For I am the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. (Isaiah 43:3; ESV)
Being a Jewish follow of Yeshua has made me very sensitive to misunderstandings between Jewish people and non-Jewish Christians. After becoming a believer I discovered the linguistic gap that exists between these two groups. Even though English is the main language used, how Jewish people and Gentiles use it is different, especially when it comes to issues of faith and religion. For example, non-Jews are comfortable with using the word "crusade" to refer to any enthusiastic, organized pursuit of a cause, while to Jewish ears, the term tends to evoke very strong negative emotions due to our suffering at the hands of supposed Christians during the "Crusades" in the 11th to 13th centuries. When non-Jews think it is silly for a Jewish person to feel nervous about a religious event being called a crusade, then that just proves my point about this linguistic gap.
TorahBytes is a biblical commentary from a Jewish New Covenant perspective. This demands using terms that are more Jewish in nature. This should not be that hard to do since the entire Bible (Old and New Covenant Scriptures) was written from that very perspective and within that cultural framework. But since New Covenant faith has developed through history within a predominantly non-Jewish framework, much of its terminology is not understood within the Jewish community. For example, most Jewish people (and many Gentiles for that matter) don't know that the word "Christ" means "Messiah". Christ, from the Greek "christos," became the preferred designation for Yeshua, because Greek was the trade language of the world at that time much like English is today. First century Jewish people, many of whom spoke Greek, knew that Messiah, from the Hebrew "mashiach," and "christos" meant the exact same thing with the latter having no associated negative connotations whatsoever. The term "Messiah" is used in TorahBytes exclusively to ensure that Yeshua is understood to be the expected Jewish Davidic King and not some pagan concept.
One of the downsides of the exclusive use of Jewish terminology is the possibility of neglecting certain important biblical concepts due to their having negative connotations or being regarded as irrelevant within the Jewish world. One such concept is "savior". That this is a biblical concept is clear from the verse from Isaiah quoted at the beginning, but among Jewish people "savior" is thought of as an exclusively Christian, non-Jewish concept. Its lack of use in Jewish circles is partly due to the Christian overemphasis on the individual's personal need to be saved from damnation in contrast to the Jewish limited view of the Messiah as a national hero - the King who will deliver us from our oppressors. There is truth in both viewpoints and to fully understand the Messiah's role we need to hold both aspects in balance.
The neglect of the biblical understanding of God's role as Savior has contributed to the common Jewish misunderstanding that we have no need of a savior at all. For most Jewish people, we ourselves are the source of our own salvation. Judaism is regarded as God's prescription for whatever problems we have in life, and if we don't follow the prescription, then we are the only ones to blame. This fails to accept that the Torah and the rest of Scripture make it clear that we cannot save ourselves. In fact biblical Judaism was designed to prove this to us and that without a Savior we are lost both personally and nationally.
The Jewish world is not the only community that has neglected the concept of savior, however. Almost every philosophy, religion, spirituality, and way of life today (Christianity and Messianic Judaism included) is based on the notion that it's up to us to fix life's problems, personal or global. I am not saying that we have no part in dealing with the ills of life, but to effectively address those problems, we need to begin with relying on God as Savior. Instead of "God helps those who help themselves", it should be, "Those who rely on God will be helped."
6 comments:
Shalom Alan,
I agree wholeheartedly with your Torahbyte on the word "Savior". It was clear, concise, well- written and biblically sound. I also use Hebraic terms in sharing with non-Jewish Believers in Yeshua as well as Jewish people in general but also include the English so that they will know what I am talking about. For me, it is imperative that I use Hebrew words for clear understanding of these words like Messiah, Torah, salvation, righteousness, redemption, sin, evil, satan, etc. Without the Hebraic background, the scripture passage or word can be interpreted anyway one desires to support perhaps an incorrect understanding. And sad to say, this is what usually happens and new doctrines are conceived that are accepted as truth. For example, when Yeshua said,"the Kingdom of G-d suffers violence and the violent take it by force" what did he mean? The passage has nothing to do with violence as we perceive violence from a western perspective. Yet this interpretation begat a following several years ago in Christianity known as "Kingdom Now".
Keep up the good work with Torahbytes. May HaShem richly bless the work of your hands (and heart).
Reuven,
Well said, but a word of caution. Just because we use a Jewish or Hebraic interpretation does not automatically make it correct. My goal is to discover the Scriptural interpretation, which is most often found in context. I am wary of (which may not apply in your case) of people who claim that their interpretations are correct based on being more culturally sound, when cultural understandings can be misinformed and misapplied.
Alan
Alan,
You are absolutely right when you say that the context of a biblical passage is important in order to understand it. I also believe that understanding the culture of the people in the land during the 1st century helps us to understand more clearly what is being said and what it means. For example, what was the woman with the issue of blood for 12 years reaching for when Yeshua was walking through the crowd? She was miserable because of her uncleanness and considered to be an "untouchable" by her family and community. Most translations say "hem" but the most correct translation is corner (which can also mean "wing") The word in Hebrew is kanaph. What were in the corners of Yeshua's garment? Tzitzit or fringes as commanded to be worn according to Torah. What do the tzitzit represent? The word of HaShem which, in fact, is the totality of all that HaShem is. That woman knew that if she could only grasp the tzitzit, she would be healed because according to Malachi 4:2 it is written that the sun of righteous will rise with healing in his wings. This is a prophetic word about Messiah. In Psalm 84:11, HaShem is called a "sun and a shield"; the only place in Scripture where He is call "sun". So who is this Yeshua? I find this fascinating, illuminating, and makes the Scriptures even more alive for me personally.
Reuven,
Note that most of what you explained is right in the text. I find that cultural and historical studies help us from taking the text into places it should not go. But the actual meaning of the text is found within its Scriptural context.
Alan
Alan,
I am sorry but I do not understand your response especially when you say " I find that cultural and historical studies help us from taking the text into places it should not go."
MY experience has been that when Christians are shown the Hebraic background to a passage, and this one is a great example, the passage becomes even more alive than before. It suddenly makes sense. It explains why she wanted to touch the Master, and especially the Tzitzit. She understood who he was and the reference to Malachi 4:2.
Can you please clarify your response for me? Thanks!
Reuven
Reuven
Reuven,
Scripture is inspired, inerrant, and authoritative; the study of history is not. While cultural insights can be helpful, there is no way to confirm their accuracy and their interpretation can be very subjective. The essence of the primary meaning of a passage is found in its context, not from extra-biblical sources. Note I am not saying that cultural and historical insights can not be helpful. It's that we need to make sure that they don't become the interpretive filter through which we understand the biblical text. The controlling factor needs to be the text itself within it's immediate and biblical context.
Post a Comment