If there’s any consensus in the Messianic movement on the Eucharist, it is generally thought that whenever Scripture speaks of the Lord’s Supper, it is referring to Passover. So when Yeshua said, “Do this in remembrance of me,” he was referring to the Passover seder, not instituting a new ceremony. If this premise is accepted, an alternate explanation is required to explain the Christian Church’s later “rejection” of Passover, and the development of what is known today as the Eucharist.

A couple of different approaches have been taken within the Messianic movement.

First, one that is less frequent, but one that I’d like to dismiss out of hand, is the idea that the Church adopted the bread and wine ritual from paganism. This argument rests upon a logical fallacy, namely that correlation proves causation. Pagans had ritual ceremonies which included bread and wine, and Christians had ritual ceremonies which contained bread and wine, therefore, Christians were influenced by pagans in their rituals. If the same logic is applied to other areas of faith, resurrection, animal sacrifice, and even circumcision must then be rejected as “pagan.” Needless to say, no serious scholar or historian endorses such a view.

Second, another view frequently heard in Messianic circles is the idea that the church adopted the practice of Eucharist as a way to replace Passover. Allegedly, the Church thought Passover was “too Jewish,” and sought to replace it. First of all, in making an assertion such as this, the burden of proof rests on the one making it. Certainly, Church History contains plenty of anti-Jewish sentiment. Yet, that in and of itself does not prove the Church held an aversion to everything Jewish. Church Fathers certainly had some harsh criticisms of the Jewish people, but they weren’t Nazis.

Actually, one of the first controversies within the Church was precisely over the question of when to properly celebrate Pascha [1] or, Passover. The churches of Asia Minor, who claimed apostolic tradition from John, Philip, and Mary the mother of Yeshua, insisted upon celebrating the Resurrection in conjunction with the Jewish dating of Passover (which, at this point in history, would have still relied on the visual sighting of the New Moon by Jewish authorities in Israel). Other churches, such as the Church of Rome, claiming apostolic tradition from Peter and Paul, sought an alternate date independent of the Jewish calendar. This controversy, known as the Quartodeciman (14-ers, for 14 Nisan) controversy, continued for over a hundred years, up until the Council of Nicea (and perhaps even beyond).

All of that is to say, the Church was highly aware of Passover, and held it in great respect. Differences in dating it remained (gee, never seen that in the Messianic movement), but everyone still desired to celebrate Pascha. Therefore, the idea that the Eucharist was introduced as a replacement for the Passover seder is an absurdity. The same can be said for the idea that the Church Fathers later read the Gospels, all the while being completely ignorant of the Old Testament feast of Passover, and came up with the regular observance of the Eucharist instead. No honest reading of Church History would lead you to such a conclusion.

Where does this leave us? From looking at Church History, we have the early Church highly aware of the Passover, even engaged in heated debate over the proper timing of its observance, all the while partaking of the Eucharist on a weekly, and perhaps daily basis. No one in Church History, it seems, ever understood Yeshua’s words of institution as “words of reinforcement,” that is as referring to the already commanded observance of the Passover. Almost universally, the words of the Master during his Last Supper were understood as instituting a new sacrament, certainly taken from previous symbols and observances within Judaism, but given entirely new meaning and content. (The same could be said for immersion or baptism as well).

Given this, I believe it is necessary for the Messianic movement to reexamine those Scriptures where we have presumed “Lord’s Supper” just means “Passover.” In part 3, I will examine two types of Scriptural passages. First, passages that certainly refer to the Eucharist. For example, this would include the Last Supper narratives of the Synoptic Gospels, as well as 1 Corinthians 11:17ff.  And second, those passages where is it contested whether or not they refer to the Eucharist, such as John 6 and the Bread of Life discourse, “breaking bread” in Luke-Acts, 1 Corinthians 10:14-22, and the agape feast of Jude 12.

————————

[1] On a related note, another factual fallacy within the Messianic movement is that the Church changed Passover to “Easter,” complete with bunnies and dyed eggs. The problem is, Easter is only called “Easter” in English and German speaking cultures. The majority of Christian linguistic traditions (Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, Russian, Syrian, Arabic, Ethiopian, Egyptian, Iranian, the Scandinavian languages, etc.) all derive their name from Pascha. “Easter” may come from the old Germanic pagan name for the month of April, which Pascha usually fell in. It is no more pagan to call Pascha “Easter,” than to call the sixth month of the Gregorian calendar “June,” the name of the Roman goddess Juno.

