ABestPost

Inevitably, it happens. Almost every time I’ve gone out street preaching I get the question asked, “Don’t you think you’re offending more people than you are helping hear your message?” I’ve developed a nice answer to that which I’ll explain in another post. But right now I want to focus on one thing.

Often, somewhere in my response I’ll say, “What do you think, ‘Go, preach the gospel’ is supposed to look like? It certainly isn’t sitting in a church pew Sunday after Sunday hoping new people show up.” Somewhere in the past 2000 years we’ve twisted the commission of Jesus to the point where it’s completely opposite to what He originally said.

We’ve changed the commission from “Go and tell”, to “Come and listen”. If you drive around town you see billboards and other ads inviting people to come into church and listen to a message instead of people on the street corners proclaiming the gospel. It’s like the people of the church have said, “Instead of us going to them, why don’t we tell them to come to us.” So they put up these billboards and signs and then drive to church on Sunday anxiously waiting and wondering if it worked!

Look, I know there may be better ways to preach the gospel to the world, but I know for sure that the “Come and listen” mindset isn’t the right attitude.

I would suggest reading the gospels and finding out how Jesus went about preaching the gospel and how He intended His followers to do the same. You may be quite encouraged.

What do you think?

For more articles you can visit Paul’s website http://www.howtobecomeamissionary.com.
Paul Ferree is an American Missionary in the process of fulfilling the call of Luke 14:25-35 where Jesus tells us to forsake everything to follow after Him. Paul is explaining how God is taking Him through this process and is encouraging fellow believers to answer the same call.

Easter is the main Christian event of the year, isn’t it - or is it? Is it, in reality, like Christmas, just another pagan celebration with the cracks of lies and deceit, papered over by men of the Christian Religion i.e. Papists, Protestants and all the other deluded denominations (demon-inations) alike?

What have rabbits, eggs (chocolate or otherwise) and hot cross buns got to do with the Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection? What do these silly symbols do, other than insult, trivialise and actually continue the mockery that The Lord Jesus Christ endured at the hands of those who abused Him?

Is the Easter festival Biblical, let’s check it out and see? Fortunately, the dreadful word Easter is found only once in Holy Scriptures:

Acts 12:3-4 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers (16 soldiers) to keep him; intending after Easter (Passover) to bring him forth to the people. (Brackets mine) Here we have all the evidence we need to know that Easter is a religious addition to the Holy Bible. A quick look up in Strong’s Concordance will tell us plainly that the word here was originally ‘Passover’. We also have evidence to support that in

Acts 12:3 Then were the days of unleavened bread - the Jewish Holy Day Feast which followed the Passover. We need to remember that Jesus Christ became the Passover Lamb and He was sacrificed at Passover - the last Passover. Please note, all other uses of the word ‘Passover’ in the KJV are written as ‘Passover’, twenty eight times in all and Easter is not mentioned again - why?

Why, because Easter is a pagan festival based purely and simply on fertility rites and reproduction - the fertility of the spring season through the warming sun and the beginning of a new agricultural year. A time when, and where, man places all his hopes in a plentiful growing season and an increase in his live stock and crops. This is why rabbits and eggs feature in such a big way. The May Pole, around which young children dance, represents an erect penis - a phallic symbol. The sum total meaning of all this symbolism is the worship of the creation rather than worship of the Creator. None of it has anything to do with Jesus Christ - not one jot of it!!

Easter has its origins in the pagan religions of Mesopotamia. The Babylonians, Assyrians, Phoenicians and Egyptians all worshiped pagan fertility deities: Ishtar, Astarte and Eostre. Easter eggs and their origin can be traced back to Ancient Babylon. From there we get the myth that the goddess Astarte came down from ‘heaven’ and deposited a large egg in the river Euphrates from which she magically appeared. So why has this pagan nonsense been allowed into the Christian Religion? Easy, wherever the original purveyors of the Christian Religion went, teaching their non-gospel, they just absorbed other religious festivals and customs into their own. By doing this they gained thousands of ‘converts’ and remained popular by condoning the continuation of these meaningless pagan activities. We must always remember the Devil is not divided, he may display himself in a myriad of ways so as to deceive but he only has one plan and one aim - the destruction of Jesus Christ’s Church - The Elect and ultimately all of mankind.

Here is another thing, why does Easter always move around and land on different dates each year when Passover lands on the same date each and every year? Easy, one is a counterfeit and the other is the original. The thing is, are we, as Christians, supposed to keep either of these festivals which are really just ritualistic in nature and if regulated, which they are, become a law unto themselves? This is one of the very things The Lord Jesus Christ came to do away with - laws and rituals of religion which undermine the Spirit of Freedom under Grace and Christ’s sacrifice. Paul says in 1 Cor 11:25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament (New Covenant) in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. Under Grace we are now free to break the bread and drink the wine whenever we wish, any day of the week, as long as we eat and drink it worthily - with respect. If it is your desire to celebrate one special day a year on the real anniversaries of His death and resurrection then you had better make sure it’s not Easter ‘cos that isn’t the right day nor is it the right date and by keeping Easter you are, by default, worshipping a pagan deity.

