I believe the Master would have a few words for those "tzaddikim."

Seth | January 18, 2008 9:38 AM

Tell me about it.

Jeremiah | January 18, 2008 11:25 AM

That really burns my soup.

It's stories like this that cause me to question the sincerity of those who insist that what appear to be sexist attitudes are really just questions of "gender roles". Bull. People like those men in the story don't respect women or want to protect their "G-d given roles". They think women are garbage and I think it is reflected in the ways women are excluded from certain aspects of their religious life as a community.

I hope the men in the Messianic Torah movement are taking an honest, hard look at what 'learned men' have taught about what women should and should not be doing, and weigh it against what the scriptures actually say. Did G-d really say "I'm only taling to the guys here" or did men add a set of rules that keep their women from being full participants in the spiritual life of the community? Barefoot, pregnant, uninspired, untaught, and unclean.

Perhaps the women in Israel should start thrashing any ultra orthodox man who tries to step on a bus with them.

Personally, I refuse to step to the back of anyone's bus, and I can guarantee my husband would never allow anyone to try to put me there.

We're here. We're co-heirs. Get used to it.

MJ Belko | January 18, 2008 12:47 PM

Galatians 3:29, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Messiah Yeshua" (NASU) is admittedly not an easy text for today's Messianic community. The work of Yeshua has enacted a new status for human beings that did not fully exist before.

1. We are still struggling with what it means for Jew and non-Jew to be on an equal playing field in Messiah.

2. And, we often avoid what it means for males and females to likewise have this equality.

I know that as an egalitarian, one who believes that women should be able to occupy the same leadership roles as men in the assembly, that my views on this are often solicited, or for that matter welcome in today's Messianic movement. But too much of what I have witnessed in the Messianic world is that it is a movement run by men for men. Yet, as our movement grows I fully expect more women to take responsibilities--no different than Lydia who led the Philippian congregation.

Evangelicalism is presently wrestling with the issue of ordained female clergy. The Messianic community is not that far behind.

J.K. McKee | January 18, 2008 2:21 PM

Not that I would agree with the practice but first thing that came to my mind was a question: Does this have anything to do with the laws of Niddah? Not saying it does but it was the first thing that came to mind.

Jeremy Long | January 18, 2008 8:19 PM

when i read stories like this i am always reminded of acts 1:14 "All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers." no segregation the ladies where probably part of the minyan! as believers our call is to be servants first. as men our call is to love our wives as messiah loves his ekklesia, and to love all other women as sisters. let us be the light in those dark sad places and not be complacent or idle. shalom

brucks | January 18, 2008 11:58 PM

First, let me say that this is a rediculously poor interpretation of laws written when women were considerd property, and the language reflected such a system.
... that being said, let me take a different tack on this (please, no one yell at me, it's just an observation)
What would cause a woman to NOT want a seat in the back of the bus? Sure a feeling of duty toward social injustice, equality for everyone, preservation and furthuring of human dignity, all fairly recent additions to civilized thought. But aren't the laws regarding the roles and relationships of women and men a reflection of how we are ALL supposed to relate to G-d? We are ALL asked to give up our PRIDE and take a back seat to the L-rd! You know, don't take the seat of honor lest someone else more important show up and you'd be asked to move? Sure, it's humbling and even humiliating to be made to take a seat in the back, but Yeshua chose to take the most degrading and humiliating place on the cross for all of us! The back of the bus just doesn't seem so bad after that! Best solution: everyone sits in the back! then they'd have to ask people to move to the front, and inherit the Earth as a bonus!

Chris | January 19, 2008 7:48 AM

1. I am no way shape or form egalitarian and while I believe that men are not supreme to women I do believe that each gender has there own God given place and that men are to be men and women, women. At times Though not to this extreme that does mean separation.

2. It probably has nothing to do with Niddah.

Jeremiah.

