Template talk:Messianic Judaism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Template:Messianic Judaism page.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming

	Religion Portal This article is supported by the Messianic Judaism WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Messianic Judaism-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents 1 Primary Goals 2 Template Type 3 Navigable Content Dispute Resolution Commitment 4 Discussions 4.1 Primary Goal Discussion 4.2 Design Discussion 4.3 Navigable Content Discussion 5 Template Talk 5.1 Possible template 5.2 possible starter template 5.3 I'm very disappointed 6 ToDo - sorting 7 Talmud 8 WikiProject link 9 where's the benevolent dictator when you need him? 10 Template 11 Requested edit

[edit] Primary Goals

In yet another grand effort to achieve consensus, instead of POV pushing (on either the Jewish or Messianic Jewish side) I wish to discuss the primary goal of this template. To do so, a need must be demonstrated for its existence, and such needs are as follows:

1. A template to provide easy navigation between exclusive Messianic Judaism articles
2. A template to provide easy navigation from exclusive Messianic Judaism articles to subsections related to Messianic Judaism, on non exclusive Messianic Judaism articles
3. A template to provide easy navigation from exclusive Messianic Judaism articles to non exclusive Messianic Judaism articles that would otherwise be redundant with an exclusive Messianic Judaism version of the same article
4. A template to provide easy navigation from exclusive Messianic Judaism articles to non exclusive Messianic Judaism articles dealing with terms and concepts that a visitor to a Torah observant Messianic Jewish synagogue would encounter, for which either a separate subsection in such an article would be redundant with the rest of the article, or the article itself would be redundant with a separately created Messianic Judaism article or subsection.

Clearly because of the vicious POV attacks on the last template, I would ask that all contributors to this template source their contributions and/or objections. This is a template folks, not an article; so there is and should be some leniency in this template's development, but some seem to think otherwise. A template is a tool, not an article. Unsubstantiated and unsourced charges of POV pushing over a "tool" that aims to be NPOV about a certain POV, will do this template no good.

[edit] Template Type

This template is to be designed as a religious navigation template, similar to other religious navigation templates.

The content of navigable material in this template, was in dispute in two prior TfDs. One was keep, the other was delete. Neither side could achieve consensus on the content. It is the desire of this talk page to move with consensus, and not force another WP:NOT or WP:POV WP:TfD.

[edit] Navigable Content Dispute Resolution Commitment

Furthermore, all contributors and objectors to this template agree that all future disputes about this template MUST be discussed here FIRST; and not in a future WP:TfD FIRST. A contributor who wishes to submit a WP:TfD will be reminded in any TfD regarding this template, that this dispute resolution notice is in place from the very beginning, and the admin reviewing any TfD of this template will be asked to consider whether or not the nominee has actually bothered to discuss their specific dispute here before bringing it up in a WP:TfD.

This is the development goal of this template. Suggestions would be appreciated. Please begin the discussion below this notice.

inigmatus 05:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Furtherfurthermoremore, this page is is not Inigmatus' Rules of Order. Tomer^talk 03:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussions

[edit] Primary Goal Discussion

Discuss here your reasons for your support of the current primary goals of this template. I currently believe that such a template would be useful, and at the very least would be necessary in all the points mentioned. Other religions have similar templates, see Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Mormonism. It is my desire to see a similar template designed as a navigation template for Messianic Judaism and related articles. inigmatus 05:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Design Discussion

The previous template used code from Template:Judaism. It is my opinion that there is no reason not to do so again since much of its design already serves as one of the best religious templates on Wikipedia. A tool is a tool, not an article. Charges of tool "plagiarism," seem ridiculous in my opinion, since if it's useful, why not use a modification of it? The previous Messianic Judaism template has been archived for easy resurrection. If one thinks that the archived Messianic Judaism template looks too much like the Judaism template, does this pose a Wikipedia policy problem? What Wikipedia policy would be violated if such a design were used again? inigmatus 05:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Navigable Content Discussion

Please follow the format here to propose new items in the template. Please provide sources for every single claim for or against. Thank you.