Now this is a Truth, Easter has caused us to lose sight of the original event - Passover, which was a shadow of Jesus Christ’s redeeming sacrifice. The blood of the sacrificial lambs was smeared or daubed on the posts and lintels of the Israelite’s houses. This happened whilst they were slaves in Egypt and the angel of death passed over them. They were redeemed or saved by the lamb’s blood whilst the Egyptians first born were all slaughtered. Easter has no connection with this event at all - none whatsoever!! Am I saying go and join in with the Jews and keep Passover? No, a thousand times no!! The grace of The Lord Jesus Christ has saved and redeemed you from all that. All we need to do is remember He lives with us through His Holy Spirit all day and every day if we are Born Again. We remember too what He did for us in His death and resurrection every day of our lives as well, not just once a year.

Here is yet another Truth, when and wherever the Romans conquered other peoples and civilisations in the expansion of their Empire, they always incorporated these people’s religions, religious deities and customs into their own. The only exception to this policy was if and when they came across True Believers and followers of Jesus Christ. In this case their policy turned quickly to ruthless persecution often to death for these brave followers of The Lord Jesus Christ. Furthermore, when the ‘Holy’ Roman Empire replaced the former militaristic Roman Empire the policy of absorption of pagan religions continued - nothing changed and nor did The Roman Empire apart from it’s new name. Watch out for my study on Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian image in Daniel 2, coming soon - you cannot afford to miss it. Also coming soon: Did The Lord Jesus Christ die on Good Friday? Watch this space to find out.

Charles Crosby

Revised and edited 24th August 2007

As always feel free to e-mail me at yes2faith@yahoo.co.uk with any questions.

The reason you may not have anything you want is that your very declaration of wantingness produces that result—the experience of wanting. Whereas, if you choose something, the result is that you will experience your choosing of it and you will, therefore, have it. I know that is a very subtle difference in the mind of some people, but as subtle as it is, it is extremely important.

Through the creation of Humanity’s Team—a worldwide movement of over 10,000 people in villages, towns and cities across the globe—we are working to create a space of possibility for the new spirituality to emerge. This grassroots movement offers educational programs, audio and video materials and workshops. They are also busy producing classes and groups for “get out the vote” campaigns, campaigns to support women’s rights, minority rights, and civil rights of every kind.

Humanity’s Team describes itself as a “Civil Rights Movement for the Soul.” This volunteer effort is the last great civil rights movement taking us now to the final frontier, the frontier of the soul of humanity. This is the place where the soul at last meets both the mental and the physical expression of what it means to be human in a synergistic way for the first time. This undertaking is underway all over the world and is one way that we hope to alter our collective reality. The effort is to awaken the human family to the possibility that there is something we do not fully understand about God, about life, and about each other, the understanding of which would change everything. We could choose to decide and define who we really are as a human species—in relationship to each other, in relationship to the experience called life, and in relationship to that aspect of life experience that we call God, Allah, Brahmin, Yahweh, Jehovah, or whatever name we’ve chosen to identify and to define the transcendent experience of the essence of life.

Collectively, we have never achieved the kind of unified expression of what it means to be human that certain individuals such as the Christed One, the Buddha, Mohammed, and others have achieved. We now seek to create a collective expression of that experience; that is the endeavor of Humanity’s Team.

Our intrinsic nature is unification. Simply put, we are all one. When I say, “We are all one,” I don’t mean that we are merely one with each other, as in “I am my brother’s keeper,” nor that we are all one as in a member of the family human. I mean that we are all one in a much larger universal sense: We are one with everything. Nothing is separate from anything at all. When I say we are all one, I say that I am one with you and you are one with me. We are one with the grass, the trees, the rocks, the fish and the birds, and with everything that is, which includes God itself. We are all one with God.

Given that this is so, the highest vision for humanity would find us experiencing and expressing ourselves through the paradigm of oneness or unity, rather than through the error of separation. This would be a planet in which what I call “Separation Theology” would disappear forever, as would all of the pitfalls that such a theology has put into place.

In my perfect idea, I envision a world in which we all deeply understand and functionally practice the truth of our oneness. Such a shift would produce an experience of peace and joy and harmony among the human family. At last, the plaintive cry we have declared on holiday greeting cards for centuries would become reality. We would no longer plead with each other year after year, decade after decade, century after century, and beg God to bring peace on Earth and good will to humans everywhere. We would be the source of that peace on Earth, rather than supplicants asking for peace on Earth.

Neale Donald Walsch is an author and spiritualist known for his best selling books, Conversations With God.

© 2007 Elite Books. Permission is granted to any site or individual to reproduce this article online provided a link to http://www.HealingTheHeartOfTheWorld.com and this copyright notice is included in such reproduction.

The ultra-orthodox are once again in a tizzy about developments in the Lubavitch/Chabad hassidic sect. They are shocked that so many of their members can have a mishichist (messianic) twist to their theology. Apparently, when their Rabbi, M.M. Schneerson, died there were some, probably a minority, who did not accept his death. They assumed that he was the Messiah and would appear in the streets of Jerusalem in a white Mercedes S500. Even though arriving in a Mercedes would not necessarily be politically correct, the fact that he was the Messiah means that history would be revised. Indeed, his coming (assuming Schneerson is of the House of David) will restore the glory of Israel and all the Jews will return there.

It is a fantastic story and utterly believable– if you believe in a personal Messiah as elaborated on by the Rambam (Maimonides) and others. What amazes me is the same people who cast doubt on the claims of the mishichistim (messianic) believe in the myth of a personal messiah. If you believe in a personal moshiach (messiah), then there is not much of a leap of faith to believe in M.M. Shneerson as the moshiach incarnate. Why not? They are both rooted in faith.

