Fifty Years Too Late
Listen to counsel and accept discipline, that you may be wise the rest of your days. Proverbs 19:20 NASB
Be wise – I have recently been reading the early speeches of Abraham Heschel. Fifty years ago his prophetic insight into our culture sounded the warning. Fifty years later it seems as though we didn’t listen at all. Think on these.
“Religion is an answer to ultimate questions. The moment we become oblivious to ultimate questions, religion becomes irrelevant, and its crisis sets in. The primary task of religious thinking is to rediscover the questions to which religion is an answer, to develop a degree of sensitivity to the ultimate questions which its ideas and acts are trying to answer.”
“Unless we recover the question, there is no hope of understanding the Bible.”
“We have concentrated our attention upon the idea of human rights and overlooked the importance of human obligations.”
“Needs are looked upon today as if they were holy, as if they contained the totality of existence. Needs are our gods, and we toil and spare no effort to gratify them.”
“In fact, more people die in the epidemic of needs than in the epidemics of disease.”
“To define religion primarily as a quest for personal satisfaction, as the satisfaction of a human need, is to make of it a refined sort of magic.”
“Prophecy is the voice that God has lent to the silent agony, a voice to the plundered poor, to the profaned riches of the world. . . God is raging in the prophets’ words.”
“Freedom is the liberation from the tyranny of the self-centered ego. It comes about in moments of transcending the self as an act of spiritual ecstasy, of stepping out of the confining framework of routine reflexive concern. Freedom presupposes the capacity for sacrifice.”
“To choose evil is to fail to be free.”[1]
Perhaps there is still time. Perhaps fifty years later we may still decide that we must know the questions and choose sacrifice in the answers. But the weight of a society that views its religion as a means of self-fulfillment will crush everyone if we do not heed the prophet. Then God will be silent while we reap the harvest.
Topical Index: Heschel, freedom, religion, prophet, Proverbs 19:20
[1] All citations from “Religion in a Free Society,” Abraham Heschel in The Insecurity of Freedom, copyright 1966.
2,000 Years Too Late
“The whole Scriptures are a testimony to Christ: the whole history of the chosen people, with its types and its law, and its prophecies, is a showing forth (the revelation) of Him.” JSB
-And who are these men who set themselves to judge the Bible, instead of being judged by it? When will they learn that the Lamb is the Lion, and that this most human of all books is also authentically divine? JSB
“Whatever He says to you, do it.” Mary (His mother) John 2.5
“Come unto Me..” – The Messiah
~ John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this Man were true. And many believed on Him there ~
Skip,
Did Heschel ever state his reasons for rejecting Yeshua as the Messiah? I am curious how someone sincerely looking for truth can reject the personification of truth. Does it help a person to know all truth except The Truth? Does it help a person to be fully obedient to the written word yet not be obedient to the Living Word? I do appreciate your passion for the jewish people and believe it is one of the dividing lines between the true church and the apostate church. I believe we are in covenant with jews through Christ; the friend of my friend is my friend. I believe that Israel is the bride of God the Father and that He is faithful to His promises to Israel. They are God’s chosen people based on Abrahams love for and faith in God. God found in Abraham a mutual heart and so covenanted with him to bring about the promised seed (not Isaac, but Christ). Abraham, and thus Israel, was chosen to be the human side of the God/Man; the hope of the world. How was Abraham “saved”? Jesus said “he looked forward to My day and he saw it and rejoiced.” He looked forward in faith that God would provide a sacrifice. Abraham was willing to provide his own seed for that sacrifice. But Jesus is that provision. There is salvation in no other name. Do you believe there is some other means of salvation for a sincere and observant jew such as Heschel?
Skip’s new book CROSS WORD PUZZLES might provide something to consider in regard to your question:
“How was Abraham “saved” . . . “Do you believe there is some other means of salvation for a sincere and observant jew such as Heschel?
You might have to unshackle a bit, however. 🙂
As far as I know, men like Abraham Heschel and David Flusser came as close as possible to acknowledging Yeshua as Messiah, but they didn’t. While I don’t know their personal reasons, I can draw some conclusions from their writings. It seems to me that the biggest stumbling block was not what Yeshua taught or said. Both men considered him well within the Jewish rabbinic tradition. It was what the CHURCH taught about what Paul said about Yeshua. Let me explain.