(see also [1])

All Exclusively Messianic Judaism articles, categories, portals, lists I would like to propose that all exclusively Messianic Judaism articles, categories, portals, and lists be included in the template. I don't think a separate source would be needed for this proposal since the articles themselves are sourced enough. inigmatus 05:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Accepted per archived discussion. 1

Torah I would like to propose that Torah be added to the template. The Torah is central to the Messianic movement, and is a central item in many Messianic synagogues. Messianic organizations also exist to promote Torah reading. Sources: [2], [3], [4], [5]

Perhaps an article such as Messianic view of the Torah needs to be created, similar to the list of articles here Torah#Other views of the Torah, and then link to that article, which itself, of course, would link to Torah. I think it is fair to say that the Messianic view of the Torah is very different from the Judaic view, especially as regards the Oral Law. Different branches of Messianism have differing opinions on this (just comapre yashanet.com with rabbiyeshua.com) So there seems to exist a rich and fertile area in which to develop a Messianic view of Torah. -- Avi 17:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that's a worthwhile endeavor, however, I'm not so sure what would be the difference between Torah and a Messianic view of the Torah since the content of Torah would simply stay the same in such a transfer with only Messianic additions. I do see the reason in creating a separate article to act as a "buffer" in explaining that Messianics may refer to Torah or Tanakh or to Bible when saying "Torah," yet such an article does not exist yet. In Old Testament#The Torah-Submissive View this is an appropriate subsection describing one of the many views of Torah, however it's not inclusive of all views, and a link to that specific view is better placed as a See Also reference in Messianic Jewish theology. This brings us back to the current scenario: the intent of the inclusion of Torah in this template is to directly link readers to the foundational use of the term in Messianic Judaism, a term which is always inclusive of the information presented in the summary of Torah. What do you think? I can provide sources for this claim too. inigmatus 17:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Tanakh I would like to propose that Tanakh be added to the template. The Tanakh is central to the Messianic movement, and is a central item in many Messianic synagogues. [6],[7], [8],[9],[10],[11]

See Above. Especially since for many Messianics, the only "Torah" that they accept is Tanakh. -- Avi 17:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly if you're making a point for or against inclusion of "Tanakh" in the template. I don't know if your statement is positive or negative evidence for or against. I would ask that in this section of the talk page, that everyone provide sources for their claims either way. inigmatus 13:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Talmud See Talmud subsection below in this talk page for an indepth discussion. I plan to move the key points of the discussion to this section soon. inigmatus 13:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template Talk

[edit] Possible template

This has been added by user:Ju98 5. It looks as a good starting point for the next one. It focuses on Messianic-Judaic specific topics in the religion template style.

Part of a series of articles on Messianic Judaism

Yeshua · Theology · Religious practice Messianic Seal of Jerusalem Complete Jewish Bible Chosen People Ministries Jews for Jesus · MaozIsrael Messianic Bureau International Messianic Jewish Alliance of America

Portal

v • d • e

That looks like a very good start. It's to-the-point and avoids the bloat of the previous version. A question about the image - is that an image representative of and widely used by the movement, like the Magen David is for Judaism, or the cross and fish for Christianity, or is it something that's been put together for wikipedia or some other limited public offering? The content of it is fine, but it's very busy, for lack of a better term, and looks a bit hacked together. Something simpler would be more appealing. Daniel^C/_T+ 12:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It is called the "Messianic Seal of Jerusalem". It has been found on some pottery, which lead some to claim it is thousands of years old, although others claim that it was an archeological hoax. Regardless, it has been used since the late 1960's. -- Avi 12:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, this is the first time I've seen it. It's not very elegant, but from what you've said it seems appropriate for the template. I'm actually interested enough now to do some research on it myself. :) Daniel^C/_T+ 13:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the start. Feel free to create it with a note that current consensus favors it as a start. inigmatus 14:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it's reasonable to start with a Template like this, that sticks strictly to Messianic topics. However, if the Template starts filling up again with general Judaism links (the reason it was deleted in the first place), then it would immediately become a candidate for speedy deletion. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

As I said, in the above subsection, I intend to post sources for every item included in the list, as to the article's relevancy to Messianic Judaism. If someone wishes to dispute a listed item, dispute it there in the subsection above. Don't bring the entire template to TfD without first debating individual item listings here first and making a substantiated case against them. inigmatus 17:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] possible starter template

The original is up top, the new one below. I've stripped it down to the bare essentials—that was one of the suggestions put forth during TfD debate. In the interests of just getting something in place I tossed some of my initial idea (see below) for now rather than waiting on others.

