Shaye Cohen's definition of a "sect":
"A sect is a small, organized group that separates itself from a larger religious body and asserts that it alone embodies the ideals of the larger group because it alone understands God's will." ( From the Maccabees to the Mishnah P. 120).
I like this definition. So the questions rise:
Is Messianic Judaism UMJC style a sect?
Is messianic Judaism MJAA style a sect?
Is MJTI a sect?
Is Hashivenue a sect?
Is One Law a sect?
Is the "Divine Invitation" group a sect?
Is the Two-House group a sect?
Care to have a discussion?
The two things that immediately jump at me about the definition are, "What is small" and "What if you don't think your group alone understands God's will"?
ReplyDeleteI don't know about One Law in general, since there is such a variety of OL expressions in different congregations, but I never thought the congregation where I worship was exclusive about knowing the will of God. On the other hand, we're relatively small, so does that make us a "sect"?
I think that out of all of the organizations listed, your average One-Law place represents Shaye Cohen's particular definition of a sect the best. Why One-Law?
ReplyDelete- It's against Judaism (Rabbinics).
- It's against Christianity (Pagan).
- It's against Messianic Judaism (Rabbinics and "exclusionary")
- It's against Two-House (unhelpful "diversion" from pure One-Law)
- It's against "Divine Invitation" (traitors to the cause)
I'm with James on this one: by no means do I think One Law or Two House or Hashivenu style, or even the broad Messianic movement itself has a corner on truth. They obviously distinguish themselves from greater Judaism or greater Christianity, and in that sense they're a sect.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you ask?
James,
ReplyDeleteThis too is from Shaye Cohen:
" A sect must be SMALL enough to be a distinctive part of a LARGER RELIGIOUS BODY. If a sect grows to the extant that it is a large body in its own right, it is no longer but a religion or a church. The precise definitions of "large body" and "church" are debated by sociologists. In the period under review in the book, two Jewish sects (or sectlike groups) outgrew their secterian origins to become independent religions. out od theChristian sect came Christianity, and out of the Pharisaic sect came rabbinic Judaism, also known as simply Judaism."
And this to answe your question:
"Sects asserts that it ALONE EMBODIES THE IDEAL OF THE LARGER GROUP. In Jewish terms, this means that a sect sees itself as the true Israel. At best all other Jews are sinners; at worst, they hardly deserve the name ISRAEL at all."
Gene, you did not relate to any of Cohen's definitions. You invented your own. Stop with the red herrings, and stop being so toxic or I will not let your comment go through.
ReplyDeleteJudah,
ReplyDeleteDon't we all think that we have a corner on the truth? It is not if we really have, it is, we think we have.
this is why I ask.
Thanks, Dan. Then I'd have to say that, at least the version of "One Law" I envision is not a sect as long as it doesn't think it has the corner market on truth. Unfortunately, there are probably some OL congregations that do believe they are "the only ones", but then again, so does the Catholic church, the LDS church and the Church of Christ.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the "One Law" label is that it really doesn't describe a single worship entity. It's a convenient pigeon hole in which to drop all Gentile-run Hebraic-based faith groups, however, beneath the "umbrella" category, there's a wide variety of styles and beliefs.
If I had my "druthers", I'd "druther" be added to a category (if I have to belong to one at all) that includes Gentiles who worship in a "Hebraic" fashion and who are driven by the Word of God and not by a desire to be a "fake Jew". Hebraic worship of Yeshua in the first century included both Jews and Gentiles. Eventually, styles and theologies separated and became redefined, but originally, even the pre-Yeshua Gentile God-fearers worshiped in a synagogue.
What people like me are really looking for is a way to recapture the understanding of God from the Hebraic perspective and see the scriptures through those eyes, not to perform Jewish religious practices for their own sake (see What Do We Worship and Why?).
@Gene: It occurred to me just a little while ago that OL probably doesn't hate "Rabbinics" so much as they just don't understand "Rabbinics". Most folks in OL congregations don't have the benefit of a classic Jewish education and, as a result, when they encounter the various writings of the sages and the sheer amount of material involved, they likely balk. Also, some of the rabbinic interpretations of events in the Bible can seem, from the perspective of the uninitiated, rather unusual, mysterious, or even counter to logic.
