Can Mormon Jews observe the Torah?
Posted on May 24th, 2006 by Adam Greenwood
I just read a fascinating post on Jews who convert to Christianity but who believe God still requires them to keep the Law and has a special covenant with the Jews still.
My first impression is that it would be a lot harder to take this position as a Mormon. The Book of Mormon is pretty explicit that the Nephite and Lamanite Jews stopped keeping the Law of Moses once Christ came. Also, Mormons have a pretty robust understanding that we are all part of the house of Israel and, indeed, that Gentiles are saved by being adopted into the house of Israel. So if the law of Moses still had any force, it seems we’d all be keeping it.
Still, I’m interested in what people have written on this subject, and in what you think.
» Filed Under Any
Comments
32 Responses to “Can Mormon Jews observe the Torah?”
Leave a Reply
Well, some observances aren’t really problematic at all.
No pork? Fine by us, as long as you don’t push it on others. It’s unlikely to be a problem if you choose to celebrate the Jewish holidays either. Plenty of Mormon families do it purely as a teaching moment.
But those are superficialities of course.
As far as the Law of Moses is concerned. Well … animal sacrifice was done away with. But I just don’t think that Christ’s teaching that the Law of Moses was “done away with” in Him really means that all observance was hereby terminated.
My dad always used to say that “if you actually observe the Law of Christ, you will observe the Law of Moses as a natural consequence.” The Law of Christ is a higher law. It supercedes, embellishes, and interprets the lower law. But it never did away with the lower law altogether.
But I’m really just speculating here. It’s been pointed out that actual Jewish observance of the Torah varies wildly from location to location and sect to sect. So what observances are you talking about?
Finally, Mormons are big on showing solidarity with each other. Sometimes this encourages members to imitate each other in the hope of blending in peacefully. Practicing “LDS Jews” might run afoul of this social impulse.
There must be some reason that those Jews believe that the Law wasn’t fulfilled by Jesus.
I don’t know. The law is pretty clear that these observences were to be henceforth and forever. I know we don’t observe them, but I don’t find a lot of ambiguity in their issuance on the matter that we should.
And I don’t find Jesus saying we shouldn’t either. But maybe I missed something. However, for those interested in showing me what they think I’ve missed, I’ll not that I haven’t missed any of the references to Jesus fullfilling the law. I just don’t see anything about “never again observe the Feast of Tabernacles,” or, even “you never again have to observe the Feast of Tabernacles.” So if I’ve missed something like that, feel free to point it out to me.
I stand by my bubblegum comment in that one thread where we talked about whether Mormons can wear crosses on their own time. If you’re not teaching it in Sunday School, and you’re not running afoul of the covenants you’ve taken as a Latter-day Saint, I don’t see any barriers to feeling free to live your life any way you please.
The beginning of the end for the Mosiac ordinances (from the Old World perspective) was the Apostle’s decision that Gentile converts to Christianity were not required to be circumcised (Acts 15). Before that, Christianity was seen as a faction of Judaism; after that, it became more and more its own religion, casting off the old performances and ordinances. The break in the New World was anticipated and much cleaner.
Oh please, this issue is a major theme in the NT and was settled by the ancient church. For the Jew becoming a Christian who is comfortable keeping all the old traditions (animal sacrifice excluded), that is fine. But don’t impose those traditions on the Gentile converts. In other words, the Gentile doesn’t have to pass through Judaism to find Christ. That’s one of my beefs with our over emphasis of the WofW; it has become our circumcision in an age when we’re not supposed to have such barriers to entry for the new converts.
It’s clear from the NT that Gentiles who converted didn’t have to follow the Law, but I have read recently that Paul doesn’t explicitly apply that to Jewish Christians. Now I’m going to have to hunt down whatever it was I was reading…
Mike, Steve, and Ben have put their finger on the question. Its clear from the New Testament that gentiles no longer have to keep the law. But is it so clear that Jews don’t have to keep the law anymore? I think Mormons have reasons to believe that Jews don’t have to keep the law anymore, but I’m not sure its clear from the New Testament.
When we are baptized we are adopted into the House of Israel. As such, there is effectively no difference between covenants we have made and covenants a Jew would have made. Once adopted there is no difference. This is one of the more critical messages of the Christian Gospel, that no matter what our heritage, we will be treated equally. Even the system of tribes works this way. Every member of the church is also a member of a tribe. It does not matter if we were adopted or born into that tribe.