Personally, I feel that many of the Judaism and Christian topics certainly have a place in a MJ nav template. (Tallit is certainly as relevant to Messianic Jews as to any other group of Jews.) However, it is also valid to say that since there is already a "primary" navigation for general Jewish subjects, a nav guide for a sub-area of Judaism ought to restrict itself to that sub-area, which makes complete sense if the sub-area is recognized by the parent. If it is not, then I think it is completely understandable that the sub-area's nav template be complete and self-contained.

So this is a compromise. The idea (put forth before the last TfD) was that "common" topics remain on the MJ template, but hidden by default. Only topics unique to MJ would be always-visible. Since the technology isn't quite "there" yet, I've pushed off that design for future improvement, though the stubs for it remain. The problem was that I'd like to see the links as a continuous list whether or not the section is expanded, but since the code relies on blocks, each section has (potentially) two lists. I don't think that looks very good. First point, what do you think of that approach? Second point, if the line break doesn't matter to y'all should I add the hidden sections back in (and just fix it up if/when the tech improves)?

I had been thinking that we'd do all pre-discussion there (since it's already been mentioned in various placed, I assumed most interested parties knew of its existence) because when it's ready to go live, the move from user to template space will wipe out this talk page. But maybe that's OK? ⇔ ChristTrekker 18:59, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Although complicated, there is a way for an admin to merge the two talk histories. It's the process used to fix a cut-and-paste merge and requires some liberal delting, renaming, moving, and restoring. If necessary, I will do that once we have a template. -- Avi 20:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Avi, the offer is appreciated. ⇔ ChristTrekker 04:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

For the sake of continuity, I will post the first code that you've shown here. If I made a mistake, feel free to modify the code to fit your suggestion so we can at least have something. inigmatus 21:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Eh? You're not referring to my version. ⇔ ChristTrekker 04:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Any further comment? Seems like Inigmatus decided to go with Ju98 5's template without discussing the merits of one design over the other. ⇔ ChristTrekker 19:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I prefer Ju98 5's template currenty, as it contains articles that are MJ-specific. -- Avi 19:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

My template contains all those links except MaozIsrael and Messianic Seal of Jerusalem, which can certainly be added. But I guess I was looking for comparisons of the design and structure primarily, as they establish a visual identity. (A major complaint was that it looked confusingly similar to the Judaism template.) The content of the template is easily changed, and will likely do so over time. ⇔ ChristTrekker 21:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I like either or. I personally like the alternating colors. I didnt realize I put Ju's template in over ChristTrekker. I was really just wanting to get a template put in. Feel free to modify the template with your modications of design.inigmatus 21:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the alternating colors helps readability, use of sections help usability, and I changed the header to a more space-saving layout. Essentially, that's the difference. However, I'll let someone else make the final decision on which proposal gets used. ⇔ ChristTrekker 22:34, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If this version is used, note that there's currently some stuff enclosed in a nowiki block while it's in my userspace. ⇔ ChristTrekker 22:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think you can call it a consensus on the design (yours), and a consensus on the content (Ju's). Feel free to change the design. If someone balks they can always speak up here. I really don't think having one template look like another is a sufficient reason to not have the same design. inigmatus 23:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm very disappointed