Jeremiah D. | January 19, 2008 10:28 PM

In the past, I rode the bus for my daily work commute. Due to prohibitions on touching non-related members of the opposite sex I would go to some length to share a seat with a fellow female. It is difficult, if not impossible to avoid touching one's seatmate (on the type of bus I was riding in my U.S. city). When the bus is crowded to 'standing room only', as it often is during rush hour, I found it required having a window seat - if one is on seated on the aisle (or standing), lots of bumping with the standing passengers ensues.
I was likely the only person on the bus concerned with avoiding touching members of the opposite sex. Finding seating that facilited this was pretty easy for *just me*. On a bus full of people all concerned about avoiding touch with members of the opposite sex, it would be more difficult unless some sort of established segregation was in place. So, in principle, I can easily understand the de facto bus segregation. That being said, the level of harassement Ms. Ragen endured on a non-crowded bus is not understandable. What she described seems to go way beyond a simple concern to avoid touch, and seems to go to the level of 'keeping women in their (subordinate) place'.
Perhaps a better solution would to have the men voluntarily segregate to 'the back of the bus' so as to avoid forcing the social stigma associted with 'the back of the bus' upon the women, or perhaps segregate right/left of the bus rather than front/back.

-Laura (co-heir who chooses to touch only her husband/son and no other males)

Mrs. K | January 20, 2008 2:19 AM

I believe that the intentions Toby had in mind when he posted this was to actually protect Orthodoxy by showing that this is not a thing endorsed by all Orthodox Jews against the “everything orthodoxy does it evil people. However I do think that “Prevision of Torah” should read “prevision of Jewish law” since I do believe that it is a prevision to humiliate some one in the name of “Law.” Your comments on Rav Moshe Feinstein may be true but that was included in the post to again protect orthodoxy against thus who will say that orthodox men are sexist (which you and me know is not true).

Peace, Jeremiah.

PS Your comments on Japan are in lighting to this discussion.

Jeremiah | January 20, 2008 10:47 AM

I agree with Mrs. K that I would very much like to sit in an area reserved only for women. Although that option may not have been offered in the best way (I don't know, I wasn't there) in this particular situation, and certainly the reaction to disagreement was out of line.

That aside, some of the above reactions from our people were very disturbing to me. I think they show a profound level of immaturity in our movement in a few areas. The quickness and the ease with which we impune peoples motives, and then turn around and use it as "evidence" of other injustices that must stem from those same bad motives is terrible. We should be ashamed when that is our knee-jerk reaction.

Secondly it reveals ignorance of actual Jewish Law, Jewish history and the Scriptures to say that rules were put in place by "learned men" to keep their wives "Barefoot, pregnant, uninspired, untaught, and unclean", or that it is a community run "by men for men". Acting slighted so easily is a real obstacle to learning, and so we are left speaking of things that we know nothing about. Demanding that our treatment be identical to men, rather than equal reveals a lack of respect toward women. It minimizes our God given strength as women and the unique role we play in the community of faith. To say that we should act like men, is to say that women are not necessary. It completely dismisses the huge amount of wisdom, leadership, Torah knowledge, intellect and strength that women need to live according to Torah. Without generations of valiant Jewish women who took their responsibilities seriously, rather than clamoring to be treated like men, the Jewish people would not exist (God forbid), and the Torah would not be accessible to any of us. Thank God for women who are willing to be women! We need more of them.

Rachel | January 20, 2008 9:59 PM

I agree with Laura that this whole issue of segregation is not totally out of the blue. Only the way it comes across feels almost like the segregation on basis of skin colour which is of course not the case. When commuting to school I also prefer not to sit next to a person of the opposite sex (whom I dont know). Needless to say Im not in favour of the way the men on the bus handled the situation yet it may be noted that she actually went on the bus with a camera crew and deliberately went to the front. This doesnt provide an excuse for the harassment but it was obviously her intention to get this reaction.
For clarity sake; I dont think women are of any lesser value in the eyes of Heaven, on the contrary, because I value women I try to maintain a separation so that both of us may be pure before the Almighty.

Blessings,

Daniel

PS For those who have access to the forum, post a comment on the topic I opened 'Gender segregation'. And for those who dont have access... what are you waiting for?:P

Daniel_K | January 21, 2008 3:59 AM

I would love to participate in the forum, but unfortunately, FFOZ has only made it available to Torah Club members. I'm working on it, but I can't yet afford to make the monthly payments.

Is there a forum for the rest of us? If not, why not?

MJ

MJ Belko | January 21, 2008 9:08 AM

I strongly object to anyone claiming that women who want to be treated with some respect are trying to be men. I don't want to be a man. I wish more men would be men. Many of us women have had very ugly church experiences where a woman's only role was to set up and clean up after the Sabbath banquet every week. We have been consistently treated like second class believers, a mere afterthought. All in the name of gender roles. Sadly, most women are afraid to speak up about this, as they know they will be labeled as trouble makers who want to take over the congregation.