Our current ordinances are the modern equivilants of Judiac ceremonies and practices.
Additionally, many of the individual commandments of the Law of Moses (don’t eat with gentiles, don’t eat certain types of food) were specifically done away with, making it impossible to contend that it is necessary for a Jew to continue to observe the Law of Moses.
Furthermore, if it were still necessary for Jews to observe the Law of Moses, the GA’s would have addressed it, as observing the Law of Moses was as important as getting baptized, taking the sacrament, observing the WoW, etc in its time.
I think you’re right, KMB Anonymous. I don’t think other faiths have this clear understanding or not, but we do. However, your last reason (that if such were the case the GAs woudl have addressed it) doesn’t seem right to me. In a church built on fallible humans receiving revelation line upon line, precept upon precept, I don’t think we can come to any conclusions just because the prophets haven’t said anything specific about an issue one way or the other.
I suspect Adam, that the Jews are still bound by the Law of Moses until they accept the higher Law of Christ. That’s why I find the trend toward secularization of American Judaism highly disturbing.
You may be right.
My bishop is a Jew. I think I’ll ask him.
The question of Jewish-Christian observance of the Torah was the primary topic for much of the New Testament. Indeed, this may be THE topic of Paul. As it stands, the NT texts come down in a variety of ways on this issue. Matthew starts out in strong support of the continued observance of the Law, but ends with only the Gentiles understanding who Jesus really was. James is in favor of the Law. Paul is hard to pin down. Acts 15 is a weird compromise that no one else besides Luke seems to have heard of (with a few random references).
Many scholars today following the New Perspective on Paul have argued that Paul does not beleive that Jews should abandon the Law (see Stendahl, Sanders, Gager). In this view, Paul argues that the Law should not be observed by Gentiles, but may be continued to be observed by Jews. This is a controversial interpretation. There are three main issues relevant to this discussion:
1) This interpretation of Paul is fueled by a senstivity to anti-Jewish readings of the NT, such as those displayed by comments like “lower Law” and others which cast Jews as religiously inferior to Christians. Basically, this view is taken as the first step on the path to Auschwitz for many modern interpreters, though most Mormons continue to characterize Jews in the NT and today in these terms.
2) What kind of Law is being refered to? It is not the entirety of the Torah. The main Laws that were at stake in early christianity were festivals, circumcision, and food laws. These were the Laws which made Jews Jews, and not Gentiles. That is, these laws sustained Jewish identity over and against Gentile identity. It is a serious mistake to think that NT references to the Law are anything more than this.
3) What is at stake is whether a new community which includes Jews and Gentiles can continue to allow practices which create differences between them. Can the be separate, but equal, or does the universality of the Gospel prevent exclusive, particularist practices? However, even if the Gospel “allows” Jewish particularity, it is still based on a principle which erases that particularity because it is seen as optional.
Adam Greenwood (#10), understanding that there is fallability in the church (I certainly do agree with this), what I meant was that a core doctrine like baptism or the sacrament would not be left behind by GA’s, and supposing that they did leave such critical, core ordinances and practices behind, it would not seem to be in the place of members (however scholarly) to determine whether Jewish practice of the Law of Moses were still necessary at this time. It was commanded of old by “GA’s” (prophets such as Moses), and if the practice were to resume among the Jews I can only assume that God would use the same messangers that He did in times past.
IMHO, it would be impossible that practice of the Law of Moses would be a requirement when this amount of uncertainty, and no word from GA’s, exists. I find it doubtful that God would expect such obedience from such confusion. However, looking forward, I would entertain the theory that the practice might resume after clarification, and perhaps a word from a GA. It is the order of God’s church, despite the imperfection present.
As a side note, I’m typically not that orthodox in my beliefs, and I am quick to point out that GA’s are far less perfect than people seem to like to think they are, however, despite this, commandments don’t come from the general membership and dissemenate throughout the church. Just because an individual decided that it was necessary to resume practice of the Law of Moses doesn’t mean that he has the authority go and tell every Jewish member that that’s what they should do.
I have wondered sometimes if resurrected Jesus would turn down a pork chop. Out of respect for his own mortal culture and what his mortal mother taught him, I think he would. That’s just a personal opinion of course.