This template is an absolute insult. Tell me here if anyone knows, what was the problem with the previous template? All of the links were relevant. Because this one is total garbage. Noogster 22:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess they want more sources to include such links on a navigation template. So, post in the subsection above, and source away. I'd feel better if individual item listings were discussed and debated, rather than baby-with-the-bathwater blanket TfD nominations. This tempalte is a navigation TOOL not a POV pusher or censor, and I want both sides to realize this. inigmatus 17:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a case of J trying to dictate permissible beliefs to MJ. "No, that's ours, you can't have it." Good grief... Other religions get along on WP even though they may refer (link) to the same concept/thing, so why is it so hard to cooperate in this case? I really don't understand. ⇔ ChristTrekker 17:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ToDo - sorting

This template adds Category:Messianic Judaism to the articles it's included on, which is a nice convenience. However, many MJ articles begin with "messianic", to the point that it's unhelpful to read an alphabetical list when one gets to the Ms. I plan on adding an optional "sort" parameter to fix this. ⇔ ChristTrekker 17:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This is done. I've also reviewed the articles that started with M and sorted those that seemed good candidates. ⇔ ChristTrekker 21:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the stuff that was the whole source of the TFD in the first place. This template is about stuff uniquely related to Messianic Judaism, not stuff already on the Judaism and Christianity templates. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I don't remember it ever being stated that it was content alone that caused the TfD. It was the combination of content and the "borrowed" Judaism template appearance that might have confused readers or given a false impression about the relationship between J and MJ. This new template changes the format (one part fixed) and hides the "shared" content by default (other part fixed). There's absolutely no justification for saying that certain Wikipedia articles are barred from being linked to by certain other articles!!! ⇔ ChristTrekker 04:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Although the borrowed content was mentioned in the TfD nomination, if you actually read the TfD discussion, that rationale was actually rebuffed by a number of "delete" !votes. If you review the other religion templates, you'll find that, for example, in Template:Islam, "God" is linked to God in Islam, not simply to God...thus making the link relevant to Islam. "Academics" is linked to Islamic studies, not to Academics. "Art" is linked to Islamic art, not to Art. Template:Christianity also does an admirable job of making its links specifically relevant to Christianity. This template should concentrate on what makes Messianic Judaism messianic. What makes it Judaism [sic] is covered in the article Messianic Judaism, and linking to everything that makes Judaism Judaism is little more than linkcruft at best, and Messianic supersessionism at worst. Tomer^talk 04:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talmud

A sizable minority, if not the majority, of people in our movement believe that studying the Talmud is important. I can easily offer half a dozen or more citations from various Messianic websites that actively promote study of the Talmud or quote from it. It clearly belongs in the template. Noogster 00:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

To be countered by an equal or greater amount who call it dangerous and against the spirit of Jesus. I think it clearly does not. If anything, it is a minority of Messianics, of whic you may be part, who believe that the Talmud has significance, especially since Rabbinic/Talmudic Judaism is clearly against the concept that the Messiah has come. -- Avi 03:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't suppose you could prove that minority claim, could you? I mean, I study the Talmud as well. Me and Noogster, well that makes a unanimous majority of us right here on wikipedia. It's kinda sad that there are no other Messianic editors on wikipedia that seem to fit the molds you think Messianics should fit, Avi. Perhaps they really don't exist. inigmatus 03:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Avi, here are several citations. I could give even more citations, if you really wanted me to.

*Messianic FAQ says YES to Talmud study

*Well-known Messianic community site affirms authority of Pharisees/Talmud

*Messianic website, regularly quoting the talmud and using it in its articles, and refers to Jesus as a "Rabbi"

*Joyofthetorah.org, which regularly quotes, and promotes study and practice of the Talmud; use the Artscroll Chumash & Siddur

*Statement of faith confirming that the Talmud, while not scripture, further reveals the nature of G-d and Israel

Now, just my personal opinions, but let me share them: Jesus (Yeshua/Yehoshua ben Yosef) was himself a Pharisaic Rabbi. He was greater than the Ravs (such as Paul), who lived and taught in the diaspora. He was a Ribbi, like Hillel, who were the greatest Torah teachers in 2nd Temple Israel/Judah, to whom the diaspora Ravs were subservient. He had 12 disciples, the oldest of which (Simon Peter/Kefa) may only have been 20 (a couple may have not even been Bar Mitzvahs). They wore tefillin and prayed in Hebrew with the best of them. He instructed them that the Pharisees, Rabbis, and Scribes have Mosaic authority to interpret Torah observance for Israel, but that his followers are not to emulate their lifestyles. It would be difficult for Messianics to fully execute this command of Jesus if they disregarded study and practice of the Talmud, the definitive Pharasaic text.