Faith is a very powerful tool and can be used for the better or detriment of mankind. It can be used and exploited by cult leaders for personal aggrandizement or for the greater glory of humanity. The Jewish people claim to have survived through the ages because they are faith based. They believed that no matter how bad it got, there would be, at the end of that very dark tunnel, a savior. It actually sounds like a story one would tell his children. But that is exactly what they were– children, emotionally and intellectually less sophisticated than they are today. After all, it was their parents and grandparents generation that went through the concentration camps and gas chambers of Europe. There was no Moshiach there to save an entire continent of Jews from murder. To maintain that kind of faith is really blind faith– the kind of faith one expects from a dog, even after its master has abused it non-stop from the day he came into his life. Ask Job, better yet, read him. They can not let go of this image of a moshiach because where will Jews be without hope?

In this world there are two kinds of people: followers and leaders. The followers are those who live on hope, the kind that need a rabbi to think for them– people who hold a job until they retire; never take an independent step; never explore the greater world of people or ideas. They are fatalists, “hachol beyedei hashem” (everything is in God’s hands) who say after every worded phrase, “baruch hashem,” (praise God), as though they would not have been able to do what they did without assistance. Then there are the leaders. They tend to be a bit irreverent because they can think for themselves. They are builders who do not depend on hope– people that we call self starters, entrepreneurs, and independent minded. They are not fatalists, but determinists, who prefer to take chances depending on their own true grit.

The European Zionists of the 19th and 20th century were of this second category. There is an old parable in Pirkei Avot “eiza hu chacham? Haroeh es hanolod,” that the wise man is the one who can anticipate or intuit the future. They saw the writing on the wall in anti-Semitic Europe and were not about to wait for mythical moshiach to arrive on the scene and do some “abra kadabra.” Then there were the followers, those with faith, who were determined to wait, because that is what their rabbis told them to do. They never had real faith, which implies that you have some belief in yourself, to be able to validate ideas and thoughts. How can you be creative, contribute to society and build a community if you have no faith in yourself? To abdicate it all to a leader is pure folly. History bears this out.

So what is the difference between those who accept M.M. Schneerson as the moshiach and those who treat these mishichistim like pariahs? In truth, there really is no difference. Both groups fall into the first category of my construct. The mishichistim and those anti– mishichistim are both followers. The mishichistim believe that M.M. Schneerson is the moshiach, and the other group of followers believe in their gedolim (sages). Either way they lose, because they have abdicated their independence and ability to think critically.

There is another side to this. The anti-mishichistim are not only followers like the mishichistim but are also dishonest with themselves. The resistance to M.M. Schneerson as the “last great hope” is the realization that if he is truly the messiah, then the Jewish community will have to make significant sacrifices (i.e. move to Israel) which they are not willing to do. Accepting the messiah is a heavy burden which a cursory look at Maimonides’ writings (Mishneh Torah, Hilkot Melakhim, Chapt. 11) will attest.

The mishichistim are ahead of the game and maybe ought to be admired. While they carry the stigma of being followers, they are struggling with and showing some creativity, albeit infantile. Perhaps these are new beginning for a new group: mishichistim. What they are going through now is their “chevlai leida” (birth pangs). At worst, if M.M. Schneerson does not pan out to be the Messiah, maybe we can recommend him for a membership to Ibburim (spirits of the righteous dead).

Shael Siegel is a post-denominational rabbi, educator, commentator and observer of the Jewish religious/social landscape. He manages a web site and writes a weekly blog which can be accessed through http://www.shaelsiegel.com

Recently, Rabbi Ovadia Yoseph (the spiritual mentor of Shas, a Sephardi political movement), was sited in an article in the Israeli daily newspaper, Maariv, in which he maintains that the mechitza (partition between men and women) was unnecessary at joyous occasion, such as weddings and bar/bat mitzvahs under certain circumstances. This halachic ruling was predicated on a question asked of him regarding family harmony: “If the mechitza caused family tension was it necessary?” Rabbi Yoseph responded, “Sometimes a family is not so pious, does not want a mechitza, and prefers that everyone sit together at one table. This is not something to fight over. If a mechitza is possible, then it should be erected, but if it is not, it can be done away with.” This approach to Jewish law is refreshing, especially considering the increase in stringent interpretation of the law developing almost daily. The stringent interpretation of law, known as “chumras” are especially burdensome and bothersome because they usually affect family harmony.

What makes the religious ruling even more interesting is that the rabbi is Sephardi, a Gadol (sage), and living in Israel. I never would have expected this ruling from an Ashkenazi Rav of that stature. For a sage of that caliber to take such a position could only be possible if it was made by a Sephardi, because their fundamental “gestalt” differs dramatically from their Ashkenazi brothers.

The differences between a Sephardi and an Ashkenazi become apparent when one experiences Sephardi culture in Israel. In America, the Ashkenazi influence is too overpowering and overbearing. Sephardi Jews attend Ashkenazi based synagogues, religious schools and yeshivot, for the most part. Even if you are part of a Sephardi community with their infrastructure of shuls and yeshivot, they are still conscious of the Ashkenazi perception of the– thus tailoring their behavior based on standards of the Ashkenazim. Many of the Sephardi rabbis in America studied in Ashkenazi yeshivot so their religious outlook was certainly influenced by the Ashkenazi dominated culture. Thus, the only place to get a clearer picture of Sephardic religious culture is in Israel.