It has been my experience that the Messianic movement really doesn’t have a theology of the Eucharist, or Lord’s Supper/Communion. For centuries, the Eucharist has been at the center of Christian worship and theological debate. Just walk into any Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, or traditional Lutheran service (representative of the oldest forms of Christian worship), and the entire service will center around the Eucharist. In terms of theological debate, differences of opinion over the Eucharist were largely the main point of division between different Protestant denominations (Anglican, Reformed, Lutheran, Anabaptist, Stone-Campbell). Yet, even they were united in opposing Roman Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist (the Orthodox church really isn’t on board with Catholics either). And yet we, it seems, largely ignore the issue, or treat it superficially.

That is not to say that there aren’t opinions out there in the Messianic world regarding the Eucharist. There seems to be some general idea that the Remembrance spoken of by Yeshua is fulfilled at Passover. Some ideas regarding the traditional Christian practice range from:

  • The Christian Eucharist developed out of ignorance of Passover
  • The Christian Eucharist was intended as a replacement for Passover
  • The Christian Eucharist was a pagan practice adopted by the church

In sure there are more, but these are the ones heard most frequently.

Explanations such as these are necessary, because it is presumed that Yeshua did not command the observance of a weekly remembrance, but rather that he reinforced an annual observance. Some sort of explanation is needed to explain the widespread development of the Christian practice, while at the same time explaining why Christians didn’t continue celebrating Passover.

But, if the above explanations cannot adequately explain why the Eucharist came to be what it is, another explanation will be needed. This will lead us to reexamine our presumptions, namely whether Scripture really teaches that the Eucharist is during Passover.

If there are another other significant views out there that I have missed, please let me know.

If you haven’t heard what’s all over the news, the nation of Haiti experienced a 7.0 earthquake some ten miles outside of the capital yesterday. Aftershocks of 5+ followed as well.

Reports are just now coming out on the extent of the devastation in this most impoverished of countries. Many buildings, including the UN embassy building and the national palace are beyond repair.

This catastrophe is beyond words. Many professors and friends of mine support and work for missions organizations there, and their reports of the country are always heart-wrenching. I cannot even fathom what state the country is in now.

Please pray for the people of Haiti and those working to bring aid throughout your day. Please also consider giving a donation to one of the many relief organizations working there, such as the Red Cross.

My blog from yesterday has apparently resonated with many readers, particularly the young men out there. Messages continue to stream in via Facebook and email, many of them expressing the same idea: that ministry and education are two of the most burning desires for young Messianic men out there. All these men want to do is give their all to God. Yet, some of them face the obstacles of jobs, finances, responsibilities as husbands and fathers, not knowing where to start school, or not knowing how to get involved in ministry.

In all of this, I see God’s Spirit working and leading us all towards God’s will for our lives, communities, and movement. He’s causing us to consider the deeper questions and a different course for our lives.

We are not alone in this, God’s knows our desires, and he longs for us to become the leaders and servants he has called us to be. Brothers and sisters, the obstacles are real. The road is tough. But that is precisely why we must give ourselves so fully to this task. We need communities. We need leaders. We need to glorify God in Messiah.

In general, here are the things I believe any potential leader needs to consider in entering congregational ministry:

  1. Discernment and reflection on one’s calling – First, you need to determine if this is for you. Can you picture yourself doing anything else? Would you find fulfillment in teaching, pastoring, counseling, and dealing with the general garbage of the everyday in the lives of people? Are you in it for the long haul?
  2. Seeking out an education – The reality is, you can’t just jump into this. It will take time, money, and effort to educate yourself for ministry. And I don’t just mean being a teacher and acquiring Bible knowledge for it’s own sake, but learning how to be an engaging speaker, how to counsel people in crisis, how to work with a congregational budget, etc. Christian Bible college can be a wonderful tool for this. I know many in the Messianic world who would rather go to yeshiva than seminary, but the reality is that most yeshivas in the world will not accept Messianic Jews or Gentiles (Messianic Jews might have a slightly greater chance than Gentiles). Seminary provides an opportunity to interact with the wider Christian community, and scholarship in general (Christian and Jewish). Or, go to a Messianic school! The only Messianic school I know of for serious leadership training is MJTI. I’m sure there may be other great ones out there, but MJTI is the only one that friends of mine have taken classes from.
  3. Building a descent research library – There are many topics and issues that arise in ministry. There are just some reference sources you will need as a pastor. A descent Hebrew and Greek Lexicon. Good commentaries on all the books of the Bible (not just the Torah, though that’s the foundation). Bible dictionaries. Some books on theology. Classic apologetic works from authors like CS Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, James Sire, or Charles Colsen.
  4. Seeking out a mentor/internship – Young guys like us may be important to the future of our communities, but we don’t know it all. We need training and experience under a trusted mentor with experience in ministry.

