|
After
being involved with the Union of Messianic Jewish
Congregations (UMJC) for a number of years (for
a time I served as the head of the Evangelism
Committee), and after completing their Yeshiva
program, I was given smicha (ordination) by the
UMJC at the Dallas conference in 1992. Several
years later our synagogue withdrew its membership
from the UMJC when it became clear to me that
Jewish Evangelism was not a priority to the UMJC.
I believed then, and still believe now, that any
organization, congregation or individual that
is not committed to evangelism is not healthy,
and will eventually head in an unhealthy direction.
Timeline
Of Events
In the
summer of 2,000, after speaking personally with
Mark Kinzer, who was the head of the UMJC’s seminary
program, it was clear to me that Mark had embraced
serious errors, like the Documentary Hypothesis
(see my “Refutation of the Documentary Hypothesis”
below). When asked about two Isaiahs, Mark admitted
to me that there were at least two Isaiahs, and
probably three, four or five! Mark also let me
know that Genesis 1-11 may not be real history,
based on real historical events, with real historical
people. Mark also embraced the “Unconscious Christian”
or “Unrecognized Mediation of Christ” doctrine
(see my article, “Sure As Hell” which refutes
this false teaching. It can be found at www.shema.com/marticles/marticles-015.php.
http://www.shema.com Also, Dr. Louis Goldberg,
of blessed memory, wrote a thorough refutation
of a very closely related error, the Two-Covenant
Heresy). Mark also teaches that the Roman Catholic
Church is an acceptable Christian Church, and
its Gospel is an authentic Gospel message (see
“Comments on Roman Catholicism” below).
A week
after discovering this information, I contacted
Russ Resnick, the General Secretary of the UMJC,
and let him know what I had found out. I followed
up that phone call with a summary of our conversation.
Russ Resnick’s initial response was to defend
Mark’s doctrine as being acceptable. That same
day I emailed Mark with my concerns. Mark and
I exchanged several emails about these issues.
Mark’s responses did not alleviate my concerns.
The matter
was submitted to a UMJC committee that met at
the national conference in Ohio during the summer
of 2,000. As I recall, the committee was composed
of three people: Dan Juster, Elliot Klayman, and
one other person. I was informed that the committee
met and decided by a 2 to 1 vote that Mark’s doctrines
were acceptable to the UMJC. Dan Juster and
the other man made a terrible mistake in this
decision. They tolerated serious error. They could
have prevented Mark’s errors from spreading further.
They were negligent as gatekeepers.
I disagreed
with that committee’s decision, and in February
of 2001 I contacted the MJAA, which our congregation
was then a part of, to let them know about my
concerns. I was told that at a joint meeting of
UMJC and MJAA leaders, the situation with Mark
would be discussed. That meeting took place, and
I was informed that the situation was discussed,
and that other than keeping an eye on the situation,
no further action was pending. I have further
talked to the MJAA, and they are more concerned
than ever that Mark is not teaching sound doctrine.
In November
2002 I warned my synagogue as part of a sermon,
which was later also sent out by email, that Mark
was denying that Jewish people needed to consciously
place their faith in Messiah in order to be saved.
On February 27, 2003, Russ Resnick emailed me
letting me know that he was initiating a joint
UMJC/MJAA resolution process against me. I met
with Elliot Klayman, who represented the UMJC,
and with Michael Wolf, who represented the MJAA,
on May 18, 2003. They both were sympathetic to
my concerns about Mark’s doctrine, and we decided
that a further meeting with Mark would be attempted
in the near future, but that meeting would wait
until after the UMJC conference took place in
Israel. I agreed that I would not publically speak
out further until our meeting took place. I also
said that I would only wait for a limited time,
so that the matter could be dealt with promptly.
That
meeting with Elliot, Michael, Mark and I never
took place because the situation changed as a
result of the UMJC’s Israel conference. In connection
to that conference, Rich Nichol was quoted by
the Jerusalem Post saying that the UMJC
does not believe that Jewish people who don’t
believe in Jesus are going to Hell. That made
this entire situation a public matter. The situation
further changed when I found out that Mark Kinzer
and Tony Eaton were in print advocating some form
of Dual-Covenant and Unconscious Christian heresies.