As a rabbinical student studying “Yoreh Deyah” (section of Jewish Law) the primary text was rarely referred to by the proper noun “Beis Yoseph,” (Sephardic) but rather by the noun “Mechaber” (generic term for an author). Interestingly, when there was a distinct difference of opinion between the “Mechaber” and the minority opinion referred to by th proper noun “Ramah,” (Askenazi) it was presented as a difference of opinion between the Mechaber and Ramah, and not between the Beis Yoseph and the Ramah. By doing this, indirectly the Beis Yoseph was depersonalized, while the Rama maintained a personal identity. The issues were not presented as a difference between Sephardi and Ashkenazi culture, but between the Mechaber and Ramah. We never received a picture of an intellectually vibrant and effervescent Sephardi culture that needed to be contended with. It was nameless and faceless. Interestingly, when Sephardim study the same text, they refer to the Mechaber as Maran Habet Yosef!

Even in Israel, the cultural differences between the two ethnic groups are difficult to distinguish because of the Ashkenazi dominance of religion and culture. This seems to be changing, but the change is slow and sometimes barely perceptible. One of the most offensive images I ever had of a Sephardi rabbi in Israel was to see him behave as an Ashkenazi at the expense of his own rich heritage. It is bad enough to be a rabbi in Israel– because for the most part they are clerics, employees of the state, with little status among the general population. Diluting Sephardi culture with an Ashkenazi overlay adds insult to injury. The most glaring example, is to see a Sephardi rabbi dressed as an Eastern European rabbi, outfitted in a black suit, white shirt, no tie and a black hat. In time, their own identities will become stronger and they will shed the trappings of the Ashkenazi world.

What the Sephardim never absorbed into their cultural/religious heritage was the Ashkenazi approach to religion. At the risk of getting pummeled by both Ashkenazim and Sephardim, I do believe that Sephardim have a more wholesome and healthier attitude and approach to religion. Ashkenazim view religion as exacting and technical, more stringent, less loving, and less forgiving. Sephardim are very much the opposite. Of course, it really depends on what kind of Sephardi you are. By and large, they all have a more inclusive approach: more loving and forgiving minus much of the stringent and strict mentality of their eastern European brothers. This is not to say that Sephardim are less pious or righteous than their Ashkenazi brothers– but to their credit they have developed over the centuries a “rhythm” to their Jewishness that Ashkenazim can learn from. Their religiosity is not their second skin, but their primary skin. They have a genuine quality that defies replication. Ashkenazim, for some reason always appear as though they are trying to recover what was lost. There is this constant adulation for years gone by and an eternal attempt to rebuild a culture that was, but is no more.

How is it, that the level of tolerance is obvious among the Sephardim, but visibly absent among the Ashkenazim? It goes back to the fact that Sephardim feel more comfortable in their skin because it is their only skin, while for Ashkenazim it is their second skin. As a result they are less comfortable and less tolerant. Perhaps the difference in the way the two communities wrap tefilin (phylacteries) is symbolic. Sephardim tend to wrap their tefilin around their arm outwardly while Ashkenazim wrap them inwardly. Would this in some way underscore the difference between the two cultures? The Sephardim wrap the tefilin outwardly, representing a sense of being more inviting and accepting of those from the outside. In contrast, the Ashkenazim wrap the tefilin inwardly, suggesting an insular group and less open to those outside of their surroundings. This recent ruling of Harav Ovadia Yosef is not earth shattering, but nevertheless very revealing of his empathy for Am Yisrael and the need to reach out and bridge the chasm whenever and however possible.

Shael Siegel is a post-denominational rabbi, educator, commentator and observer of the Jewish religious/social landscape. He manages a web site and writes a weekly blog which can be accessed through http://www.shaelsiegel.com

Many Christian’s ask the question, why does God allow suffering? I know there was a time when I asked the same thing. I couldn’t understand why a God whom I wanted to dedicate my life to was allowing me to suffer through trials and tribulations, unanswered prayer, and the like.

As a matter of fact, I went through twelve or so years of struggling with this same mentality after being born again and Baptized with the Holy Spirit. I struggled because prayers were going unanswered, my finances were a mess.

When I read scriptures such as Matthew 7:7, which reads, “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.” or Malachi 3:10, which reads, “Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,” says the LORD Almighty, “and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it.”

I didn’t understand! Was God lying to me? Some even use this as proof that there is no God. If God were real, they would say; why does He say this in the Bible, yet we still suffer?

Well, I’m here to tell you that I have found the truth, and it has set me FREE! Just as Jesus said it would. I can tell you that God does NOT allow suffering and He truly does want you to have all that He promises in Jeremiah 29:11, “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”

If you apply the principles that I have found, or should I say, that God has opened my eyes to see; you will find God’s promises to be real and true. The transformation may take some time, depending upon circumstances in your life and how well you clean out of your life all of the clutter, garbage, and all the worldly habits that have accumulated over your lifetime, but it will happen.

I have written a study based on my experience and success in finding the truth about this very question, does God allow suffering? If you would like to break those chains of bondage in your life, just click on the link below to access my full study on this topic.

“Does God Allow Suffering?”

Russell is founder of Plain Bible Truth Ministries. The ministry was founded following a series of spiritual developments over a course of a ten month period in 2005. The events of that ten month period, transformed Russell in ways that only God Himself can. Russell says, “the whole direction and path of my life has been altered dramatically since that time of blessing. I now fully grasp and believe with all my heart God’s promise to us in Jeremiah 29:11, ‘For I know the plans I have for you,’ declares the LORD, ‘plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.’ I know if we all dedicate ourselves to putting God first, this promise will be fulfilled in each one of our lives.” Russell is now dedicating himself to service to God and developing Plain Bible Truth Ministries to reach out and touch whomever he can with the Good News of the Gospel truths that God has revealed to him. Plain Bible Truth Ministries can be found at Plain Bible Truth.org

Joe Lanzman has a quiz on the web site Slate (Feb 2 - 2007) to determine if you’re anti-semitic. The quiz appears to have been prompted by a study for the American Jewish Committee written by professor Alvin Rosenfeld which points to an increase in “virulent anti-Zionism in many quarters of the left”.

