Fear vs. Fear: Fear vs. Dread

My cousin Jeff Vazzo recently wrote "I Will Not Fear". What is fear? According to Jeff, "The "Church" tells us to fear god even when God is in us, around us and works through us. Fear is the unbelief." This is the negative type of fear, known as dread.

Often, especially since we are in Laodicea, we are given this message by the Church: "[']May the God of Avraham and also the god of Nachor, the god of their father, judge between us.[']" The NKJV incorrectly translated this as "[']The God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, and the God of their father judge between us.[']" Nachor and Terach feared the g-ds of Ur, even if they feared G-d at the same time. But remember that a man cannot righteously serve two g-ds at once.

Positive fear is what Jeff described as "God’s Son is my fortifying power." Ya'akov himself "swore by the Fear of his father Isaac" (The CJB reads, "But Ya'akov swore by the One his father Yitz'chak feared.").

Ya'akov even understood, "It is a fearful [that is, dreadful] thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Understanding the dreadful side of G-d, he confidently told Lavan, "['] If the God of my father, the God of Avraham, the one whom Yitz'chak fears, had not been on my side, by now you would certainly have already sent me away with nothing! God has seen how distressed I've been and how hard I've worked, and last night he passed judgment in my favor.[']"

So, Ya'akov understood both sides of the Fear of G-d. Ya'akov feared G-d and only G-d-- for the most part, anyway; though he did sometimes dread-- e.g., Esav and Lavan.

"For God will bring to judgment everything we do, including every secret, whether good or bad. [Here is the final conclusion, now that you have heard everything: fear God, and keep his mitzvot; this is what being human is all about.]"

Don't Let Legalistic Grinches Steal Christ-Mass, Chag Mashiach

"Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free,[a] and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage." (Galtians 5:1, NKJV) If anyone gives you drek about Christmas (Chag Mashiach), Easter (Chag HaT'khiyah Mashiach), etc.; tell them to go do their homework and learn the actual origins, not the origins of what they were alternatives to.

Matters like this have "occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you." (Galatians 2:4-5)

When Legalism Sprouts Up The Most

I notice that Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter are the times when legalism sprouts up the most; all because of what each originally historically coincided with and were in fact meant to be alternatives to-- the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest, the believed-to-be Sukkot celebration of the Puritans gone wrong and long left un-recelebrated, the Greco-Roman Winter Solstice, and the likewise Spring Solstice.

The Early Church created Christmas as 'Am Yisra'el created Hanukah, both to counter the Winter Solstice. The Early Church also created Halloween and Easter to counter the Celtic Pagan Fall Harvest and Greco-Roman Pagan Spring Solstice.

Thanksgiving is another discussion.

Don't let P'rushim and other legalists streal your freedom to observe alternative-to-paganism, Christ-centered mo'edim v'chagim.

Are Christmas and Hanukkah Pagan? The Answer Is, Based On History and Other Factors...

Christmas and Hanukkah are both not pagan, and were actually created as alternatives to (respectively) the Winter Solstice and a Greek Pagan holiday. Google "Is Hanukkah pagan?", by the way. I once did after someone asserted that it may be or is. I was shocked.

Anyway, Christmas was originally "Christ-mass" or Chag Mashiach, created as an alternative by the Early Church to the pagan Winter Solstice and coinciding pagan holidays. Similarly, Hanukkah-- thought by some to be a late celebration of Sukkot-- was created to replace the celebration of the desecration of the Temple and a dedication to a pagan god. Some Hellinized and other Jews would only go so far in terms of Hellenization and toleration thereof, and would certainly not accept the Temple being destroyed.

Therefore, we have two Winter mo'edim v'chagim which are alternatives to Greco-Roman Pagan holidays.

When Reform Judaism Puts Messianic Judaism to Shame, As Yeshuat Yisrael Messianic Congregation Could Exemplify

Amein, Yeshuat Yisrael: "Live a Godly lifestyle where the MESSIAH IS CENTER and the Torah is principle. The Torah is totally holy, but we are under no obligation to keep it. We are free to keep the biblical (still biblical) precepts of scripture. The key is individual freedom, not corporate legislative legalism. Messianic believers must hold firm that the Brit Chadasha is a very Jewish book and... the most Jewish thing that anyone could do is to follow the Jewish Messiah Yeshua. God offers a free gift that can not be obtained at the local rabbinic synagogue."

And isn't that Non-Messianic Reform Jews get that "We are free to keep the biblical (still biblical) precepts of scripture..." while many Messianic Jews do not sad? "The key is individual freedom, not corporate legislative legalism." The key is indeed what will bring more sanctity, as Reform Judaism echoes Romans 14 on. "As for practice, it strongly recommends individual study of the traditional practices; however, the adherent is free to follow only those practices that increase the sanctity of their relationship to G-d."