Their heretical quotes can be found below. The
situation further changed when quotes from various
UMJC leaders were printed in the Jews for Jesus’
Havurah article in the Fall of 2003. That
made this situation a public matter.
I continued
speaking out about this public situation. Russ
Resnick initiated charges against me for libel
and divisiveness and brought those charges to
the UMJC’s Judicial Committee. After looking into
the matter, they found me innocent of 8 of the
9 charges that Russ charged me with. The one charge
they found me guilty of, and which in their opinion
was slanderous, was my following statement to
my fellow UMJC rabbis: “I am writing to those
who are part of the Messianic Jewish Movement,
and affiliated with a UMJC congregation, to let
you know what has been happening between me and
some of the leadership of the UMJC. I write to
you believing that, because these issues concern
everyone, they should not remain private, and
you should know the facts. Recently I've made
some critical remarks regarding some of the theological
drift of some leaders in the UMJC. For that, I've
been threatened by Russ Resnick with the revocation
of my ordination with the UMJC. It seems to
me that Russ is biased, and is using his position
as General Secretary to try and punish dissent.”
Based
on this last sentence (the sentence in italics)
the Judicial Committed concluded that I was guilty
of libel charge against Russ on this one charge.
They also stated that this did not rise to the
serious level needed to take away my ordination
. However, Resnick ignored the recommendation
of the Judicial Committee, and went to the Credentials
Committee, who without contacting me, took away
my UMJC ordination. At the following delegates
meeting, the delegates allowed this decision to
be approved.
Heretical
Quotes
* “If
Abraham Heschel is not in heaven, I don't belong
there either, regardless of what I think about
Jesus. This is a person who had a deep personal
connection with God.” (Quote from an interview
with Tony Eaton, found on page 74 the Senior Thesis
of Gabriela Karabelnik, titled, "Competing
Trends in Messianic Judaism: The Debate Over Evangelicalism."
Gabriela’s Thesis was published for Yale University,
the Department of Religious Studies, April 12,
2002.
* “The
day is going to come in the judgment when all
these devout Jews are going to come before the
Messiah, and when they approach Him they’re going
to look at him and say, ‘Didn’t I know you?’ and
He’ll say, ‘Yeah, you did, you just didn’t know
my name.” (Quote from an interview with Tony Eaton,
found on page 74 of the Thesis).
* “The
Talmud says all Israel has a place in the world
to come.” Why? Because God made a covenant with
our ancestors. So it doesn’t become an obsession
for the Jewish people to worry about post-mortem
bliss. For some reason, it’s an obsession particularly
with evangelical Christians.... The focus on redemption
and salvation in the Christian world is wrong
- God’s role is primarily as a consummator, bringing
creation to completion. Redemption is there, but
it’s not the focus.” (Quote from an interview
with Tony Eaton, found on pages 74-75 of the Thesis).
* In
a recent article in the Jerusalem Post,
Rich Nichol said that he "does not believe
that Jews who have not accepted Jesus are doomed
to hell." (Jerusalem Post, July 3,
2003. “Zaka gets donation from Messianic Jews”,
pg. 4).
* In
an article entitled, Some People Call Me a
Heretic published in The Semi of Fuller
Theological Seminary, November 3-7, 2003, Stuart
Dauermann writes: I am a pretty well-educated
person. Still, I find it baffling when the
orthodoxy of my faith and the authenticity of
my life’s work is judged by my answer to the question,
“Do you believe Jewish people are going to hell
unless they believe in Jesus?” ... Lately,
some people have attacked my friends and me. When
they do, they are thinking and acting like a Greco-Roman.