Some Jews believe that if you are critical of Israel and/or anti-Zionist, you are also anti-Jewish by extension. Well by that measure some orthodox Jews could be included in this category, because a percentage of them are anti-Zionist and in some cases reject the concept of a state.

The state of Israel came about after decades of extreme hardship and persecution. Jews of the diaspora were victimized when they were minorities in European countries in the earlier part of the 20th century. The holocaust shamed our common humanity.

However this is 2007, and Israel is a powerful state with advanced weapons systems. As a democracy Israel has also taken on the obligation to uphold civil rights. Since it is situated in a flash point area of the Middle East it will of course be subject to intense scrutiny, in part because wars in the Middle East impact on all of us.

How does criticism of the democracy of Israel makes a person anti-Jewish? Not every citizen of Israel is Jewish. About one fifth of the population of Israel is Arab, mainly Muslim. There is a small Christian minority. In addition a percentage of Israeli Jews are non-religious and secular in lifestyle, many of them European immigrants. There is also a significant number of orthodox who don’t share the Zionist vision.

Some American Zionists assume that due to Israel’s unique relationship with the US, the military and political challenges it faces etc, allies should turn a blind eye to problems in the name of solidarity. In other words human rights issues and other problems shouldn’t be criticized too loudly because such criticism may mark you as a bigot and anti- Jewish.

When activists speak about human rights abuses in Israel, they are doing nothing differently from what they do elsewhere. Amnesty International has reports on human rights violations from every corner of the world. So why is it that when similar human rights issues are addressed in the context of Israel, with some justification, there are those in the Jewish community cry anti-semitism?

When a country declares itself to be a democracy and signs international agreements, it also assumes responsibilities and liabilities, especially in the area of civil rights.

Ongoing conflict and war is no solution to the problems of the region. It’s a lose, lose scenario. With the weaponry that is now coming into play it will amount to reciprocal destruction in the end. Israel must defend its territory as any other nation must, but it should strive equally strongly to address internal issues that will help to boost its credibility in the region and abroad.

Criticism of Israel on the part of allies should be regarded as a positive, not as a negative. As long as Israel presents itself to the world as democratic, it better prepare to be judged as harshly as America has been judged under George Bush - if and when such criticisms are warranted.

Aidan Maconachy is a freelance writer and artist based in Ontario. You can visit his blog at http://aidanmaconachyblog.blogspot.com

“The concept of Daas Torah(following a Torah mentality) is firmly rooted in the recognition that Hashem(God) ‘looked into the torah and created the universe’ (Breishis Rabbah 1:1). The Torah provides history’s agenda, past, present and future, and encompass the world’s every secret. Those who have merited to acquire Torah thus possess the best credentials for effectively addressing the world’s problems, and those who doubt the Torah leader’s ability to ‘understand politics’ thereby redefine the meaning of Judaism.”

This comment presumably self explanatory wouldn’t have been so stunningly audacious, had it been said by a naïve yeshiva bachur or a disillusioned kollelnick. Unfortunately, this was written years ago by the late Rabbi Sherer of Agudas Israel as part of an article entitled Torah in the Proper Place, which I stumbled over while researching the theme of authority and dissent in Jewish tradition.

Daas Torah, a term of fairly recent origin, is understood to mean that through intense Torah study and the rigorous practice of the mitzvoth, one will have a greater understanding of God’s will. Daas Torah can be a compelling ethos for people in search of guidance, when they voluntarily seek it out. However, when dissenting opinions aren’t tolerated as in Rabbi Sherer’s vision and description of Judaism and the stature of the gedolim, than we have the makings of a cult, controlling people through peer pressure and charismatic leadership. Sherer says in the same article that “it is the responsibility to remind ourselves and others of the fact that our gedolim are the foremost experts not only in matters of Jewish law, but in social and political issues as well.”

As a side bar, it should be noted that in Europe, prior to the modern period, lay leaders functioned under the general guidance of rabbinic leadership in areas relating to social and political issues. However, then lay leaders weren’t educated. The rabbis weren’t understood to be infallible, but were viewed as default leaders. With the rise of modernity, the positions of authority in areas outside of religion were challenged by those with education and expertise.

The gedolim spend their lives immersed in Torah study. They do not study systematically the advanced sciences, political and social theory, philosophy or mathematics. Thus, it would appear that their scope is limited to what they know best – Torah. To place them in a position of authority beyond that narrowly defined area is dangerous and irresponsible, because they can negatively impact on those who place all their trust in them. Prior to World War II, when the Gedolim in Eastern Europe had a virtual monopoly on the hearts and minds of its adherents, they in a sense became inadvertent enablers of the anti-semites seeking to destroy Jewry. A case in point was the Belzer Rebbe, Rabbi, I. Rocheach., who forbade his Chassidim from departing Europe to America or Palestine.. There is a documented case of one of his shamashim, who defied his P’sak and left for Palestine in 1937. This shamash confided to me, how he begged his Rebbe for a Heter(permission), but was answered in the negative. And so it was with many of the gedolim (with the exclusion of the Gerrer Rebbe) at that time. A Heter couldn’t be given, wouldn’t be given to allow a member of the community to emigrate to the godless America or to Palestine run by atheistic Zionists. Daas Torah, at the time subscribed to the dictum Shev V’al Ta’aseh - remain in Europe. Interestingly, in 1944, the very same Belzer rebbe who forbade his Chassidim to leave Europe for America or Palestine was smuggled out of Europe and brought to the safety of Palestine where he reestablished the Belzer dynasty years later. So much for their political saavy.