Summary: The Talmud link belongs on the template, because a significant number of Messianics believe in studying it and applying its teachings at least selectively. If, very hypothetically, as few as 10% were to hold this view, then it would still belong. Compare this to the Judaism template for example which has the Chabad work Tanya listed, even though only Lubavitchers consider it authoritative, which are of course only a tiny fraction of all Jews, religious or not. Noogster 03:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

They only "study" it to search for proofs of the messiahship of Jesus; that's not really the same as using it as a religious text. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you're completely wrong. Stop your POV attempt to make us look like Christian fundamentalists, and stop thinking that you know more about our religion than we do. I presume your religion is Judaism, Jayjg? Well, Judaism demands the highest standards in honesty and ethical behavior. Prove that you are more devout in your walk of Judaism and Torah than we Messianics are by investigating these things or asking a Messianic, rather than presuming you know it all about us and making dubious statements that are not across the board. You would understand all of this if you were Messianic or had a solid understanding of it. Consult me or Inigmatus if you have any more questions about what we actually do believe rather than what you presume we do.

The historically verifiable Yeshua is the one that Messianic Judaism promotes, not the goy Greek one-size-fits-all antinomian sun priest you see in the paintings. Again, I made my case time and time again for why the Talmud has much to do with a large sector of the movement. You continue in reverting (and not notifying me) on subjects you are not fully informed about. Noogster 00:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The Template was deleted under a TFD, and its recreation was only allowed on the condition that it not duplicate items found in the Judaism Template, which is what it was doing in the past. If you continue to re-create a POV fork Template of the Judaism template, it will have to be deleted again. Stick to items which are unique to Messianic Judaism, that will be what is most helpful for the reader. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You continue in your POV attacks and anti-MJ bias. Guess what, genius: TANAKH IS IN THE JUDAISM TEMPLATE, TOO. And not to mention the fact that Christianity and some other religions use some the Hebrew Bible or NT. AND not to mention we call it the Apostolic Writings, not the "New Testament". AND not to mention that the Hebrew Bible is listed twice, once as the Tanakh/Masoretic text (which we use) and once as the Greek Old Testament translatory that Christianity uses. I'm reverting your meritless edit, again. Noogster 03:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I kept the Tanakh stuff in as a concession to you, though I really should have removed it. I suppose I'll have to go the next step now. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Not sure where to reply since the threading's been lost here. But anyway... I was not under the impression that Judaism-related topics had to be completely removed from the MJ template. (Was that ever explicitly stated?) Merely that their presence did not cause confusion with the Judaism template or somehow cause people to believe that MJ was accepted as mainstream Judaism. These topics are certainly of interest to MJews, and as a navigational aid to people researching MJ, I cannot see how you can outright ban them. The very idea seems completely preposterous to me. "You are not allowed to link to me because I don't like you"—essentially that is your argument. How can you tell a religion they cannot talk about or reference a topic central to their beliefs? Are you serious??? If you don't want people linking to it, it shouldn't be online to begin with! This is nothing but a thinly veiled attempt to marginalize MJ beliefs. I believe the technical solution I built into the current version of the template addresses everyone's concerns adequately. ⇔ ChristTrekker 04:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

And you're absolutely right. And they are absolutely arrogant. Basically, that is their perspective and it is entirely POV: "we don't like you and have a pre-conceived notion of you, so don't do certain things or else". They're sending the entire project to hell in a handbasket and it is profoundly depressing and disturbing to me. Unsigned by Noogster (talk • contribs) 05:31, 5 March 2007

I have protected the template again. Please work it out here. There seems to be a fairly strong consensus in favour of leaving the topics in question out of the template. JFW | T@lk 10:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, inigmatus, here are some responses to your citations. I believe each and every one does not support your contention:

*Messianic FAQ says YES to Talmud study

Quote from source "The Talmud's purpose was never intended to replace the written Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy)" Again, completely the opposite view of Rabbinic Judaism which views the Talmud as a prime repository of Oral Law.