As for Romans 14, read it for yourself. Go right to Bible Gateway or Bible Study tools. I'm not doing the work for you.

Avraham Kept Torah shel Brit Chadashah

I may lose friends over this (aI have already lost at least one Facebook friend-- and she fooled me twice, anyway; shame on me for ever reconfirming her as a friend); but Tanakh is indisputably clear that one can keep either all 613 mitzvot-- which, since a Temple no longer stands, are impossible to keep-- or Brit Chadashah, which Avraham himself kept (cf. Bereshit 15:6). For:

eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the ...truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.
For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel [cf. Galatians 1:6-12].

By the way, I certainly won't allow gerim to ever come in and tell Jews like me that we have to keep a Torah that even Avraham couldn't have kept, anyway (He cheated with Hagar, remember?) and that Moshe couldn't keep (since he struck the rock and was not allowed to be b'Eretz Yisra'el). I'll also give Reform and other Non-Messianic Jews this: they run into many "Meshichim" P'rushim and think, "Well, gee; why leave Judaism and come to Yeshua if Messianic Judaism is no different? What's the point of being under grace if we still have to keep all 613 mitzvot? Really; even Reform Judaism works better for me."

They even say, " As for practice, it strongly recommends individual study of the traditional practices; however, the adherent is free to follow only those practices that increase the sanctity of their relationship to G-d. Reform also stresses equality between the sexes." This echos Romim (Romans) 14.

Moshe Looked To Torah Shel Brit Chadashah, and Legalistic "Messianic Judaism" Is Not Jewish

"Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘If a person sins unintentionally against any of the commandments of the LORD in anything which ought not to be done, and does any of them, if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD for his sin which he has sinned a young bull without blemish as a sin offering..."

Those who insist on keeping all 613 mitzvot make the blood worthless ("For it is impossible for those who...fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.", as Hebrews 6 partly reads.). They like to play pick-and-choose mitzvot while under grace, since they cannot possibly go to the Temple and offer a korban l'kippur.

Besides, "the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.", as Hebrews 10 partly reads.

To advocate that keeping all 613 mitzvot while under grace is a mitzvah, is a sin. Legalism is sin, and "if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?"

More URJ Arrogance: A Real Reform BA'AL Teshuvah Alright...

Richard Furman has hutzpah to be saying the following. Why did Moshe address the men, by the way? Moshe addressed primarily the men with He said to the people "'Be ready for three days, don’t go near a woman.'" The Ivri men and women understood this as that the men were not to have sexual relations with the women (and vice versa) during Hayamim L'Kiddush. And the ishim, being the roshim l'ishot, had to be addressed. Moshe was not being chauvinistic or "not do[ing] all of what he was told".




The moment of the revelation at Sinai is a curious moment; It begins with our text telling us how God tells Moses to prepare the Israelites:

וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָֹה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵךְ אֶל־הָעָם וְקִדַּשְׁתָּם הַיּוֹם וּמָחָר וְכִבְּסוּ שִׂמְלֹתָֽם: וְהָיוּ נְכֹנִים לַיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי כִּי | בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִשִׁי יֵרֵד יְהוָֹה לְעֵינֵי כָל־הָעָם עַל־הַר סִינָֽי:(שמות י"ט: י"-י"א)

God said to Moses “Go to the people and sanctify them today and tomorrow; they shall wash their clothes. They shall be ready on the third day, for on the third day Adonai will descend before the eyes of all the whole nation upon Mount Sinai.”(Ex. 19:10-11)

The actual delivery of this message is rather different:

וַיֵּרֶד מֹשֶׁה מִן־הָהָר אֶל־הָעָם וַיְקַדֵּשׁ אֶת־הָעָם וַֽיְכַבְּסוּ שִׂמְלֹתָֽם: וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־הָעָם הֱיוּ נְכֹנִים לִשְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים אַֽל־תִּגְּשׁוּ אֶל־אִשָּֽׁה:(שם, י"ד-ט"ו)

Moses descended from the mountain to the people. He sanctified the people and they washed their clothing. He said to the people “Be ready for three days, don’t go near a woman.”(Ibid, 14-19)

That Moses here is injecting a misogyny into the moment that God did not command is noted by Ellen Frankel in the Five Books of Miriam (117-118). Indeed, even the קול סתם, the narrative voice of Torah, tells us that Moses addresses “העם” whereas God told him to address "כל־העם", thus suggesting that Moses did not do all of what he was told. The injection of that misogyny, however, is not the main problem with this disparity, but rather that the change took place at all. This introduces the fundamental problem of mediated experience: the mediator necessarily changes the message.