The gedolim claim to have enormous expertise in the area of social/economic issues as well. As things have evolved in the haredi community in the United States and Israel a growing number of B’nei Torah can barely eek out a living. Instead of learning skills or acquiring professions they spend their youth in yeshivot and kollelim which can’t give them any marketable skills. In most cases they couldn’t even be effective rebaim(teachers) because they haven’t studied and mastered pedagogical skills. In the past these b’nei torah sought out shiduchim that had an economic incentive. Either the brides family was wealthy or they owned a business into which he could be integrated. However as their proliferation grows exponentially, there are fewer shiduchim available that carry an economic incentive. “There are only so many to go around”, as the song goes. The days of the corner grocery store are over where the wife ran the cash register and the ben torah sat in the back learning another blot. In effect, the gedolim(rabbinic scholars) and their nuanced Daas Torah has created a generation of b’nei torah(devotees) on the poverty level, who in turn will be raising a generation subscribing to the same values put forward through Daas Torah and thus remaining in the cycle of poverty. Being a member of this new underclass has given rise to a new phenomenon: pride in receiving welfare because this enables the ben torah to continue the study of Torah. Values once revered have been trashed, Jewish pride and culture demeaned, standards lowered, spousal abuse, drugs and the loss of shalom bayis, the foundation of the Jewish life.

An additional by-product of Daas Torah is the cultural shift of the kollelnik(married men who study in post rabbinic programs). There was a time, not long ago, when a promising and talented yeshiva student was encouraged to join a kollel. Many of these kollel students attended college at night and graduated on to law schools, medical schools or pursued other professional degrees. There was nobility in this. Those times are over. Torah U’madah doesn’t mix. As amatter of fact, it is discouraged. As a result, and due to their inability to compete in the new economic paradigm there is no place to go. As a result there is a proliferation of kollels, most of which are substandard institutions but serve a nobel purpose – a place to warehouse a growing number of “déclassé” Jews.

The hubris, in espousing the kind of Daas Torah described above, oddly enough, is responsible for the state of the haredi(ultra-orthodox) community. They were so preoccupied and obsessed with opposing the haskalah(enlightenment) and its institutions that they threw out the baby with the bath water. The popular refrain of Rabbi Sofer (a late 19th century Godol) was Chadash - Asur Min Hatorah(reject modernity). Why hadn’t the Gedolim encouraged their students to study Rambam’s (Maimonides) Guide for the Perplexed? In the introduction, writing to his pupil, Joseph Ibn Aknim, Maimonides underscores the absolute necessity of mastering astronomy (science), mathematics and logic, in order that the student will gain the skills of critical thinking.

Critical thinking is anathema to Daas Torah. They seek to undervalue individual rights, independent thinking, and the ability to make an informed and intelligent decision. Daas Torah doesn’t allow for dissent. It is noble for a faith based Jew to consult with his spiritual mentor for guidance always with the option for accepting or rejecting that advice. Daas Torah, however, seeks to control the individual and thus the community, molding it into its own image, squashing dissent and undermining free will by manipulating peer pressure in order to insinuate its singular control and presence.

Shael Siegel is a post-denominational rabbi, educator, commentator and observer of the Jewish religious/social landscape. He manages a web site and writes a weekly blog which can be accessed through http://www.shaelsiegel.com/

Question: If it is true that the Torah, written with Divine inspiration, but not dictated word for word by God and therefore not immutable, (as evidenced by the various versions of masoretic texts and tikunei soferim, coupled with variants in texts even during the Talmudic period)than is our halachic(Jewish Law) system flawed, since its foundations do not rest on bedrock?

Answer: There is a well known Baraita(section of Talmud) (T.B. Hagigah 14b) that relates the story of four sages who entered Pardes (BenAzzai, Ben Zoma, Acher-Elisha Ben Abuya, and Akiva). Ben Azzai gazed and died, Ben Zoma went insane, Elisha became an apostate and Akiva came out in peace. According to some, the sages entered “Pardes” in order to achieve an absolute and total understanding of Torah. Kabbalists interpreted their experiment as a journey into the Pardes –an encounter with the divine truth. It would appear that the kabalistic version holds merit in view of the Talmud’s discussion of Elisha’s encounter with the angel Metatron and subsequent apostacy. When Elisha saw Metatron sitting and writing in heaven, he assumed he was a deity (since only God was allowed to sit) and proclaimed there are indeed two powers in heaven. (There are those that say that it was this statement earned Elisha the reputation as a heretic. Rabbi Tsadok HaKohen of Lublin believed that ultimately he became a heretic not because of the dualism, but because as the result of his encounter with God he believed he no longer had to obey the law).