The harvest is plenty, but the workers are few…

The 00’s are now history. Many significant events have transpired over the course of ten years: on the international scale, within the Messianic Jewish movement, and within my life personally. Somethings good, somethings bad, none without their challenges.

In 2000, I was just discovering Messianic Judaism. Ten years later, I’m still here. Sadly, such is not the case for others. I have had friends and acquaintances who, after a time in MJism, gave up. They either gave up on faith in Yeshua, or faith in God altogether. For some reasons, I don’t blame them. Reflecting on these situations, I often find the one major part of the problems stemmed from a breakdown in interpersonal relationships and the general dysfunction within community.

In the fall of 2001, I entered Bible college. I now stand ready to complete my last semester of seminary and give (formal) academics a break. Now more than ever, I feel God’s call to translate my knowledge into action by serving his people and building community. In many ways, I don’t think this call is for me alone, but for MJism in all its expressions, especially for the next generation of its leaders.

Young men, young women, some of us have been raised in Messianic Congregations. Some of us have been raised in Christian Churches. Some have no religious background at all but find themselves in the midst of MJism. We see the state that many of our communities are in (if we have one at all). If it is anything like my experience, and what we see on blogs, our communities are not places of stability, love, self-sacrifice, or service. Instead, we discuss and debate issues: identity, ritual, halacha, theology. That is not to say that these discussions are unimportant, but in some ways, it feels as if we are spinning our wheels. We, the youth of our movement, see perhaps better than most the problems we face for the future.

Today is the Feast of the Epiphany. In most Western Churches, it commemorates the visit of the Magi. In the East however, the primary remembrance of this day is the baptism of our Lord Yeshua by John (Matthew 3:13ff, Mark 1:9-11, Luke 3:21-22). I find this account to be significant for our current state of affairs. Allow me the grace to wax midrashic.

The baptism of Yeshua primarily serves as an anointing/commissioning of Yeshua for his ministry as the Messiah King. Yeshua, being the sinless Lamb of God, did not come to John out of a need for repentance. After his immersion, the Spirit descended upon the Master, the Voice from Heaven declared his approval, and then the Master was led into the wilderness to be tested. It is due to the presence of the Master, the Spirit, and the Voice from Heaven that the historical Church called this day “Epiphany,” because it was there on the banks of the Jordan that the glory of God was manifested.

At the outset of this decade, our generation stands prepared like the Master to accept the commission God has set for us. It is time for us to immerse ourselves in this task and put our hands to the plow. Young people, if you realize the needs of our communities, and desire to do the work of ministry, commit yourselves wholly to that task. Get an education, go to a Bible college, talk with leaders in your communities about opportunities to serve the community. Learn from them, be mentored by them.

If we will do this, there will be two outcomes. One, we will be tested by the adversary. Just as the Master was tested at the outset of his ministry, we likewise will face all manner of obstacles that will prevent us from committing ourselves to God. If we rely on God’s word, as Yeshua did, we shall overcome these trials. But secondly, and more importantly, when we set out to make God’s commission our primary aim, we will see the manifestation of God’s glory in our movement, in our communities, and in our lives.

As for me, as I said, I’m finishing up Bible college. The skills I’ve learned there are invaluable. If you are considering ministry, seek out a Bible college were you can learn the necessary skills of biblical language, exegetical skills, and practical ministry skills like teaching, preaching, and counseling.

Once my degree is finished, I hope with God’s help to do a Messianic Jewish ministry internship to learn the practical needs of leading and serving a Messianic community. This internship could last anywhere from 6-24 months.

During my internship, I will be looking for a Messianic community around the country that has a small, established group of believers that will serve as the “core” of a community that would grow into a congregation with formal services, classes, and community life functions. After my internship is completed, it is off to whatever area of the country (or even further, who knows?) to begin creating/nurturing this vision for community.

What I’m finding to be so difficult is that there simply isn’t a good mechanism for entering Messianic Jewish ministry. Perhaps the organization with the most tools along these lines is the UMJC. But being that I’m not part of a congregation with the UMJC, I’m having to take what little I’ve learned from school and essentially create the process for myself. I hope to blog along the way about this process, in hopes that others will be able to benefit from my experience.

May we all seek to manifest God’s glory in our movement and our lives as we press forward into the 2010’s. May this decade be a milestone in our movement’s short history as we turn our attention to nurturing authentic community.

Epiphany 2010

There is a very healthy, stimulating discussion on-going on the Or Gadol blog on the ever-continual discussion on Gentiles in the Messianic Jewish movement. If you haven’t seen it, check it out here. Many of my favorite bloggers have jumped in on this one (including JK, Reb Yosh, Judah, and Daniel K).