Thus, they call me a heretic because I don’t
form my categories and/or fill my categories the
same way they do. To them, every Jew who doesn’t
believe in Jesus belongs in the category “going
to hell.” Only those who die in infancy or are
mentally defective get a break. However, I don’t
believe the Bible unambiguously supports their
claims. God may still have some surprises up his
sleeve. I argue he may just apply the benefits
of Messiah’s death and resurrection to some people
who loved and served God the best they knew how,
and who sought his mercy because they needed it,
even though they never received Messiah Yeshua
in the evangelical sense. I believe this is God’s
business and not mine. I am prepared to say, “I
don’t know the answer to that question because
it is not my business to know - it is God’s business.”...
While Greco-Roman theologizing involves fitting
new situations into a revered grid (i.e. old answers
to new questions), this Hebraic approach involves
asking new questions and perhaps finding answers
that haven’t been discussed before. I contend
it is not wrong to say, “God, it’s not fair that
these people should go to hell because they have
never received Jesus. After all, look how Jesus
has been represented to them by 2000 years of
persecution and prejudice! Look God: they seek
to honor you! Is there no place in your Kingdom
for them?” Here is a concrete example from my
synagogue. Judy visited a 100-year-old Jewish
woman who was blind and almost totally deaf. It
was not possible for Judy to get doctrine across
to Mildred, but she did go and visit with her.
A few days before Mildred died, Judy heard her
say clear as a bell, “Father, forgive me.” Now,
assuming she was talking to God, does “sound doctrine”
require us to say that God said to her, “Mildred,
I’d really like to help you, but you chose door
number two and the answer is behind door number
one?” Finally, I think any conclusions we draw
about people’s eternal destinies need to be made
with a heightened awareness of what we are talking
about, rather than in the airtight theological
grid which has a preformulated response for every
question. I think it is better for us to embrace
the rigors, uncertainties and agonies of beseeching
God for better answers, than to accept the closure
that comes from acquiescence to a system of theological
thought that gives us tidy answers but a terrible
God. Or so it seems to me.
* “Because
of the validity of the Abrahamic covenant, I believe
it's still as possible for a Jew who doesn't know
Yeshua to have a living relationship with God,
just as a Christian. But of course Yeshua is still
the Messiah and any Jew who knows Him is in a
better place and has more access to God than before.”
(Quote from an interview with Mark Kinzer, found
on page 75 of the Thesis).
* In
the “Letters” published by Jews for Jesus, which
accompanied the February 2004 publication Havurah,
Kinzer states: “He (God) makes a way for humble
and faithful members (as if a Jewish person who
denies the Son of God is “faithful”) of His people
to enter His presence through the unrecognized
mediation of Israel’s Messiah.” Contradicting
this, John writes: “He who has the Son has the
life; he who does not have the Son of God does
not have the life” (1 John 5:12). Those who do
not have the Son of God, who reject the Messiah,
are not humble, faithful members of God’s people;
nor do they have a way to enter into God’s presence
- a way in which they will be accepted, welcomed
and saved.
Comment:
In spite of these and other heretical statements
and his other beliefs which are outside of Evangelical
theology, Kinzer remains one of the leading theologians
within the UMJC and in charge of their Seminary!
It is foolish and negligent to allow Kinzer to
train the next generation of spiritual leaders.
Refutation
of the Documentary Hypothesis
Kinzer
claims that the identity of the author is not
relevant to the issue of inerrancy, but I disagree.
My faith may be naive, even child-like, but I
believe that where the Scriptures teach on the
identity of the author, we must accept that teaching.
The Torah itself says that it was written by Moses.
“So Moses wrote this Torah” (Deuteronomy 31:9).
“Moses finished writing the words of this Torah
in a book until they were complete” (Deuteronomy
31:24). The prophets say it was written by Moses
(Joshua 8:31, Malachi 4:4). The infallible Son
of God says it was written by Moses (Matthew 8:4,
Mark 7:10, 12:26, John 5:45-47). The inspired
Apostles say it was written by Moses (John 1:17,
Romans 10:5). Jewish tradition and teaching says
it was written by Moses. “V’zot haTorah asher
sahm Moshe leef-nay b’nay Yisrael, al pee Adonai,
b’yad Moshe.” Christian tradition says it was
written by Moses. But, starting 1800 years after
Messiah came, critics have arisen who deny what
the Torah says about itself, what the inspired
prophets, Messiah and His Emissaries say about
the authorship of the Torah. As to there being
more than one Isaiah, the Lord and His Emissaries
are clear that Isaiah wrote the entire book of
Isaiah (see Matthew 3:3, 4:14, 8:17, 12:17-21,
13:14-15, 15:7-9, John 12:38-41, Acts 8:28-33,
28:25-27, Romans 9:27-29, 10:16, 20, 15:12, and
other passages). Where the Scriptures teach on
authorship, we must accept that teaching.