The search for truth demands the questioning of all previously held assumptions that we have learned and believed. It means that nothing can be assumed or taken for granted. It may also mean that there is no ultimate truth and that the nature of truth is that it is constantly being revealed within different contextual frameworks. Something like a hologram-every angle producing a different image. The search for truth requires abandoning religious rhetoric and nomenclature that has been accepted and popularized by different religious denominations including but not limited to the orthodox. For example, standard fare is to claim that the Divine revelation at Sinai is irrefutable because there were 600,000 Israelites who were witness to the event. This argument is obviously disingenuous because those witnesses are no longer present and their testimony isn’t verifiable. They left no documentation attesting to the epiphany, nor were there any secondary sources who recorded what they were told by the primary witnesses. All we have is the Pentateuch which in effect serves as its own witness attesting to its own veracity and as we have demonstrated wasn’t an accurate document. Its lack of accuracy raises a host of other questions which have far reaching implications such as our halachic system and its development. An example of this might be the rules governing the mixing of meat and milk products. The torah text mentions “lo tivashel gdi bachalev imo” three times. Because of this redundancy our Rabbis instituted a host of dietary laws that have defined the Jewish people throughout our history. If there were inaccuracies in the text, than why would we assume that this wasn’t an inaccuracy? Perhaps it should have been repeated only once or perhaps not at all, thus changing the dynamics of the laws pertaining to mixing meat and milk. Another consideration is the correct usage of the word “chalav”. Is it “chalav” – milk, or perhaps “chalev”- fat, both spelled the same in Hebrew. A critical approach to the text would have impacted on the development of Jewish law.

Elisha Ben Abuya’s (known as Acher in Talmud) odyssey poses several questions which are very important in the search for truth. What are the limits of searching? Who sets the limits? Why are there limits if one is to find the truth? What kind of questions can we pose? Are we entitled to draw conclusions based upon our observations? Do we have to accept dogma even if we can’t accept those principles? Does it make us hypocritical or at least inconsistent if we continue to practice “halacha l’maaseh”(commandments) even if we are still questioning? These are important questions for consideration.

There are many who believe that if one “questions” than one is on the path of Elisha Ben Abuya. Not necessarily. If we don’t question than how can discovery ever be made and how can we ever honestly validate our religious convictions? Surely we all agree that it was God’s plan to have man designed with a brain with incredible potential for discovery. The purpose of mankind is to increase and maximize his potential for transcendence. As in every field of the sciences and humanities mans advancement can’t be expected without framing intelligent questions and seeking the answers. It stands to reason that in the discipline of philosophy and theology we are presented with the same challenges. To regurgitate the same litany of beliefs as held for thousand of years doesn’t necessarily validate them as.

Many years ago, having completed studies for Rabbinical Ordination and pursuing graduate studies, these were the issues that consumed me. Corresponding with my professor of Philosophy, Rabbi Eliezer Berkovitz I raised these issues, fearful that I was on the doomed trajectory of Elisha Ben Abuya. His answer which developed into a series of letters encouraged me to continue questioning and searching. Framing and articulating the questions, he maintained, would ultimately prove to be more important than the answers. I do believe that no matter how much we question there remains an indelible qualitative linkage between the questioner, his questions and the tradition which he questions.

There is, to be sure, a moral, ethical and historical imperative to honor the Torah and to practice its teachings. It really doesn’t matter who wrote it. It isn’t important whether it was dictated word by word by God to Moshe Rabbeinu, or whether it was a Divine revelation which latter went through many emendations, and permutations in the form of Tikunei Soferim and various versions of the Masortic text. The sheer weight of history, our cultural and ethical development based on Torah and the sacrifices made over the generations justifies in and of itself honoring the Torah as it has come to us through the generations in the form of shemirat mitzvoth. The tragedy of Elisha Ben Abuya was that he didn’t relate to Torah within the complex context of historical imperative. Even when in the process of questioning and searching, the “practice” of Mitzvoth(commandments) is what ultimately will contribute to discovery and self discovery.

Shael Siegel is a post-denominational rabbi, educator, commentator and observer of the Jewish religious/social landscape. He manages a web site and writes a weekly blog which can be accessed through http://www.shaelsiegel.com/

Question: Why isn’t a bracha (blessing) made before writing a sefer torah(Torah scroll)?
Answer: Because of the uncertainty of being able to execute the mitzvah(commandment) without error, since we don’t know the correct spellings or orthographic notation.

Driving home one day from my office I took notice of the fact that I was humming a tune that I learned decades ago, probably in kindergarten or first grade. It’s the tune set to “Yigdal”. It’s a great and catchy tune, probably one of the most popular poems in our literary history, written and composed by Rabbi Daniel Bar Yehudah of Rome in the early 14th century, about one hundred years after the death of Maimonides. It is a poem affirming the thirteen articles of faith as articulated by Maimonides. Yigdal never enriched its composer financially, but enriched the Jewish people and continues to do so six hundred years after its composition. It’s a prayer chanted by hundreds of thousands of Jews every morning, included in all prayer books and is an integral part of the morning tefillah(prayer).

It created however, in the hearts and minds of millions of Jews through the ages facts that really can’t be substantiated. It brought into the consciousness of millions of people a dogmatic belief system that is questionable. It was ingenious, because nothing stated in the Yigdal can ever be substantiated, nor does it have deep roots in any of our primary texts. On the contrary, there were many great scholars through the ages that took exception with the dogma articulated by the Rambam(Maimonides), and artistically phrased in the Yigdal. Their voices, however, never received the exposure, popularity and acceptance that Yigdal received.