Please keep the discussion fruitful. If you feel that burning feeling in your chest welling up (you know what I’m talking about), take a step back. Take five and think about it. Don’t say anything you’ll regret. Let’s just have some good, open, honest discussion on these matters.

I love, love, love getting new books in the mail. Here are the titles that arrived for me today.

Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ

Robert M. Bowman Jr. and J. Ed Komoszewski

This of course is yet another resource to aid my continued study of Christology. It has some respectable endorsements, including one of my favorite scholars, Richard Bauckham.

Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church

N.T. Wright

This is a long-overdue addition to my humble library. NT Wright comes out strong on the centrality of the future resurrection, as opposed to a abstract, disembodied spiritual bliss in the hereafter.

The Koren-Sacks Hebrew/English Siddur

Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks

I’ve been eagerly waiting to order the Koren-Sacks Siddur. I resonate much more with a Modern Orthodox approach to faith as opposed to the Haredim, as typified in ArtScroll (I make no claim to be orthodox, though I do respect it). Both approaches have strengths and weaknesses, but my way of thinking has much more commonality with the Modern Orthodox philosophy. Aside from that, I appreciate Koren publisher’s layout method. It seeks to not rush a person through the prayers. Where all possible, Koren sought to keep longer individual prayers on their own page (such as Adon Olam on its own page), or at least without breaks in the middle of the text. Ascetically, it is very pleasing. Though it may sound superficial, a well-laid out text is important when you’re spending as much time as you are with a prayer book.

And speaking of books, I hope to post a new page with my recommended reading for Christians and Messianics. I think it is good to share with one another what books we’ve read, and how they have impacted our lives. Look for this coming soon.

A few weeks ago, I posted a blog on the recent Vine of David post of a Hebrew New Testament complete with cantillation marks. Over a century old, it was originally intended for use in Hebrew Christian congregational worship of a traditional stripe. Initially this post was nothing more than a neat, curious thing that I came across. But it sparked discussion on larger issues in the comments. Namely, whether publicly reading the New Testament in a Messianic liturgical context is necessary, and the even larger issues surrounding the canonicity of the New Testament.

With this fresh in mind, I came upon this statement last Shabbat from Oskar Skarsaune “The History of Jewish Believers in the Early Centuries – Perspectives and Framework” in Jewish Believers in Jesus. I thought it relevant to the previous discussion,

What distinguishes the canon of the New Testament writings of the “Great Church,” compared with the several alternative canons around in the second century, was its comprehensiveness, not its narrowness. Most of the competing alternatives were much narrower (779).

In general, I think many people, and Messianics in particular, have a Bart Ehrman/Da Vinci Code-esk view of the early Church Fathers. That these were evil, subversive men who sought to tyrannically impose their view of Christianity upon the ignorant populace. Within Messianic circles, the conspiracy usually includes a heavy dose of pagan syncretism and antisemitism. We imagine leaders burning books, altering manuscripts at will, all the while hunting down heretics at the bidding of the almighty Constantine.

The reality is much less dramatic. Sure there were some bad guys in the early church. (I for one, am not a fan of “St.” Cyril, the dude was a real life mafia boss). Anti-Judaism was a reality in some sectors of the Church (not the modern racially-based concept of antisemitism). None of Church Fathers were perfect. But we shouldn’t let stereotypes blind us to the facts. When we allow these stereotypes to go unchecked, issues like the reliability of the canon inevitably will arise. How can I trust them?  How can I trust anything? (It is also worth repeating that Messianics who question the canon of the New Testament will not ask the same questions of the Tanach. This is a double-standard.)

But as Skarsaune points out, it was those groups who were deemed heretical who adhered to shorter, more exclusive lists of books. Marcion, the heretic Messianics love to hate, had a very small canon containing no OT, a heavily edited version of Luke’s Gospel, and a handful of Paul’s letters (including a copy of Romans minus chapter 16 – too many Jewish names in that list). Other Gnostics followed Marcion’s led in rejecting the canonical Gospels for more fantastic accounts like the Gospel of Thomas, Peter, and Mary Magdalene. The later sect of the Ebionites held only to a Hebrew version of Matthew (minus the first two chapters), and according to Epiphanius’ account, some even rejected the Prophets after Joshua.

But within the “Great Church,” those texts which were authentically from an apostle or close associate, and were not gnostic obviously, were recognized as being canonical. Given this, and the voluminous textual history of the NT, whether in Greek, Aramaic, Latin, Slavonic, or Coptic, believers today have more than sure ground to place their confidence in the New Testament Scriptures.

Next Page »