What I am asking from the Messianic community is an objective look at the Torah as it relates to women. I've seen too many men pick and choose which commands they will obey and how (wearing a kippa, tefillin, tzit-tzit, etc.), deciding to obey the rabbinic rulings for some things and declaring others mere tradition, but jumping on the rabbinic bandwagon with regard to anything they decided about women. The rabbinic rulings about women need to be subjected to very careful scrutiny. As much as some try to defend the decisions made over the centuries, a great deal of it comes off as spin and not truth. Rabbis of centuries past, like it or not, were influenced by the society around them and this helped to shape their ideas about women.

At what point do the scriptures say that a woman is to be considered in a perpetual state of niddah? Where does it say that a woman can't shake hands with or sit next to a man other than her husband? I have to deal with men other than my husband all the time. It is hurtful to me that the unbelievers I know treat me with far more respect and consider me far more valuable than my fellow believers (male) ever did.

Please tread carefully in this area. I am convinced that the reason so many woman get involved with the occult and New Age movement, particularly Wicca, is that women are considered important in those groups. Nobody wants to worship a god they are convinced loves them less than their male counterparts. Let the scriptures say what they say and don't let tradition nullify the Torah, even if that means having to say that some well-respected rabbi was wrong. If a command is gender neutral in the scriptures, no rabbi has the right to tell us to sin by not keeping that command simply because we are female.

This is important. It isn't about women wanting to be men. That's a cop-out. It's about how the community treats us. It's about living the Torah lifestyle as fully as possible. We want to obey G-d just as much as you men do, but centuries of opinion have clouded the issue and left us with a lot of unanswered questions. Scripture is scripture and tradition is tradition. Let's not lose sight of that.

MJ

**Toby's response:** Neither or nor Rabbinic Judaism considers woman to be in a perpetual state of Niddah. Not touching the opposite sex has nothing to do with this. It is about setting up fences and boundaries that do not allow for immodesty to take place. Traditionally it is just as taboo for a woman to touch a man as a man to touch a women. Why does this have to be looked at as being degrading to women and not men? Yes, it is only tradition but I personally think healthy boundaries like this could really help out the body of Messiah. We should ask ourselves why statistics of teenage pregnancy and adultery are the same amongst believers as in secular communities. It’s not about blindly accepting tradition but seeing the wisdom in aspects of it.

MJ Belko | January 21, 2008 9:41 AM

What I'm trying to address is the profound ignorance of Judaism's view of women. If men are using Judaism to browbeat women, and I've seen it happen, it needs to be stopped. let's step back for a moment and stop leveling broad, false accusations against something we know so little about. Let's leave the possibility open that the problem lies with these messianic men who are misusing what they learn. They often bring with them leftovers misogynistic ideas from somewhere else, and just read it into Judaism. There are two sides to the story. Judaism has a long history of being very progressive in it's respect for women and doing everything possible to protect femininity. Not without it's imperfections, of course. And you will find many different views, don't just believe the first thing you hear. This inability to give the benefit of the doubt is what is troubling. There are a lot of things taught in the messianic world that are just flat out false (where did the idea of perpetual state of Niddah come from?? And some of the messianic teaching out there on how to keep those laws are just weird and cruel). Other times the intent behind certain guidelines are grossly misunderstood. Instead of just lashing out, men and women both need to first verify the facts, and then try to understand the intent. There will be a lot less to be angry about.

Rachel | January 21, 2008 11:30 AM

Hot topic!

My Rabbi, Yeshua, had quite a radical idea of women and how to treat them. He clearly enjoyed their company, as they were almost always around. It even seems that he didn't mind them financially supporting his ministry. And he didn't have a problem with them touching him.

Then one of my Rabbi's disciples, Paul, seems to have been on the radical edge of society in terms of his thoughts and attitudes towards women. He taught respect of women, etc. He didn't freak out when Priscilla was the one with the gift of teaching and not her husband. He mentions women a lot in his letters - as in fellow laborers.

The 1st century church had women in leadership roles. Leaders, teachers, apostles, deacons, etc. Hashem gifts to both sexes and He expects those gifts to be used.

I'm not calling for "egalitarianism" (although, I really appreciate JK McKee's attitude & thoughts) but I want balance.