The popularity of Yigdal reminds me somewhat of the psychology that says “if you say something long enough you begin to believe it”. If you say the Yigdal long enough you begin to believe it. But not everything in the Yigdal is as clear as the poem states as Menachem Kellner comented on Rambam’s thirteen principles of faith in his book Must A Jew Believe Anything. One example of this is the eighth of the thirteen principles of faith that the Rambam insisted was critical basing this and the other 12 principles on the first Mishneh of the tenth chapter of Sanhedrin.

But before getting into specifics let me point out that the Thirteen Principles of Faith are universally accepted by the traditional Jewish community. Even the early maskilim such as Judah Leib Ben Ze’ev accepted the thirteen principles. The early reform movement and even some of their rabbis today are in acceptance of these principles. But to paraphrase Gershom Scholem, how is it possible that something so universally accepted can be so wrong? To be sure there were traditionalist that questioned the thirteen principles, such as R.Luzzatto(1800-1865) , R. Reuven Amar and R. Bezalel Naor. Incidentally, even the Artscroll, the final word for today’s orthodox community, refers to the thirteen principles as “virtually universally accepted”.

The eighth principle of faith states: “I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses”. The Yigdal, reflecting these sentiments reads: “God gave a true Torah to his people, through his prophet trusted in all His house.” Essentially, all this principle does is to authenticate the masoretic text edited and brought to light by Aaron ben Moses ben Asher which was in the tenth century. Prior to that there was a string of edited texts many of which are referred to as masoretic texts, or tikun soferim. One is led to believe that according to the Rambam the text we have today of the Pentateuch is the same one given to Moses at Sinai three thousand years ago, in spite of our knowledge of the masoretic text and tikun soferim. Ask any child with a day school education, or your typical yeshiva bachur and he will tell you that the torah we have today is that which was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai. How does he know? He will answer because it’s one of the thirteen Ikarim. Not to believe it is tantamount to being a heretic.

Regarding the tikun soferim, as Marc Shapiro points out in his book The Limits of Orthodox Theology, there were significant textual changes in the Pentateuch. In many cases the soferim made changes if they felt the existing text was inappropriate. For example, Genesis 18:22 ought to read that God stood before Abraham, since it was God who came initially to Abraham. However, the tikun soferim reversed it to read and Abraham stood before God, because in their opinion it wasn’t appropriate for God to be depicted as standing before Abraham. In this vein, there is scholarly evidence that supports the thesis that Ezra, while not changing the intended mitzvoth, took the liberty to embellish the text. Incidentally, Ibn Ezra believes that significant verses of the text were written after Moses departed from the scene. He doesn’t dispute the fact that it was written with Divine intervention, he just maintains that it was someone other than Moses.

The picture becomes more complex when one takes into account the fact that there wasn’t one masoretic text, but many. Furthermore, as far back as the Babylonian period when the Talmud was edited there was awareness of gross errors in the Torah text regarding spelling and orthographic notation. As Shapiro suggests, there were halachic discussions on what happens if the Torah text differs with that of that quoted in the Talmud, or a discrepancy between texts quoted in Talmud and that of the masoretic text. An example of this is found in the Ten Commandments. In the Talmud Yerushalmi, the first commandment spells the word “hotzesicha” without a “yud”, but the masoretic text in Exodus and Deuteronomy spell it with a “yud”.

These aren’t minor errors. Sages of the Talmudic period were aware and concerned with the multiple discrepancies in the Torah text. Midrash Rabbah comments that the Torah texts of R. Meir differed from that of R. Akiva. In Genesis 1:31 the words Tov M’od appeared as the wording in R. Meir’s text , but in R. Akiva’s Tov Mavet appears in place of “Tov Me’od”. In genesis 3:21 the word “Or” appeared with an “ayin”, meaning clothing, but in R. Meir’s text it appeared with an “aleph”, thus rendering the word to mean light. Furthermore in T.B. Makot 11:a the opinion is expressed that Joshua and not Moses authored the last eight verses of Deuteronomy. This is just an abbreviated list of the inconsistencies of the text. The point is, since we have these inconsistencies how could the Rambam compose the eighth principal, in effect, rendering the sages as heretics?

Obviously, the Rambam was aware of all this. How can he still posit this eighth principle of faith as one of the thirteen ikkarim(principles)? Arthur Hyman, a Maimonides scholar and author of several texts on medieval Jewish philosophy (referenced by Marc Shapiro) suggests that the Rambam worked with two systems: “true beliefs” and “necessary beliefs”. According to Hyman, when the Rambam formulated this principal, he knew that Moses didn’t write the entire Torah. His overriding concern was for the welfare of Am Yisrael at a particularly difficult time in Muslim Spain and felt the necessity to perpetuate this idea for the sake of the “amcha”. By perpetuating this and other notions, it would keep the Jewish community from straying and help maintain their abiding faith. Keep in mind that at this time Muslims were accusing Jews of intentionally altering the text of the Pentateuch. So it was all the more important for the Rambam to underscore the divinity and pristine nature of the total text.

Having said all this I will conclude with another question which unfortunately has no simple answer.

Question: If it is true that the Torah, written with Divine inspiration, but not dictated word for word by God and therefore not immutable, (as evidenced by the various versions of masoretic texts and tikunei soferim, coupled with variants in texts even during the Talmudic period)than is our halachic system flawed, since its foundations do not rest on bedrock?
Answer: To be addressed.

Shael Siegel is a post-denominational Rabbi, educator, commentator and observer of the Jewish religious/social landscape. He manages a web site and writes a weekly blog which can be accessed through http://www.shaelsiegel.com/