Talk:Messianic Judaism/Archive 3

message: wow, i'm amazed at the carelessness with which this article was written!  to say there are no legitimate jewish groups that consdier messianic judaism to be a legitimate expressionof judaism is careless and irresponsible.  there have been several books written by the most respected reform scholars that legitimize messianic judaism.  also, the article admits the messianic jews don't consider themselves to be anything other than jewish - yet asserts they are christians.  the article does this very flippantly without explaining WHY they're christians.  as others have pointed out in this discussion, orthodox jewish groups like chabad and bressler khassidim claim messiah has already come and even atribute divine identities to their messianic leaders.  do we ignore the fact that they consider themselves orthodox and start flippantly calling them christians?  of all the articles i've seen on this (usually very helpful) web site - it one is by far the poorest.
:Can you name the "several books written by the most respected reform scholars that legitimize messianic judaism"?  Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 21:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not going to look up who you are, anonymous.  There are a total of two authors, with one book each on the subject, both of whom conclude that MJ can be considered both Christian and Jewish.  These are mentioned in the article.  If you try to edit the article to say otherwise, you can look forward to quite a race to revert the edit. NathanZook 02:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: amazed

message: From my own firsthand experience, most member of these groups are not Jewish at all.  They may have had a Jewish great-grandfather or grandfather, but are no more Jewish than the Pope.
This is especially true of people involved in leadership.  A good background check will reveal that they are not Jewish at all, based on matrilineal descent.  OpenInfo 21:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So your edits are based upon original research?  Should I ask for arbitration & revert your edits based upon this statement?  In any event, I don't know about the MJAA, but the UMJC numbers are WAY higher than that.  NathanZook 02:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Between 1% and 25% of members are Jewish 

message: It has come to my attention that this article is:
1. Seriously biased toward views espoused by Outreach Judaism (a self-defined anti-Messianic group).
2.  Dominated and controlled by and Orthodox Jew who often promotes an anti-Messianic agenda.
3.  Highly inaccurate.
4.  Often contradicts itself as it presents misinformation.
As a public relations worker for the Israeli knesset, I can assure you that "mainstream" Judaism in Israel is mostly secular and humanist.  This Orthodox administrator pretends he represents "mainstream" Judaism when he is, in fact, part of a 20% minority.  True mainstream Judaism is pluralistic and and, according to the Dahaf Report, 78% of Israelis view Messianic Judaism as a legitimate expression of Judaism.
Among Orthodox Jews, I can assure you that most here in Jerusalem do not share this administrator's anti-Messianic zealousness.  Furthermore, over 90% of Knesset members have no objection whatsoever to Messianic Jews - including the Datim (Religious).  We Israelis - especially in the Knesset - are growing impatient with a very small percentage of datim who marginalize Messianic Jews and arrogantly claim all the rest of us support their views and behavior.  Let it be known, the radical views expressed and dominated in this article do NOT represent the views of most Jews, Israelis and certainly most in the Knesset.KnessetP.R.Guy 17:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation of Alert Tag 

message: There has been numerous 3rr violations in the editing of this talk page and this article, any edits in the future that continue this edit war will lead to blocking under the 3rr rule. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 20:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 3RR violations in this article and talk page

message: I attempted to finish my comments PinchasC unfairly blocked me and prevented me from expressing a realistic view of the subject.  He freely allows OpenInfo to vandalize my comments.  Hopefully these two users will allow my 10 years research and expertise on Messianic Judaism a little space below.
1.  Let's start with the opening paragraph.  Denominations of any religion officially registered and recognized by the US and Israeli governments cannot be called "loosely connected".  Wording such as "claiming connection with Judaism" is highly derrogitory.  Such language only serves to make this article read like propoganda for Tovia Singer.  This article spends no time interacting with "Defining Messianic Judaism" - the official publication of the UMJC.  That is the final authority on how Messianic Jews define themselves and why.
2.  Even the most basic understanding of and interaction with: a. the Apostles' Creed; b. Maimonides' 13 Principles of the Jewish Faith and; c.  Mainstream Messianic Judaism, would reveal Messianic Judaism is most definately an expression of Judaism and certainly not an expression of Christianity.  Not once does the article address this comparison yet uses inflammitory language to cast doubt upon the legitimacy of Messianic Judaism.  The language of the article needs an overhaul to be neutral.
3.  The article inaccurately claims the Messianic Jewish movement "began" in the 1800's.  We know from every first century source the Messianic Jewish movement existed 2,000 years ago and predates Christianity by over 300 years.  We see Messianic Judaism throughout the last 2,000 years.  Sometimes and in some places they existed in smaller numbers and other times and places they existed in larger numbers.  Connecting Messianic Judaism to the Chruch of England in the 1800's is not only factually incorrect, it is academically irresponsible.
4.  Further down the article, the author spends a lot of energy asserting Messianic Jews are evangelical Christians in disguise with no facts to back up such claims.  He uses more derrogitory language such as "the self-described Messianic Jewish movement."  Again, he does not interact with "Defining Messianic Judaism" - the official "self-definition" of the Messianic Jews; nor is this publication anywhere in his bibliography.  How could he pretend to know how and why Messianic Jews define themselves when he hasn't bothered to read their official position?
5.  Later he makes a sweeping statement, "Messianic Judaism is not seen as a legitimate form of Judaism by any recognized Jewish organization or leaders whatsoever" then contradicts himself, "Some individuals, especially Humanist [and Reform] Jews hold that messianic Judaism should be considered a viable approach to Judaism."  First he says absolutely no recognized Jewish organization recognizes Messianic Judaism, then admits organizations that happen to represent the majority of the Jewish community recognize Messianic Judaism.  In fact, the Israeli government recognizes Messianic Judaism as legitimate.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Israeli government a recognized Jewish organization consisting of recognized Jewish leaders?
6.  He makes sweeping generalizations about "evangelism" and "evangelistic tools"  without any facts to back up his statements.
7.  He contradicts himself on who Messianic Jews "really are."  In one place he wrongfully asserts they're from the Church of England, in another place he wrongfully claims they're Baptists then in another place he wrongfully claims they're Pentacoustal.  He finally generalizes they're a Protestant evangelism tool.  It is painfully obvious this writer has no idea who these Christian groups are in how they differ from each other.
8.  He makes strange comparisions saying Messianic Jews don't use terms like "Reverend" or "Priest".  Okay . . .  neither do they use terms like "Comrade", "Cleric" or "Dali Lama".  What could such ridiculous statements do other than to insult the integrity of Messianic Judaism.  If this article is supposed to insult Messianic Jews, then it doesn't belong in an unbiased and neutral enclyopedia.
9.  He wrongfully describes debates in Messianic Judaism concerning halacha for Gentiles.  While Messianic Jews are working out some issues related to Gentiles, the examples the author gives are laughable.  I've spent 10 years travelling around the world and interacting with the widest variety of Messianic Judaism.  I know beyond any doubt this author has no idea what issues are really debated between Messianic Jews - especially concerning Gentiles.
10.  Finally, I'd like to know why "See also" links include "Anti-Semitism" and the like.  It seems to imply Messianic Judaism is an anti-semeitic group of Jews.  Perhaps I am mistaken, but my misunderstanding here is legitimately based upon reading an entire article by somebody who obvioulsy wants to do everything possible to discredit Messianic Judaism and is capable of stooping so low as to equate them with anti-semitism and the like.
KnessetP.R.Guy 19:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation of Alert Tag Part 2