ReplyDeleteBy comparison, many of these same folks are very familiar with the Bible and the meanings for Biblical events they are accustomed to, so this, more than "hating" Rabbinics or "hating" Judaism, may explain their shyness about the writings of the sages.
James,
ReplyDeleteRead this:
http://www.torahresource.com/EnglishArticles/OneTorah_not_OneLaw.pdf
Thanks, Dan. I read it before when Judah posted it on his blog. I agree that the Bible is the Word of God and even MJ/BE would probably say that the oral traditions are overwhelmingly written for Jewish people, so it may be moot for most Gentiles to study them. Also, even in Judaism it's agreed that a Bible command takes precedence over a Rabbinic command.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I can see a justification for at least some of the oral teachings to "fill in the gaps" of the commandments. For instance, when God commanded the Children of Israel to wear "fringes" on the corners of their garments, He didn't specify how to do this. We have to conclude that either Moses made up a specific procedure, or he got it from God during their 40 days together on the top of Sinai.
I don't oppose Jewish observance of all of the written and oral Torah (why would I?), but if MJ/BE says that the vast majority of even written Torah doesn't apply to Gentile believers, why would they be concerned if Gentiles didn't see most or all of the oral law not applying to us?
@Gene, "One Law" against "Rabbinics" - man, you need to get out more. Although Tim Hegg does not want to be called "One Law" - it is the label that Resnick put on him - and the Siddur from Beit Hallel where Tim teaches is extremely "Rabbnic."
ReplyDeleteYou might call me "One Law" and yet I am very orthopractic. Who is more frum, you or me < grin >?
In assessing the definition I think we can conclude that every organization on the list possesses some characteristics of a sect. Some more than the others? Yes! But are they sects?
ReplyDeleteCohen's definition stems from his research of the period he covers, does it apply to organizations today? Well, you do the math.
1) Messianic Judaism UMJC style:
Small? Compare to what? It separates itself from Christianity (one bloger even says that MJ is a religion), It also separates itself from mainstream Judaism, despite their unceasing efforts to revers the course. Messianic Judaism UMJC style also separate themselves from other parts of the Messianic Movement.
MJ (especially MJTI and Hashivenu) thinks that they alone understand God's will.
2-7) See # 1.
Again you do the math.
"Gene, "One Law" against "Rabbinics" - man, you need to get out more."
ReplyDeleteRick, denying reality will not make it go away.
"You might call me "One Law" and yet I am very orthopractic. Who is more frum, you or me < grin >?"
Rick, I know, I know, you claim to be a lot of things: "Chassidic...Messianic...mystic, Calvinist...Orthodox Judaism...Christian...Zionist...One Law"
Gene, I think you're ignoring the alternate explanation I posed a couple of comments ago about why most Gentiles would find the writings of the sages to be hard to absorb, as well as whether or not most of them would apply to Gentile believers anyway.
ReplyDelete@Gene, BE folks seem to do a lot of talking past people and not listening. I am amazed at what is purported to be "scholarship" in the camp. When honest biblical objections are raised, they are ignored. Instead of answering textual questions, the "answers" are based on cultural, sociological, and philosophical positions. Masters of anachronism, they talk a lot, and say little.
ReplyDeleteThe "reality" as you put it, is that the Bible (all of it, not just Acts 15, and Galatians) is quite clear that there is only one people of HaShem. Denying that reality only makes BE sound like they are out of touch with a great movement of HaShem.
In a previous post, you made a point that only "halachic" Jews can make aliyah to the Torah in "your" shul - and then you defined "Jewish" as orthodox Judaism does. That seems to be the irony here: BE depends upon orthodox Judaism for its identity, and yet orthodox Judaism completely rejects BE on the similar grounds that BE rejects Gentiles. What is ironic is that BE wants to be a "sect" of normative Judaism and seeks to define itself that way - and yet the very definition used to exclude those pesky Gentiles excludes BE as well. Normative Judaism does not consider you to be "halachic" Jews. Isn't it ironic that between "One Law" and normative Judaism, it is those mean "One Law" folks that consider you to be Jewish? In "One Law" congregations, you would be first to make aliyah...
The fastest way to obscurity is to allow your detractors to define you.