**Toby’s Response:** I am sure that you have met as I have men who are not secure in their manhood and have used things like this to exploit and degrade women. However, this post is not about that. It is about men and women who other than their wives and families do not desire to touch the opposite sex. it is not about being degrading or lowering men or women but rather it comes out of a desire to save that touch for their spouses. For men rather than degrading women it is actually placing high honor upon their wives and visa versa fro men. Here in our office most of our staff practices these customs and I can tell you that it makes for a very healthy environment where respect for everyone is upheld.

On a side note, one question I have always asked is that if the Master’s treatment of women was so radical for Judaism why did He not receive criticism for this like He did for other things?

Connie | January 21, 2008 2:47 PM

You make an excellent point, Toby. Maybe our Rabbi Yeshua's attitude toward women in general wasn't so radical, maybe we just have a twisted notion of the common views of Judaism. This is a touchy subject where misunderstanding is a real danger. Balance is key, and we all need to be very careful to think the best and ascribe good intentions. We will get a lot farther in fixing real problems.

Rachel | January 21, 2008 3:33 PM

Paul says that it is good for a man to touch his wife only.

Jeremiah | January 21, 2008 5:05 PM

Just to clarify my thoughts above, I do not believe in widescale ordination of women, but only women that fit certain requirements due to training, skills, temperment, etc.--the same exact skills that I would expect any men to have.

While we see some examples in the Apostolic Scriptures of where women in leadership may be prohibited, I think when we weigh all of the examples in Scripture, including those in the Pauline letters, that some today have placed women in a position that is not Biblically intended. We have to contextualize each instance and understand it for what it meant for its original audience before we then draw broad conclusions.

Certainly, there are natural separations between the sexes. No one is expecting men to suddenly bear children! And it is absolutely true that feminism has not helped, either. Yet, just as the Torah's commandments regarding slavery have clearly given way as Scripture does not present slavery as ideal, likewise changes have certainly taken place in Messiah which should bring us back to the equality of responsibility that Adam and Eve were originally to have.

J.K. McKee | January 21, 2008 6:51 PM

Regarding Jeremiah's comment above: "Paul says that it is good for a man to touch his wife only."

The passage I assume is being referenced is 1 Cor. 7:1, but translations differ on the strength and meaning of "touch" in that passage, with many texts translating the word "touch" but some translating it "have sexual relations with." I have not studied Greek, but I do know that in the Vulgate, both 1 Cor 7:1 and John 20:12 have the Latin infinitive "tangere" (to touch), but that John 20:12 has a stronger meaning of "cling to, hold on to" (rendered in the Greek as "haptou" I think.) Perhaps 1 Cor. 7:1 also has the stronger meaning?

I do believe that we are only to cling to our spouses, but as for public touch -- especially the type that takes place on a bus (aside from assulative groping in a super-packed bus/train) or through a handshake -- I do not think that was Paul was referring to in his teaching about marriage.

As an aside, the loss of acceptable public touch and this perceived need to be fully separate can be perceived as leading to a loss of chivalry. A wise young friend recently said, when I mentioned my concern about walking home from prayers at night but also wanting to be aware of not walking 1:1 in public with a man not my husband, "Better a man and a woman walking in public than a woman walking alone."

Shalom,
Tami

Tami | January 22, 2008 12:25 PM

I am new to the Messianic movement and have spent some time reading the blogs, this one and the kosher blog.
Reading these blogs makes me want to run back to my old understandings...I mean no harm when I say that I get the feeling from reading some comments that the writers of them really hold themselves in high esteem! It seems to me that the closer you are to Orthodoxy/Ultra, the more legit you are?!
I thought I understood from Yeshua that we are to be aware of the levin of the Pharisees....I read in the blogs that if we are grafted in, then we should act like the Jewish people do. My question is what Jewish people...the conservative Jews, the Reformed Jews, the Orthodox etc.....
I personally know people from each group and they will all tell you something different regarding the above topic and kosher topics. I am confused...and frankly afraid of getting deeper into this way of life if it means falling under the "watchful" eye of the community or hints of piety in the discussions. Who's traditions, yoke am I to take on?????
I do hope new believers are very careful as to what they read...because I understand how easy it could be to just turn back...or turn away from messiah to feel more legit!

**Toby's Comments:** This certainly takes balance and carefulness. The Master tells us to do what the Pharisees say and not what they do. the problem/ (leaven) he had with some Pharisees was not their teachings but was their hypocrisy. For me it is not about feeling more legit but doing things as Messiah would. He was very traditional.