message: The Israeli Government's official position on Evangelical Christianity does not exactly allow it to have a neutral P.O.V. on this issue.   As we all are too well aware, the Messianic movement is almost entirely funded by Evangelical groups.
As this article from Christianity Today will prove , Israel needs strong ties with powerful Christian organizations in order to influence American Foreign Policy, and get the big bucks in U.S. funding (as well as the tourism $$).
Therefore, it will bow down to pressures from Messianic groups, who have a very powerful lobby.
OpenInfo 01:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: With a comment like that, in conjunction with your earlier remark that your wife is Israeli, the question is begged..."Israeli Arab?"  :-p  Tomertalk 18:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israeli Government in bed with Evangelical Christianity 

message: I've reverted a whole spate of edits.  I have been approached by persons wanting me to take sides in this argument; I have decided not to.  What I have decided is to "freeze" the article for a few days, hoping that a consensus version will emerge on the talk page.  Apart from minor edits, I am likely to revert any changes, representing ANY point of view, to the article for he next week or so.  As I said, I'm not going to take sides.  I'll declare my interest: I'm an evangelical Christian who is sympathetic to Messianic Judaism.  I'm telling you that so that you know where I stand.  I will NOT allow that POV to pervade the article however: this is not a propaganda bulletin, fan club, or online tract resource.  In keeping with Wikipedias rules, we need to QUOTE all points of view (with REFERENCES).  Any controversial POVs that are not sourced will be deleted.  Frankly, the theological question of whether MJ is an expression of Judaism, or of Christianity, or of something else altogether, is not for Wikipedia to settle.  If you can link assertions for such viewpoints to reputable sources, fine.  But as an encyclopedia, WE are not going to answer that question. Until a consensus emerges, I'm locking the article. David Cannon 12:46, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a distinct failure on the part of KnessetP.R.Guy to adequately source any of the many changes he made. Please don't rewrite the whole article. Please don't add unsourced information. You may remove information that is not well sourced, but take the time to discuss each item on the talk page. My personal position. I met one Messianic Jew who seemed more or less sane, considered himself a Jew, but was not a proselytizer, indeed was innocent of Christian culture or tradition. I don't have a dog in the hunt, being neither Christian or Jew (although I would probably attend the local Episcopal Church if it were not for the dense pall of incense). Fred Bauder 18:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversion 

message: I would move that this be called Messianicism, and not have the word "Judaism" in its title.  
This would remove the controversy, and eliminate the need for Jewish editors to review the article.
Otherwise, "self-definition", as KnessetP.R.Guy says should dominate the article, will always be disputed.   The "definition" as quoted from UMJC leaders, was actually written by a non-Jewish (in fact Christian) Minister.  However, it does not make mention of that fact, and instead claims to be a Jewish organization.  
That is a false statement, and therefore if it is included in Wikipedia, it should be appropriately referenced.
OpenInfo 20:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose Christianity would be one part of Messianicism and the Essenes and Messianic Jews another part. It's not a made up word, but is more commonly used in a political context as in "Slavonic messianicism". However Messianic Jews call themselves Messianic Jews. How they deal with Gentiles who chose to join their movement is their own business. What is the status of that "non-Jewish (in fact Christian) Minister"; is he considered a member of the movement? Is he considered a convert, or just as associate? Fred Bauder 21:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

text: That is an interesting point. I wouldn't have guessed that they would have adopted baptism. But what do I know. I would think that the Christians would have to convert. confusing subject. I'd like to see some sources for all this, one way or anther. Fred Bauder 01:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No one from a Christian Bible college is any kind of a Jew. Fred Bauder 01:57, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to change name of article