Yeshua was a Torah observant Jew. But the Church teaches that this was merely a means to an end, the end being the abdication of Torah. The Church teaches that Paul, the principal disciple of Yeshua from the Church’s perspective, taught that as a result of Yeshua’s life and death, Torah no longer matters. NO JEW CAN ACCEPT THIS CLAIM. As Heschel said, “A Jew without Torah is obsolete.” Therefore, if what the Church teaches about Torah is correct, and if Paul actually taught that this was the message of Yeshua, then Yeshua must be a false prophet and must be rejected. Since the Church began teaching this anti-Semitic point of view in about 165CE, there has been no place for real reconciliation since. Today many Christian organizations and believers wish to embrace Jewish brothers and sisters. They wish to overcome the horrible anti=Semitism of the past. But this theological divide remains. It will forever separate Jew and Christian no matter how much dialogue occurs because it establishes a FUNDAMENTAL and INTRINSIC difference between the two faiths. As far as I can see, both Heschel and Flusser reacted to what the Church taught rather than what Paul and Yeshua actually taught. In this regard, they were right. They should never and could never accept a Messiah who called for the end of Torah. What a shame that neither Yeshua or Paul actually taught this. What a disaster that the Church did!
But this is the point I have tried to make in my “Foundation of the Christian Church.” The Church is NOT an outgrowth of Jewish roots. It is a religion that is deliberately opposed to the fundamentals of Jewish faith and the Jewish way of life. It is a religion invented by men as a replacement of Jewish faith. To be a follower of Yeshua is to embrace the Jewish way of life (by the way, I do not consider that as modern Judaism). Anyone who deliberately, with forethought, rejects Yeshua’s way of life after understanding His Jewish worldview, is (in my opinion) opting for a system of belief that is not biblically grounded and certainly not in line with the Messiah. As far as I can tell, most Christian believers are quite sincere in their faith and most truly have a relationship with God, but most are entirely ignorant of the real perspective of the Bible – and, by the way, are NEVER taught otherwise.
So you question might just as easily be turned around. Instead of asking why Heschel never accepted Yeshua as the Messiah we might ask why Christians don’t accept Him as Jewish.
“we might ask why Christians don’t accept Him as Jewish.”
I LOVE this question. I will be using it in the future.
What you said about Herschel and Flusser makes a lot of sense. I also can see and agree that The Church is NOT an outgrowth of Jewish roots. It doesn’t take a PhD to see that (no offense Skip) 🙂
The more I learn at the feet of Jesus, the more I can see the lies and twistings in the modern Church. Funny, the things that used to give me comfort (in The Church) now give me shudders!
I believe God is gathering His remnant and for those with ears to hear, we are being taught! There are not many of us altogether but more than I realize and you can bet your sweet bippy that I am glad of that!!
“The Church teaches that Paul, the principal disciple of Yeshua from the Church’s perspective, taught that as a result of Yeshua’s life and death, Torah no longer matters. NO JEW CAN ACCEPT THIS CLAIM”
Skip and TW community:
Please help me out with this. A lot of Christian friends I have are in agreement that obedience to YHWH’s commands are the expression of love and are not burdensome.They don’t believe that Paul did away with the Torah per se. However, they generally say the commands are “progressive” and the apostolic writers like Paul “added clarity and essentially updates” to the “law” under the “inspiration of the Holy Spirit” (e.g. all foods are “clean” now is often stated, we don’t stone each other anymore). I am well aware of the exegetical shortcomings and “proof texts” they defend this position with like Acts 10, 15 and Romans 14. However, even after I bring up the key points about the audience, Paul being a Torah observant Jew, and more contextual key points, they usually revert back to Paul adding “progression” to the law.
How do I handle the “progressive” nature of YHWH’s Torah? I think about Deuteronomy 4:2 often but I’m not certain of the entire context. Understanding that I’m grafted in and desiring to walk as Yeshua walked has brought such a BLESSING to my life. But, as expected, some of my Christian friends are not willing to investigate what commands Yeshua referred to when He said: “If you love me, You’ll obey my commands”.
Thanks for the help!
Come to Virginia Beach in February for the conference where I will be lecturing on the 613 commandments for today. 🙂
If you can’t make it, then let’s work on the idea that neither Paul nor Yeshua altered ANY of the commandments in a “progressive” way, which appears to me to be an excuse for not doing precisely what God commands. Why not take your friends through the 613 and discuss each one, how it applies (or doesn’t) and what it means today.
I am going to make every effort to attend the Virginia Beach event. My only concern is if I can negotiate 8.5 hours of meaty sessions given by one Skip Moen! My capacities might be overloaded partaking of all that much at once.
But I’ll give it a shot if I can work out the scheduling and travel.
Here’s my question.
Should we listen to men and their timely thoughts,
or to God and His eternal Word?
“The counsel of the Lord stands forever,
The plans of His heart to all generations.
Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,
The people He has chosen as His own inheritance.” Ps 33: 11-12
Amen.
“Should we listen to men and their timely thoughts,
or to God and His eternal Word?”
Yes
Why?
