Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Master's Thesis (1)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- English (1)
- Hebrew (1)
- Multiple languages (1)
Keywords
- Halacha (3) (remove)
This study on the Messianic Jewish movement and its relationship to the Torah explores the various aspects of the relationship to the Torah on the basis of 10 interviews with selected Yeshua-believing Jews in leadership positions. The selection of interviewees results in a range of different positions typical of the movement as a whole, which overlap in many respects but are often fundamentally different and sometimes contradictory. Particular attention is paid to the theologically based, divergent and contradictory positions in an attempt to make these understandable.
After a brief introduction to the Messianic Jewish movement, aspects of the Messianic Jewish dual identity are examined and their relevance for the relationship to the Torah is demonstrated. This is followed by an overview of the forums in which Yeshua-believing Jews discuss their relationship to the Torah. The extensive bibliography at the end of the work provides an insight into a lively discussion process within the movement that is still far from complete. A briefly annotated differentiation of terms serves as an overview of the most important meanings of Torah used in the Messianic Jewish movement. Following this preliminary work, the field study is presented. A description of the research field and methodological reflections precede the interviews. In the interviews, the associations with the term Torah are first recorded and the conceptual meaning and use clarified. This already reveals some serious differences. The theological positions and understandings of Torah are presented with the biographical context and main field of influence, and the most important formative influences are named. The points on which they all agree are noted first, as they serve as a common basis. All study the written Torah and consider it, as well as the rest of the Tanakh and the writings of the New Testament in their present form, to be divinely inspired and authoritative. All have found a positive approach to the Torah according to their own definition of the term. For all of them, the written Torah and the Tanakh point to Yeshua. All agree that Yeshua did not abrogate the Torah, but fulfilled it. And all feel a responsibility as a Jew to the Torah in some way. With regard to keeping commandments, all say that no one can earn their way to heaven by doing so. G-d's faithfulness to His promises to Israel is affirmed by all, but whether the new covenant in Yeshua superseded the old covenant of Mt. Sinai, or whether it is simply added to the already existing covenant of Sinai, whether ritual commandments are to continue to be kept after Yeshua's death and resurrection and the destruction of the Temple, whether the commandments aiming at separation from the nations should continue to be kept, whether and under what conditions rabbinic halacha should be followed and what individuals do and teach in their families and communities - all this is discussed interview by interview. It becomes clear how different ways of reading and weighting key scriptures produce different positions. Just as the diversity of positions in relation to the Torah already suggests, the interview partners are divided on the question of a Messianic Jewish Halacha. But here too, the term halacha is interpreted differently by the representatives. At the end of the field study, the attempts to produce Messianic Jewish Halacha and the problems and points of criticism expressed by other interviewees are explained. The work concludes with a theological framework able to contain all the different positions and relationships to the Torah and some starting points for a possible Messianic Jewish hermeneutic theology of the Torah.
עבירה לשמה
(2014)
A Transgression for the Sake of God -‘Averah li-shmah: A Tale of a Radical Idea in Talmudic Literature
All cultures, religions, and ethical or legal systems struggle with the role intention plays in evaluating actions. The Talmud compellingly elaborates on the notion of intention through the radical concept that “A sin committed for the sake of God [averah li-shmah] is greater than a commandment fulfilled not for the sake of God [mi-mizvah she-lo li-shmah].” The Babylonian Talmud attributes this concept—which challenges one of rabbinic Judaism’s most fundamental dogmas, the obligation to fulfill the commandments and avoid sin—to R. Nahman b. Isaac (RNBI), a renowned 4th century Amora. Considering the normative character of the rabbinic culture in which Halakhah (Jewish religious law) plays such a central role, this concept, seems almost like a foreign body in the Talmudic corpus.
The study focuses on the linguistic stratum of RNBI’s statement. By tracking the development of the meanings and uses of the word ‘li-shmah’ the research locates RNBI’s statement as part of the broader Talmudic discourse evaluating two levels of performing religious actions ‘li-shmah/she-lo li-shmah’. Since we wish to explain the word ‘li-shmah’ consistently both times it appears in the statement, the best translation would be ‘for the sake of God’. This translation is based on the linguistic connection between the word ‘li-shmah’ and the term ‘le-shem shamayim’ (for the sake of God) that appears in several rabbinic sources. This linguistic connection is also the key to identifying the possible root of RNBI’s concept. RNBI bolsters his idea by quoting a verse about Jael, thus implying that Jael sinned for the sake of God. The research describes at least five statements in Sages’ Literature that attribute sins for the sake of God to other biblical figures, all the while using the term ‘le-shem shamim’. Therefore we may presume that RNBI’s concept has evolved from the exegetical notion of attributing sin for the sake of God to biblical figures.
To understand the way RNBI’s statement was accepted in Talmudic culture, we must explore the textual witnesses to the literary frame of RNBI’s statement: the Talmudic sugya (Nazir 23a; Horayot 10b). We possess five versions of the sugya’s dialectical structure. Comparison of these versions, allows us to reconstruct the earlier dialectical structure, from which the familiar versions developed. The radical potential of RNBI’s statement led to cultural activity, in the transmission of the sugya, in an effort to mitigate it. This activity is reflected in late additions to the sugya identified by our research—which should be viewed as a process of self-censorship for ideological reasons.
This research explores a fundamental issue in rabbinic world: the immanent contradiction between law and intention. The research depicts in detail the movement of a radical idea from the margins culture to mainstream - in this case into the Babylonian Talmud. Therefore, the findings of this research provide substantial insight into our understanding of the interpretive process and of conceptual adaptation in rabbinic culture.
Der Beitrag setzt sich mit der halachischen Bedeutung von Dtn. 6,18 im Kontext der heutigen Zeit auseinander.