The Documentary
Hypothesis has been thoroughly and sufficiently
refuted by those who hold to inerrancy. "An
Introduction To The Old Testament" by Edward
J. Young has an extensive treatment of the literary
criticism of the Torah. In his treatment of Isaiah,
he discusses at length the evidence for the single
authorship of the book by Isaiah. B.B. Warfield’s,
“The Inspiration And Authority Of The Bible” is
also recommended. Oswald T. Allis’, “The Five
Books Of Moses” and his work, “The Unity Of Isaiah”
are good. A large volume by F. K. Harrison of
the University of Toronto, “Introduction to the
Old Testament,” has some very good material dealing
with the higher critical position. Another recommended
work is Gleason Archer's “Survey of the Old Testament.”
Some scholarly works of Jewish authors who opposed
the Documentary Hypothesis include Rachel Margalioth's,
"The Invisible Isaiah" and Umberto Cassuto's
work on the Pentateuch.
The
Documentary Hypothesis has been ruinous to every
denomination that has embraced it. The Documentary
Hypothesis is contrary to sound doctrine, and
what the Scriptures teach about their own authorship.
The Documentary Hypothesis contradicts the doctrines
of Infallibility and Inerrancy . The Evangelical
Theological Society (a kind of Sanhedrin or Beit
Din in these matters) recently reaffirmed that
the Documentary Hypothesis is to be rejected by
those who hold to the Word of God. Those who embrace
it are outside of sound Evangelical theology.
Comments
on Roman Catholicism
The Gospel
that the Roman Catholic Church offers has been
perverted, and consequently will not save its
adherents. It has added to the Word of God by
acknowledging the Apocrypha as part of the Holy
Scriptures. It has added to the Word of God by
elevating Catholic traditions, laws and decrees
to the same status as the Word of God! In addition,
it has arrogantly declared the bishop of Rome
to be the infallible leader of the entire Church.
It invented the doctrine of a non-existent place
called Purgatory. There is no Scriptural support
for traditions and practices such as the sacrifice
of the mass, transubstantiation, prayers and masses
for the dead, indulgences, the worship of Mary,
prayers to the saints, adoring a piece of bread,
the use of icons in worship, holy water, rosary
beads and scapulars, a Roman Catholic priesthood,
the demand of celibacy from these priests and
nuns, and confession to priests to obtain absolution.
It has multiplied anathemas against Protestants
and against good Protestant Biblical doctrines.
I believe that anyone who can't say that the Roman
Catholic Church teaches a different and distorted
Gospel (see Galatians 1:6-9), should be removed
from any position of authority within the Messianic
Jewish Community.
Conclusion
Kinzer,
Dauermann and others remain within the UMJC, promulgating
heretical doctrines. I criticize the majority
of the leaders within the UMJC who maintain good
doctrine for not only tolerating those who teach
error, but also for allowing this situation to
get worse without taking appropriate action. I
criticize those leaders in the UMJC who are sound
in doctrine for allowing me to be railroaded when
I tried to bring this darkness into the light.
I consider myself to have been persecuted for
the sake of speaking the truth. I regard the removal
of my ordination with the UMJC as a badge of honor.
I recommend
that no one attend their conferences or support
the UMJC until all false teaching and false teachers
have been removed, and those who have been in
a position of authority to prevent this from happening
(like Resnick, Cowen, Juster, Fischer and others)
are reprimanded for failing in their responsibilities
as gatekeepers.
May the
good Lord grant those who have strayed from the
truth His grace and mercy, and bring them back!
|