*Well-known Messianic community site affirms authority of Pharisees/Talmud

Quote from source "Yeshua was a Jew, a rabbi and a Pharisee, who wore tzitzit (Numbers 15:37-41), always upheld Torah, often quoted Talmud, and was Orthodox in His practices." OK, so he quoted Talmud. This brings NOTHING to support Messianic study of Talmud today.

*Messianic website, regularly quoting the talmud and using it in its articles, and refers to Jesus as a "Rabbi"

Quote from same source "When we begin to study and observe Torah to become like Messiah, there are pitfalls we must avoid. One such pitfall is the study of Mishnah and Talmud (Rabbinic traditional Law).

*Joyofthetorah.org, which regularly quotes, and promotes study and practice of the Talmud; use the Artscroll Chumash & Siddur

I can find NO discussion of the study of Talmud. Only Mishnaic mention is Pirkei Avos, ONE out of 60-some odd mesechtos of Mishnayos. Also fails.

*Statement of faith confirming that the Talmud, while not scripture, further reveals the nature of G-d and Israel

Quote from source "4. THE TORAH: The Torah may refer to either the Five Books of Moses, the entire Tanakh (Hebrew Scriptures) or the whole Bible, depending on usage. The Torah in our usage never refers to the Talmud but, while we do not consider the Talmud or any other commentary on the Scriptures as the Word of G-d, we believe that the writings of Oral Tradition, such as the Talmud, the Mishnah, and the Midrash Rabbah, also contain further insight into the character of G-d and His dealings with His people. The Torah is given for our protection, not for our perfection. We do not practice in the Diaspora those parts of Torah which require residence in the land, a theocratic civil government and/or a consecrated Temple on Mount Moriah." Also completely contrary.

-- Avi 15:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

(Wrong person. I didn't bring up Talmud here. But thanks for responding to Noogster. I personally think Talmud is a related text in Messianic Judaism, even if its not looked to as an authoritative religious text; it provides background and information necessary to many messages I've heard given in various Messianic synagogues. If anything, I think the appropriateness of including "Talmud" in the template is to think if it would be appropriate for the Bible to be included in the Muslim template. The Muslims don't claim the bible as authoritative, but do look to it for important background and information necessary to some messages given in Mosques. At the same time though, I think the links Noogster provided is an honest attempt to show the importance of Talmud study in Messianic Judaism circles, however I can attest that it's a issue that currently being debated in Messianic Judaism - an issue I don't think has been decided on yet, but when it does, or if MJs accept more and more Talmud in their study, I don't see why such a relevant link should be excluded from the template just because some other religion claims exclusivity to the text.) inigmatus 13:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Avi, you are either purposely attempting to explain away the clear messages of the websites cited, or you have some very poor reading comprehension skills. You are wrong here in almost every case, and let me explain.

Quote: Quote from source "The Talmud's purpose was never intended to replace the written Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy)" Again, completely the opposite view of Rabbinic Judaism which views the Talmud as a prime repository of Oral Law. Truth: Actually, what you are citing as contradictory is in complete harmony with the Rabbinical Talmudic view. The quoted phrase is in fact in response to the false view some have that the Oral law was meant to “replace” the Written (which is not true, the website states that it is the authoritative interpretation of the Written Law). Not to mention that this is all miscellaneous one way or another to the fact that the website explicitly says study of Talmud = good.

