TED PIORO
IRAQ'S WAR AVENGES PURIM!!
Thu Oct 7, 2004 02:39
12.72.70.242

Dear Editor of the Christian Examiner.com, please read first Adolf Hitler Founder of Israel by Hennecke Kardel, available at each Search Engine (or with Ralph Modjeski), and then publish my comment infra:

This regards an article which appeared in April edition of your renown Examiner, Messianic Jewish View Of Movie, written by Rabbi Barney Kasdan of Kehilat Ariel Messianic Synagogue of San Diego.

The Rabbi’s Synagogue embraces Jesus Christ as the Messiah, i.e. King of Jews, who should deliver them from a yoke of unbelievers, and he did touch a very sensitive issue of how God is winning the deliverance.

As an argument of winning it, the Rabbi drew parallelism between “Passion of Christ” and the feasts of Purim (read the Bible’s Holy Book of ESTHER), while to an ordinary Christian these two events contradict each other.

While mission of Christ is to seed love among people of the entire world, the Purim basks in hatred and revenge against the world if it does not accept abominable practices of Purims, about which the Old Testament is full of examples, during the feasts celebrated with fanfares.

In his discourse the Rabbi identifies the modern State of Israel with the ancient one and with Jews (Judeans) who with that ancient have little in common. Thus he is trying to convince that his Messianic Synagogue by embracing Yeshua (Jesus) also struggle for the State of Israel and is expecting Christians to join the struggle. By the way the Rabbi is ignoring Yeshua as the Son of God, or God himself, because Yeshua lived as a traditional Jew among the Rabbi’s people, he wrote.

Truly – Ralph Modjeski, P.O.Box 193, San Diego, CA 92038.

A Messianic Jewish view of “The Passion” By Rabbi Barney Kasdan CHRISTIAN EXAMINER- Opinion
The theater was sold out and packed with a diverse group of spectators. The local Presbyterian church bought out a large block of tickets and invited their own members, Baptists and Jews to attend a special screening of Mel Gibson’s controversial film “The Passion of The Christ.” This was to be followed by an interfaith panel discussion about what we saw and experienced. It was with mixed emotions that I accepted the invitation, although I was very happy at the prospects of presenting a messianic Jewish perspective to counterbalance the views of the other pastors and rabbi. What an amazing, angst-filled experience! On the positive side, I was quite impressed with much of the Jewish cultural environment.This is not your typical, European Jesus who speaks the King’s English. Instead, all the dialogue is either in Aramaic or Latin. I have to admit I was blessed when Jesus was addressed either as Yeshua or Mashichah. Likewise most of the details of the Passover and daily life seemed much more authentic to first century culture in Israel. Maia Morgenstern, a daughter of Holocaust survivors, did an amazing job portraying Mary. I had seen in an interview that she even made the powerful suggestion for the script as the women at one point ask the question “Ma nishtana ha-laila ha-zeh…” (Why is this night different from all other nights?) This question in Aramaic, read every year at our Passover seders, took on a double spiritual meaning tying Passover with the death of the Messiah.Having said this, there is no doubt that this film presents some quandaries for many Jews, including those of us who embrace Yeshua. There are some very uncomfortable moments as Ciaphas and some of the other priests are strongly confronting Yeshua. Those who know the New Testament account will likely admit that it happened on some level. But it is very difficult to portray the nuances since no one is exactly sure of the pathos of that exact moment. Add to this the weak personality of Pilate, which seems to contradict the brutal record we have of him in the New Testament and other historical sources. Was the washing of the hands his plea for sincere absolution or just a façade of a tyranical despot? Likewise, we Jews know what terrible fruit came from the “passion plays” of history. It was not uncommon for such plays to portray Jews as devils complete with horns, a theme which Gibson comes uncomfortably close to when some apparently “Jewish” children morph into grotesque demons. Many times such plays stirred up such virulent anti-Semitism that Jewish communities were attacked and synagogues burned. Thankfully, we are not in Czarist Russia of 200 years ago but our historical memory remains a compelling lens on how many in the Jewish community will see this movie. For better or worse, much of the pre-release controversy of The Passion came from certain—not all—segments of the Jewish community. The fears are understandable, yet many have pointed out that some of these responses were unnecessarily extreme, such as Jewish commentator Michael Medved’s astute March 2004 article in Christianity Today, “Why I asked the Anti-Defamation League to give Mel Gibson a break.”Of course the timing of the film’s release cannot be overlooked. Corresponding with the 40-day period of Lent for many Christians, The Passion was obviously targeted to the spiritual focus of many churches. In another twist of irony, the Jewish community celebrated the holiday of Purim (book of Esther), where we remember the anti-Semitism of another era, the following week. The joy of Purim is in response to the deliverance that God brought to our people in that generation through such people as Mordechai and Esther. I am not sure if there is any direct connection between Purim and The Passion. Perhaps it is all a reminder that there has always been a spiritual battle centered around Israel. The good news of Purim and The Passion is that God wins!Ibelieve this film, even with some of its flaws and artistic liberties, will open up many people’s minds to realize that Yeshua lived as a traditional Jew among our people. This may challenge many of my own people to reconsider some long held assumptions about this One who claimed to be our Messiah. Likewise, I can see where many from the Christian community will be faced with a Yeshua that did not start a new religion but fulfilled the ancient promises given to the Jewish people and made available for all nations. Perhaps the perplexity over The Passion will serve, ironically, as a positive platform for dialogue and understanding between diverse groups. The panel discussion that I participated in turned out to be a very positive event for both Jews and Christians. In a strange way, this controversial film may help fulfill the words of Yeshua as he said “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself” (John 12:32).Dear Editor of THE GOOD NEWS, first read the Adolf Hitler Founder of Israel by Hennecke Kardel, available at each Search Engine (or with Ted Pioro), and then re the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:If you allow me to contribute to Mr. Michael Newdow stance on the issue of thePledge of Allegiance with the phrase “God” or without it, I see that AmericanPatriotism can thrive without. And why, I would like to make my American Compatriots aware that the Declaration of Independence of 1776 was written bya man who understood the difference between "our Lord" and "laws of nature", identified by him with the "Nature's God". In the Articles of Confederation twoyears later appears "the Great Governor of the world", certainly referring toJesus Christ, who came to this Earth on behalf of the "Nature's God".Mosaic (as well as the Islamic religion) does not equal Jesus with the "Nature'sGod" nor a God. For these two religions Jesus Christ is not a God. Even inthe Gospels many time Jesus is called "Son of Man".So, it seems to me, that the article by E.P. NEWS “Supreme Court hears Pledgecase” (April 2004) is wrong blaming an atheist for his intent to remove God entirely from the public sphere, for if one would make a clear distinctionbetween "Nature's God" and the "Lord", will see that the "laws of nature" areat work and they preceded Christ, now allowing the humanity to land soon on the planet Mars and far beyond.Once again it seems, that to the said atheist a God is the "Nature's God",and whether IT be removed from the "public sphere" or do not, IT all ways willstand for the "laws of nature" being taught in every school.But if someone insists on the phrase that it should not be removed from thePledge, “One Nation under God”, it would be much better for the world tobe ruled by the "Great Governor" than by the Yahve, the Israel’s God or by Allah, the God of Muslims, although to these two religions IT is the same GOD.With regards - Ralph Modjeski & Ted Pioro, San Diego. P.O.Box 193,CA 92038.