That doesn’t mean he would condemn us “Gentile Mormons” for breaking kosher.
I think Jewish Mormons are in a very interesting position, since as far as I can tell they are participating in two sets of valid covenants at once. Hopefully they don’t have to keep two sabbaths but they are probably able to honor many Jewish traditions and practices.
Well, you know, God would just be completely unreasonable to demand two days out of the week …
“As far as the Law of Moses is concerned. Well … animal sacrifice was done away with…”
Modern Jews have also done away with animal sacrifice. I don’t know at what point in history it stopped. But who authorized stopping the practice? What authority or prophet did/do the priests, scribes and rabbis cite for discontinuing the animal sacrifices?
At the time of the last generally accepted prophet of Judaism (Malachi?) was the standard that animal sacrifices could only occur at the temple? And so the loss of the temple meant the loss of animal sacrifice?
“I don’t see any barriers to feeling free to live your life any way you please.”
Unless the Stake President (’s wife) lives in your ward.
Bookslinger, I think animal sacrificies ceased because there wasn’t a temple to do them in … the Biblical command still exists — it’s just that there’s no sanctified place for it to happen. However, I’ve heard orthodox Jews still sometimes perform a ritual called kaporeh (the day before Yom Kippur). The individual swings a chicken over his head three times and then kills the chicken. This is supposed to be a reminder of the need for sins to be atoned as well as the animal sacrifices done in temples. Here is a description of it.
In lieu of the sacrifice one can also simply give the cash value of the chicken to the poor.
Interesting subject. I think its important to realize that by becoming a Mormon you are accepting that the LDS are the “House of Israel” today. I’ve heard it punned like this: Mormonism, the only place where a Jew is a Gentile. Its true. When a Jew gains Testimony of Mormonism, they are accepting that Mormonism is the true House of Israel, even if most of the peopl are grafted into the family so to speak. The practice of Jewish ceremonial customs is acceptable, and my family has done Passover Celebration a few times, for example. As far as the rest of it goes, maybe there are a lot of “forever” irrevocable commandments that we are failing to perform today and maybe we should take heed of them. The Church itself doesn’t seem in a hurry to adopt such practices, so I think it is up to those of us who recognize them to treat them in the same camp as the rest of us have to consider Adam-God and Polygamy. They were commanded by God, they were and are true, but they are not preached or forbidden for whatever reasons, and we must cope with that. Some such items are acceptable to use your own discretion on, others, like Polygamy, or even drinking wine ceremonially, for example, are forbidden by current Church standards, and must be abstained from.
As a Jew seriously considering conversion to the church, I find this discussion quite relevant. It was my sense that as a unified body, the religious requirements for a Jewish LDS member are no different than anyone else’s. This would not preclude him/her from running a Passover seder or choosing to refrain from pork. An article by Jeff Chadwick of BYU, “What Jesus Taught the Jews About the Law of Moses” in Volume Two of “The Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ,” edited by Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Thomas A. Wayment, supports the view that in the early Church Jewish members continued to observe the Law while Gentile members were not expected to do so. I think a related question that does not refer to just Jewish members concerns what portions of the Law are still mandatory for Christians to obey. It would seem that laws relating to ceremony, holidays and ritual are no longer binding. Laws regarding the way we conduct ourselves obviously are - 10 Commandments and forbidden sexual practices, for example.
One thing we might be missing: The Jews have sought for and lived under a Political Kingdom. They have resumed the Sanhedrin in preparation for what Gentiles have been trying to live, i.e. a Spiritual Kingdom.
Both are needed, not separately but together. There is something we can learn from them. I don’t think the Kingdom of God AND Zion can exist unless they are fully coalesced. Most LDS are completely oblivious to this fact, which is why we are so little concerned about the unraveling of the Constitution, really since 1913.
We have lost a great deal. If there is anything to be done, it must be done soon. I am not trying to be doomsaying, but the facts are very evident that we are very close fo Martial Law in the US (don’t forget Pres. Benson’s multitude of warnings).
At that point, and it won’t be easy. The Council of 50 (they knew about 50s in the Old Testament–hopefully we know that it is not passe) will need to be reestablished as an interrim governing body so that Zion can be built up and the Word can go forth and the Law from Jerusalem.