Oh, and I am waiting for you to take my challenge. Who is more "rabbinic" - you, or me?
"Oh, and I am waiting for you to take my challenge. Who is more "rabbinic" - you, or me?"
ReplyDeleteFair enough. First of all, let's check something. Instead measuring degrees of frumeness between you and I (I never defined myself as "frum"), since you defined yourself as practicing "Orthodox Judaism" specifically let's see if you actually do as you say:
- Do you do "Netilat Yadayim Shacharit" - washing of the hands before you rise from your bed in the morning ?
- Do you say 100 brachot (as specified in siddur) during each day? (each one for a separate thing you encounter or do during the day).
- Do you walk to shul on Shabbos and do you not turn on electricity during that day at any time for any reason?
- Do you pray in a minyan three times a day as required (when not traveling, of course)?
Hey guys,
ReplyDeleteCan we stick to the topic please? What, and who is a sect?
@Rick. So that the topic can be maintained here, I've been having a similar conversation with Gene in the comments of one of my blog posts if you'd like to jump in.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the interruption, Dan. Carry on. :)
"The "reality" as you put it, is that the Bible (all of it, not just Acts 15, and Galatians) is quite clear that there is only one people of HaShem."
ReplyDeleteSorry for getting away from the "sect" theme, Dan (not sure what more can one add to that end), but that's not the reality (regarding only "one people). What you as One-Law rep mean by "one people of HaShem" you mean there's only one NATION: Israel. However, this not what the Bible says, since to G-d all the nations he made will be his PEOPLE (with Israel as the had of the nations but not THE ONLY PEOPLE).
"The L-RD Almighty will bless them, saying, "Blessed be Egypt MY PEOPLE, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance." (Isaiah 19:25)
Which means you Mr. Spurlock will probably be part of "Scotland My People" - if that's the land of your likely ancestors:), but I will be part of Israel "my inheritance" (will be hanging out there together with Dan:).
@Gene, LOL you assume that my father is from Scotland?
ReplyDeleteAmerican Jews
I am not Morgan, but he is famous and I am not.
Assumptions can get you into trouble Gene < grin >
OK, to stay on topic... I am NOT in the sect of "Morgan-Spurlockists"
A sect is a small, organized group that separates itself from a larger religious body and asserts that it alone embodies the ideals of the larger group because it alone understands God's will
ReplyDeleteIs UMJC/MJAA/MJTI/Hashivenue/Divine Invitation style a sect?
Yes, a sect of Christianity. To some degree, some in those camps want to be a sect within Judaism and define themselves as such. However, normative Judaism rejects this identiity because their orgin is clearly "Christian" and their "Jewishness" is not only questioned, it is rejected by normative Orthodox Judaism.
Two-House/One Law a sect?
Their self-definition (like MJ/BE) is to be a sect within Judaism. However because they reject conversion and have origins within Christianity - so to normative Judaism they are seen as a sect of Christianity.
"[Two-House/One Law] self-definition (like MJ/BE) is to be a sect within Judaism."
ReplyDeleteReally? I've never heart of THAT. Dan, do you consider yourself part of "Judaism"? Because I distinctly remember you saying that you do not.
Gene,
ReplyDeleteDon't get personal. You know i can dish just as I can take, so stop it. Did not let the comment go through.
I stumbled on this thread/blog just today. Interesting stuff...
ReplyDeleteI think they are all sects. No matter how much each group/organization may make claims that they are "authentic," or even "open to everyone." Each group's "authenticity" claim is a denial of the communities that gave them a start, and each group's "openness" doesn't hold too much clout if the groups they are open to are not open to them!
It's a price we all have to pay by being who we are.
I pray time will heal all the wounds.
That is of course, if we don't kill each other off before reconciliation can take place.
Benjamin,
ReplyDeleteThanks for coming to my blog.
I totaly agree with you. I know for sure that when Messiah comes we would all look like fools....
"I totaly agree with you. I know for sure that when Messiah comes we would all look like fools...."
ReplyDeleteDon't be so hard on yourself, Dan. I know that you got at least one thing perfectly right - there's no "Two-House Micky Mouse" thing:)
Most agreed Dan,
ReplyDeleteLet's hope we'll be the fools He recognizes!