the Trinity or about Oneness! No, I never even had you in mind. Why are you taking this so personally? Slade wrote: > A definition of "Judaizing" would be nice... since you're > generalizing here. In my definition, I agree, but the tonal > quality of your post rings like a 120db 1K sine wave in > my ear.... which means you and I are doubtfully using the > same definition. Right. From my perspective, you do seem to have misunderstood my post. We probably have different definitions of some of the words being used. David Miller wrote: >> The letter kills but the spirit gives life. Slade wrote: > Yeah... so what?! We ALL agree... > even Rabbinic Judaism! I thought we agreed too, so why all the disagreement expressed over what I said? Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