JamieLynn | January 22, 2008 11:00 PM

As a teenage girl beginning learning about the messianic community, I weigh each new concept carefully and sometimes it takes me awhile to turn things over in my mind and come to a conclusion. One helpful resource I have read is the "Modesty" articles in messiah magazine. I have come to agree with the no touch rule between unrelated men and women, and I apply it in my life.

I find it pretty easy to avoid shaking hands with men, even though I shake women's hands. If you just have it in mind that it is not something to do, it is natural to express your posture in a way that respectfully says "nice to meet you" but doesn't look like I'm about to shake hands with the person. Of course, I am aware that it would be offensive in some situations to not shake their hand, so in order to not offend, I will shake a hand offered to me and be polite.

Sometimes you will have to deal with the person who simply is not aware that there ever was a no touch rule, such as the lady in our church who always has to hug EVERY person. It is a nice, southernly thing to do. It makes my dad uncomfortable but he cannot avoid her without hurting her feelings, so he just accepts that this is her way of expressing her joy at seeing us each Sabbath. I think he sometimes prays that she will read something like those modesty articles ; D

I think keeping each touch for your mate is an excellent thing to do. Even around other teenagers, I keep in mind that each young man will be someone's husband some day and would I want my future husband to be touched like that by some other girl? My dad always says every girl/woman ought to be treated like a lady.

Maybe some people have gotten too extreme. If I always had to ride the bus, I think I would like there to be a women's only section... unless I was riding with my dad. Who could make this decision for a whole city? The concept seems so strange to me. Although, it seems like it would make more sense to have the lady's section up front because it is safer and more polite for the lady to have to go a shorter distance. Maybe men there are not even supposed to LOOK at the women?

I really like the concept of EQUAL but not IDENTICAL. I think it shows much more respect to recognize the differences between men and women and treat each in their own way. Can any of you deny that there are communication differences between the two?!

I guess I don't have many firm feelings about women holding positions of authority. It is clear that women have been in charge for some things. In my mind, it would depend on the situation. If a woman truly feels led by God to be a preacher, or what have you, then who is to stop her?

As the first born, I have always been a leader-type. If God gave me a message and a mission then I would have no problem getting up and saying it. It's not like women aren't strong, physically or spiritually, and it's not like God doesn't speak to us. I just think there is a proper way to go about it. Like I said, I am the first born and I have been learning to be more respectful of my elders and the people in authority over me.

Like, if you think something should be changed in the church, you can't just go yakking about it to everyone; you need to be respectful and go to the person in charge of that thing, or the pastor, and speak privately to them.

Personally, I like to see a man taking responsibility and leading. I like that we have a male pastor. It makes me feel more secure that my dad is becoming more and more of a spiritual leader for our house. Even though they are not always right, even though they make mistakes, it makes me happy to see male leaders who deserve our respect. Would I vote for a female president? Well, that's a whole nother subject...

In conclusion, I know that God has made men and women to be different and complementary, and I think that it is good to put some distance between the two in normal situations. I also think that no man should have the attitude that women are lesser creatures who need to sit in the back and rather, have the chivalry to give up their seat for a lady. Also, people need to be slower to take offense. But don't give up! We're not in a perfect world, yet.

By the way: I can't wait to be bare-foot and pregnant, feeling the grass between my toes (on a farm with little sheep frolicking, of course) and knowing there is a tiny life within me that God has entrusted to mine and my (future) husband's care. No man has been blessed to feel those tiny movements.

God bless each and every one of you,
A.S.
Virginia

Alicia | January 25, 2008 3:23 PM

a couple of thoughts:

Yeshua said: The last shall be first, and the first shall be last... or something to that effect. The Lord sees what is done according to the heart, and will honor that action accordingly.
I would consider myself blessed to be able to give up my seat to honor another human being, in accordance with Torah and Yeshua's teaching. To be humble is preferable.
I like not being accidentally "bumped" into other males who are not my husband or family. A more equal separation would be down the aisle, rather than dividing front to back. This would only be economically feasible if an equal number of each gender travelled each bus trip.
On another point, many people on this Earth must walk to their destinations, due to lack of public transportation or money. It is a blessing to have public transportation available and not a right, whatever the seating. A seat would be better than the alternative.
Thanks for the opportunity to respond.