No one is an island, as the saying goes. We are community, a body that lives in motion together, at crossroads together daily. We live, breathe and act together in rumination of the head, Yeshua. Everything I listen and react to affects you somehow, someway, sometime because a body responds that way. It is connected.
Truths and mysteries of YHWH aren’t in plain sight. Mostly they are hidden, drawing us to search and discover them from the vastness of YHWH creation.
Hand holding isn’t a childhood trait. We all must extend our hands toward each other in order that we all help and encourage one another toward life found in Torah.
Teaching is a foundational aspect of being human. Osmosis does not come in to play. Leading and following becomes us. It enhances us, molds us, and creates us.
The first readers of Paul’s letters weren’t reading the eternal words of God. They were reading timely thoughts of a man. God applauded this man’s interpretation and understanding of His eternal words and men recognized that as such. Then someone put man’s approval on them as God’s eternal words.
It seems today people, even believers don’t really want to listen to the direct words of God, but rather yield to man’s rendition of God’s direct words. Take what happened at Sinai, for instance. God’s direct words were given. They were even somehow engraved in stone by God’s own ‘finger.’ Yet, today, people easily dismiss it, preferring man’s interpretation of that finger writing.
Unless someone follows Torah in it’s entirety, that person is listening to the timely thoughts of man over God’s eternal words anyway. Even if that timely man’s thoughts are his own.
There’s more, of course. But, my response to your question is:
Yes.
Listening (shema) correctly to the one will sift the wheat from the chaff of the other.
Amen — you took the words right out of my mouth. 🙂
I especially agree with you about Paul’s letters – his letters are wonderful but the Church gives an undue precedence to the apostolic letters — as if Paul, Peter, James et.al. set Torah aside.
As Heschel said, we need to know the question.
I liked the Heschel quote that said:
“We have concentrated our attention upon the idea of human rights and overlooked the importance of human obligations.”
Over the years this has come to the front. I, personally, have been captured by this ‘human rights’ mentality for a long while. I make myself sick thinking about my ownership of this concept.
Being so grossly a part of that mindset for so long has shown to be a tough challenge to remove myself from it and crossover to the human obligations view. The yetzer haRa is very adroit at putting on a haTov cloak and fooling me toward less than admirably actions. The yetzer haRa never flinches or takes up remorse at diverting me astray.
I hope He keeps me earth-side long enough to master the beast that crouches at my door daily.
Really bad question! We should do both. It is just important that we always measure people’s thoughts and ideas against God’s Word before we accept or reject them.
Like it or not, but God does use people to speak through!
“Should we listen to men and their timely thoughts,
or to God and His eternal Word?”
Yes.
Strange that Heshel’s book was published in 1966. The same year “Time” magazine printed an article by William Hamiton titled “Is God Dead”. If God has placed us in a spiritual exile for the past 50 years, then I have hope that we are at the end of our exile and can truly know the meaning of the scripture so often quoted in times of distress…(quoted but not put into action) 2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
Jaco,
Perhaps my question could have been better formulated.
So, I ask: If you had the choice of only ONE book, would it
be the Bible, or one written by a noted author?
For the record, I’ve read and been blessed by hundreds and
hundreds of books. Fantastic reads. Fantastic writers. Many of
them touched me deeply and made great impacts on my life
and faith.
But nothing comes remotely close to the Bible.
I’m sorry if my original question was not clear.
Rich,
Yeah, your original question was rather open ended. Your rephrased question kind of falls in to the category of “What things would you choose to go live with on a deserted island?”
If one took only the Tanakh, I’m sure much wisdom would be received from it’s sole source. However, with limited knowledge of the social, cultural, linguistic and other theaters of information one’s wisdom would surely be tainted by whatever translation one was limited to, don’t you think? If there were no means by which to search, discover and understand the Jewish world in which the Scriptures originated, ones understanding would still be limited to that framework, would it not?
Yes, YHWH could give inspirational understanding if He so chose to do so. On the other hand, He hasn’t given much special revelation over the centuries or overtly corrected much of the error that has so dominated peoples around the globe in the various translations of the Torah, has He?
I would think even absent any Scriptures on that deserted island YHWH would deal fairly with the behavior of a follower. I would tend to think his judgement would be based on what he knew, how he acted on it, and his inclination toward seeking YHWH, as it was with Abraham reasoning from all his faculties and acting on his conclusions as it related to the one God that He surmised and rejected all else.
I would think in the deserted island scenario, a believer without a hard copy of the Torah would be the more interesting study and observation to see what kind of world he would construct around his/her faith in the YHWH that is known upon arriving on the island.