I would be very careful in passing any kind of judgment on our Jewish brothers. We can learn a great deal from them while they learn from us. Once that is accomplished, maybe then people will want to ascend to Zion and learn of her ways and be one.
You might also check out http://www.greaterthings.org
why jews does not think twince about there rejection of Christ,who is no controversy is the power of God?
I find your comments quite interesting. As a Jew and a Mormon, what is interesting is to see how many people are looking at the subject from a Wester/Greek Gentile mindset. It amazes me at how many Mormons do not realize how “Hebraic” Mormonism is.
First regarding the fulfillment of the Law of Moses. Most Gentiles (Mormons Included) have this strange notion that the Law of Moses was “done away” or it was “fulfilled.” It is sad because (to a Jew) when Jesus (y’shua ha moshiach) stated that the law was fufilled it is a hebraic idiom meaning that he made it complete. Remember not one Jot or Tittle hath passed away from the Law.
But then there are those who ask then why does it say in the Book of Mormon that they did not follow after the performances and ordinances of the Law of Moses. Well, to an Israelite the Law of performances and ordinances only has to do with a particulare portion of the Law of Moses. What is even more interesting is that most Gentiles do not understand the term Law of Moses. Was it everything given to Moses or are there parts to it. The answer to both is Yes. Just like the Constitution of the United States the Torah is if you will the Constitution for the House of Israel. It is the foundation. In the constitution there is the Preamble, the Body of the Constitution, and the 10 ammendments. So when I say constitution do I mean all of it or a particular part of it. Well, this would be determined by the context of how I use the word Constitution. The same applies to the Law of Moses. It can be a uniform body or it can refer to its’ component parts ie. The Commandments, the Judgements, The witnesses etc.
What is interesting is that as a Jew reading the Book of Mormon we find that when the Law of Moses is talked about the BofM writers also use the description the Performances and Ordinances (in particular the blood Sacrifices). Remember, Israel was taught about the atonement by using the ordinances and symbols of the sacrifices. They were types and shadows of Good things to come.
By the way, did you know that Mormons STILL believe in Sacrifice. Now before you all lynch me please understand that while sacrifice as a means of atonement was fulfilled in Christ. The law of Sacrifice is still in effect and at the appointed times are used as a symbol for the people to look back at the atonement of the Messiah. Joseph Smith in TPJS stated that Sacrifice is part of the duties of the Priesthood. (see page 173). When speaking he made particular reference to the Sacrifices in leviticus. But wait wasn’t it all fulfilled. Yes it was. Y’shua is the fulfillment of the ordinances of Sacrifice. But this does not mean that Sacrifice at the appointed times (i.e. Solemn Assemblies and Feasts) will not be attended to again. Remember the Law of Sacrifice as contained in the Torah is Olam (Eternal).
So all in all If Mormons claim to be of the Houseof Israel, then Torah Observancy in light of the Saviors oral teachings at the Sermon on the Mount should all still be observed.
I understand the eternality of the law of sacrifice to mean that the At-one-ment is still ongoing, and will continue forever, in one form or another:
Note the explanation here - he takes away the first, that he may establish the second, though the word itself is preserved, just interpreted differently.
If sacrifices are done away with never to be done again why did Joseph smith say this: (found in the Words of Joseph Smith)
“The priesthood continued from Lamech to Noah Gen 6 Chap 13 verse. And God said unto Noah the end of all flesh is before me, for the earth is filled with violence through them, and behold I will destroy them with the earth,” thus we behold the Keys of this priesthood consisted in obtaining the voice of Jehovah 19 that he talked with him in a familiar and friendly manner, that he continued to him the Keys, the Covenants, the power and the glory with which he blessed Adam at the beginning and the offring of Sacrifice which also shall be continued at the last time, for all the ordinances and duties that ever have been required by the priesthood under the direction and commandments of the Almighty in the last dispensation at the end thereof in any of the dispensations, shall all be had in the last dispensation. 20 Therefore all things had under the Authority of the Priesthood at any former period shall be had again—bringing to pass the restoration spoken of by the mouth of all the Holy Prophets. Malachi 3 then shall the sons of Levi offer unto the Lord an acceptable offring” then shall the sons of Levi offer an acceptable sacrifice to the Lord Se[e] Malichi 3 Chap. 3 & 4 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of Silver; and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord [p.43]
It will be necessary here to make a few observations on the doctrine, set forth in the above quotation, As it is generally supposed that Sacrifice was entirely done away when the great sacrife was offered up—and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of Sacrifice in future, but those who assert this, are certainly not aquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the priesthood. or with the prophets The offering of Sacrifice has ever been connected and forms a part of the duties of the priesthood. It began with the prieshood and will be continued untill after the coming of Christ from generation to generation—We freequently have mention made of the offering of Sacrifice by the servants of the most high in antient days prior to the law of moses, See 21 which ordinances will be continued when 22 the priesthood is restored with all its authority power and blessings. Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of this priesthood, and who will, 23 before the last dispensation, restore the authority and delive[r] the Keys of this priesthood in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness.