Jeanne L. | February 10, 2008 5:40 PM

Toby,

I noticed you made a comment about "watch out for the leaven of the pharisees" being in reference to the phariee's hypocrisy, and not their teaching. Here is your quote: "The Master tells us to do what the Pharisees say and not what they do. the problem/ (leaven) he had with some Pharisees was not their teachings but was their hypocrisy."

Here is what the Scriptures teach: "6 So when Yeshua said to them, "Watch out! Guard yourselves against the hametz of the P'rushim and Tz'dukim," 7 they thought he said it because they hadn't brought bread. 8 But Yeshua, aware of this, said, "Such little trust you have! Why are you talking with each other about not having bread? 9 Don't you understand yet? Don't you remember the five loaves of the five thousand and how many baskets you filled? 10 Or the seven loaves of the four thousand and how many baskets you filled? 11 How can you possibly think I was talking to you about bread? Guard yourselves from the hametz of the P'rushim and Tz'dukim!" 12 Then they understood -- they were to guard themselves not from yeast for bread but from the teaching of the P'rushim and Tz'dukim. (Matthew 6:6-12"

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, because I believe you had in mind the text that says "1 Then Yeshua addressed the crowds and his talmidim: 2 "The Torah-teachers and the P'rushim," he said, "sit in the seat of Moshe. 3 So whatever they tell you, take care to do it. But don't do what they do, because they talk but don't act! (Matthew 23:1-3).

But please be careful, because the leaven that Yeshua warned of was indeed the teaching of the P'rushim and Tz'dukim. In fact, Yeshua went on to say in Matthew 23: 15 "Woe to you hypocritical Torah-teachers and P'rushim! You go about over land and sea to make one proselyte; and when you succeed, you make him twice as fit for Gei-Hinnom as you are!

After all, it was the P'rushim and Tz'dukim that widely persecuted the many common people that followed Yeshua back in that time. And a similar situation exists today. So we do need to be careful about accepting the teachings of religious authorities who do not submit to the eternal rule of the Messiah.

Keep it real!!

Peace and Love in Yeshua,

Baruch

**Toby's Response:** Baruch, thank you for your comments. Even with that additional passage I still stand behind my original sentiments that the Master was mostly coming against the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. In my studies it appears to me that the Master’s teachings and lifestyle was most akin to that of the Pharisees. Also although there were Pharisees against Yeshua it was mostly the Sadducees who were the real problem. I would highly recommend you read Daniel Lancaster’s book “King of the Jews”.

Baruch Frost | March 7, 2008 3:47 AM

Toby,

Thank you for the reply. I will try to get a hold of Daniel Lancaster's book "King of the Jews", and read it. Also, I agree with you that the Messiah lived a completely Torah-observant life. He taught us to both observe the mitzvot and to teach others to observe them (Matt. 5:19). He also seemed perfectly comfortable with Jewish tradition, as long as it did not violate the Torah (*for example, Mark 7:1-13

But we must be especially careful when dealing with the "leaven of the P'rushim" in the context of the teachings of modern Judaism, as the general assumption is that Yeshua is not the Messiah, and the offices we (Messianics) claim He holds [eg. Cohen Gadol, Mediator between man and G-d, etc] are not even necessary.

This is important because Judaism has developed a view of sin that is completely out of line with the Scriptures, even claiming that the yetzer hara (understood to be Satan) was simply created to provide us with free will, and is really no big deal.

By misunderstanding the nature of sin and of the kingdom of darkness, modern Judaism fails to understand G-d's righteousness and the necessity of having a clean heart created within us. This in turn affects halacha, as the emphasis is no longer on having a pure heart (which can only happen through a miracle of redemption, since our hearts are by nature desperately wicked), so external mitzvot become the overarching concern.

Yeshua teaches heavily on this in Matthew chapter 23, with His "gnats" versus "camels" examples.

Sorry for the long post. I truly believe these are essential issues for us to deal with. Hopefully we will stay true to Yeshua, to the Torah, and to the calling we have received in Him.

Shalom,

Baruch

**Toby's Comments:** Thanks again for the comments. I think some of things you said about modern Judaism as generalizations. Certainly some forms of Judaism teach what you have said but this is really an over simplification. Many still teach the need for a mediator and almost all the need for a pure heart. Like I said I would encourage you to read that book.

Baruch Frost | March 12, 2008 3:17 AM