Just some thoughts. Not really getting in the ring to joust, rather just postulating regarding a hypothetical. My experience most of the time, not all, is that I am pushed and tested in areas that I haven’t really prepared for. I mean, why be tested on things I’ve mastered and prepped for. To grow I must be stretched, molded and trained in new areas.
I think there is always a crossroad in the path of the one seeking righteousness. Once a path is chosen, the next crossroad depends on which one you just chose.
So, getting back to the question, it’s a hypothetical. We rarely get to finally chose the arena in which we are asked to play in within our discipleship training of life. Do we?
The minute we get it all figured out and organized, WHAM! We get thrown a wrench in our turning cogs. We get to figure out Torah again as it now figures in and apply it thusly.
Next crossroad coming up . . .
I could be wrong though. Of course. 🙂
Hi Rich,
The obvious answer that any believer would give is, “The Bible”, but I just don’t think it is that simple.
For example: In the first century, the “Bible” (as we would call it today) believers had was the Tanak. The “New Testament” was not in existence or considered part of “The Bible”. Now, if all believers in the first century were to have subscribed to your question and decided that we ONLY read “The Bible”, we would not have a New Testament today. All the gospels, Paul, Peter, James and John’s letters would have been lost to us. They would not have been considered to the part of “The Bible”.
The same argument can be made about the Tanak. When David was King, The Torah was considered to be “The Bible”. Did he ever imagined that his Psalms would be considered “Scripture” and “on par” with the Torah when he first wrote them? Did Solomon and the people of his generation consider Solomon’s writings as “Scripture”? Did the prophets ever consider that what they were saying would become “Scripture” and be considered as authoritative as the Torah?
The point is, although all believers throughout human history would have answered your question – “I choose The Bible” – that would have meant different things for different people at different times. Not just that, but history shows that even though we say “Bible Only”, that is never the case. That is why we not only have the Torah, but also the the Writings, Prophets and Apostolic Scriptures, it is precisely because we as humans read more than just “The Bible” and we recognize that God speaks/spoke through others as well.
The problem for modern day believers who might answer your question, “The Bible only”, is that what we have as “The Bible” today is pretty much a product created in the 1600’s via a process that started in the 300’s (if my memory serves me correctly). And that process was influenced by theological, social and political ideas and ideologies. These ideas and ideologies influenced why certain books were included and certain books weren’t. These ideas and ideologies influenced how the books chosen were being read, understood and interpreted.
What do we do about other texts? I for one think that the Didache and 1 Clement are books that can be very informative for believers today, and that they should even be considered to be part of “The Bible”. And so we can carry on about the merits of other books as well. What were the reasons they were excluded? Are those reasons legitimate? For example, if those reasons were that they were “too Jewish”, shouldn’t we then alter our Canon to include them now that we have a different understanding?
It is just not that simple for me. Please understand, I am not questioning the Bible or its authority. I believe that the Bible is God’s Word and that it is authoritative for those who choose it to be an authority in their lives for faith and practice. Studying and reading the Bible takes up a great deal of my day, every day. But, I just don’t think it is that easy.
One last point, even if I answer “Bible Only”, I am still influenced by other people. The church tradition I grew up in, the theologies and doctrines I prescribe to, etc, ALL influence how I read the Bible and how I understand it. Even in that sense, I never ONLY read the Bible, my paradigm and theological history influence how I read the Bible.
Anyway, just my two cents. Have a blessed day.
Hi Jaco,
Your “two cents” make good sense.
Obviously, God, and all there is to be know about Him
is much more than the Bible can contain.
And despite the “curious” ways it was put together,
the Bible today is accepted by most believers as God’s
inspired Word to man.
Is there more?
More than we’ll ever know, I suspect.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Looking forward to Virginia Beach — we hope to be there that week to see our oldest son and his family. Sounds like a few of us may try to get there. It would be great to connect.
“My own existence is not the result of my will to exist. At one moment my life came about, it is a mysterious loyalty within my substance that keeps it keeps me in being.
Being is obedience, a response. “Thou art” precedes “I am.” I am because I am called upon to be.”
A. J. Heschel. WHO IS MAN? pg.98
Obedience derives from our being. It’s our response to YHWH’s “Let there BE . . .”
Being human and living rather than residing in death finds summation in obeying.
Obeying what?
You know what!
Approximately 48 years ago special Heschel said this:
“The failure of our culture is in demanding too little of the individual, in not realizing the correlation of rights and obligations, in not realizing that there are inalienable obligations as well as inalienable rights. Our civilization offers comfort in abundance and asks very little in return. Ours is essentially a Yes education; there is little training in the art saying “no” to oneself.”
I’d say little has changed in this regard in the last 50 years.
I finished WHO IS MAN?
On to THE PROPHETS.
Scratch “special.” Siri got excited.