It is true that the Savior had authoritity and power to bestow this blessing but the Sons of Levi were too predjudi[ced] 24
And I will send Elijah the Prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord &c &c.
Why send Elijah because he holds the Keys of the Authority to administer in all the ordinances of the priesthood and without the authority is given the ordinances could not be administered in righteousness. 25
It is a very prevalent opinion that in the sacrifices of sacrifices which were offered were entirely consumed, this was not the case if you read Leviticus [2] Chap [2-3] verses you will observe that the priests took a part as a memorial and offered it up before the Lord, while the remainder was kept for the benefit maintenance of the priests. 26 So that the offerings and sacrifices are not all consumed upon the Alter, but the blood is sprinkled and the fat and certain other portions are consumed These sacrifices as well as every ordinance belonging to the priesthood will when the temple of the Lord shall be built and the Sons Levi be purified be fully restored and attended to then all their powers ramifications ramifications and blessings—this the Sons of Levi shall be purified. ever was and will exist when the powers of the Melchisid Priesthood are sufficiently manifest. 27 Else how can the restitution of all things [p.44] spoken of by all the Holy Prophets be brought to pass be brought to pass 28 It is not to be understood that, the law of moses will be established again with all it rights and variety of ceremonies, ceremonies, this had never been spoken off by the prophets but those things which existed prior Mose’s day viz Sacrifice will be continued 29—It may be asked by some what necessity for Sacrifice since the great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which if Repentance Baptism and faith were necessary to Salvation existed prior to the days of Christ what necessity for them since that time
Here is a quote also from the words of joseph smith that Zecharyah Solomon will appreciate: (words of joseph smith)
(Joseph) asked and answered 1st How was John the greatest prophet ever born of a woman 2d How was Christ is the least in the Kingdom greater than he
Ehat & Cook, Words, Franklin D. Richards “Scriptural Items”: 29 January 1843 (Sunday), p.162–p.163
Ans to 1st His greatness consisted in 3 things 1st His appointment to prepare the way before the Lord Jesus Christ 2nd His privilege to Baptise him or induct him into his Kingdom 3d His being the only legal administrator in the affairs of the Kingdom that was then on the Earth consequently the Jews had to obey his instruction or be damned by their own Law & Christ fulfiled all [p.163] righteousness in becoming obedient to the the Law which himself had given to Moses 17 on the mount and thereby magnified it and made it honorable instead of destroying it
Greg,
The Law of Sacrifice has never been done away, as Joseph Smith said the prior sacrifices were used to temporally sustain (feed) the priests and administrators of the temple. We do the same thing when we have missionaries over for dinner, or contribute to the missionary fund, or tithing in general. There are many ways we make efficacious sacrifices. The Law of Consecration is all about presenting our whole souls as a living sacrifice to God, taking upon ourselves his name, etc.
I grew up in Chicago with a family in our ward that coverted from Judiasm. They practiced some of the Jewish traditions like Hanukah and made great fireside speakers.
I asked the Dad (who is currently running for congress by the way and could be described politically as a religious leftist) once about his former faith and he told me that he was now a LDS Christian and did not feel compelled to abide by any of the Jewish customs or traditions. He would do some things for fun if he felt like it like Hanukah.
Shalom, we have been discussing the relationship between the Book of Mormon and the Law of Moses at our list as well:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Jewish-Roots-Mormon/
My view is that the Book of Mormon and NT do not actually say to discontinue observing the law of Moses.
Saryah
So if a Jew becomes a Mormon they are a JEWMON?