Quote: Quote from source "Yeshua was a Jew, a rabbi and a Pharisee, who wore tzitzit (Numbers 15:37-41), always upheld Torah, often quoted Talmud, and was Orthodox in His practices." OK, so he quoted Talmud. This brings NOTHING to support Messianic study of Talmud today. Truth: Hahaha, that’s a good one, Avi. Every portion of the cited statement is suggesting that Yeshua was a Rabbi, a Pharisee, one with the Oral Law in addition to the Written. How much better to understand him than to study what he would have upheld! At least, according to this website. Also, here the same website states explicitly that the Oral Law is necessary to understand many parts of the Written.

Quote: When we begin to study and observe Torah to become like Messiah, there are pitfalls we must avoid. One such pitfall is the study of Mishnah and Talmud (Rabbinic traditional Law). Truth: That website’s articles are actually written by more than one person. The person who wrote that article had a perspective obviously not consistent with the overarching themes of the website and his/her congregation. The website regularly quotes Talmudic passages on every sort of subject, uses the Orthodox Jewish calendar, promotes all manner of Jewish tradition, and even sometimes uses the Talmud to provide a final answer to certain issues (see, for example, its article on re-marriage). If you see this other article from that same website, it says right off the bat that To fully understand what Yeshua does and what he teaches we must explore the institutions of Rabbinical teaching and methodology.. And in that very same page in the margin the Talmud is quoted. And then the article continues on to explore the finer points of Yeshua and his Talmidim, quoting various first century sources, stating that the Talmud is to be studied, and other Rabbinical writings along the way. And then this similar article HERE also upholds study in the Rabbinic manner, refers to Jesus in an entirely Perushim light, and explicitly makes positive reference to the “sages”.

Quote: I can find NO discussion of the study of Talmud. Only Mishnaic mention is Pirkei Avos, ONE out of 60-some odd mesechtos of Mishnayos. Also fails. Truth: I suppose it means the website creator really likes the Pirke Avot, then? The site states from the very beginning that the services endorsed are all very traditionally halakhic and that they don’t even do the Torah reading if there isn’t a minyan present.

Quote: Quote from source "4. THE TORAH: The Torah may refer to either the Five Books of Moses, the entire Tanakh (Hebrew Scriptures) or the whole Bible, depending on usage. The Torah in our usage never refers to the Talmud but, while we do not consider the Talmud or any other commentary on the Scriptures as the Word of G-d, we believe that the writings of Oral Tradition, such as the Talmud, the Mishnah, and the Midrash Rabbah, also contain further insight into the character of G-d and His dealings with His people. The Torah is given for our protection, not for our perfection. We do not practice in the Diaspora those parts of Torah which require residence in the land, a theocratic civil government and/or a consecrated Temple on Mount Moriah." Also completely contrary. Truth: Actually it’s not in the least contrary. The CTOMC does not consider the Oral Law to be Scripture (as in divinely inspired/and or on a Biblical level). Then they continue to praise the Talmud’s merits by stating that it contains further insight into G-d‘s character and His people (and therefore of course should be studied). Everything after that is actually completely in agreement with the Rabbinic view. The quoted text is referring to verdicts for crimes as well as animal sacrifices and some more minor things that require the Temple to be standing and the Diaspora to be a minority. In fact much of the Oral Law developed as a codified response to how Judaism should be practiced when there is not the Temple/Priesthood functioning in Jerusalem.

Therefore the validity of all five cited sources for the importance of the Talmud in the movement stands. Even the simple fact that Messianics don Kippoth and Tefillin, and call their seminary-ordained leaders Rabbis, is inherent proof of the definitive impact that the Talmud and/or Rabbinic concepts have had and continue to have on the movement. Noogster 22:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject link

Please do not add a link to a WikiProject. This is a self reference and should not be in the template as per WP:ASR and my previous comments on this matter at Template talk:Messianic Judaism/Exclusive MJ. mattbr³⁰ 20:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

This is quite reasonable. Since I am fairly new to Wikipedia, though, tell me, how will people be able to know that the MJ Wikiproject exists? The project pages themselves do seem to be getting into a little bit of a decrepit state. Noogster 03:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I imagine if someone finds an article/topic they'd like to contribute to, they wisely read the talk page first, and note the project template that should be present at the top. At least, that appears to be the SOP, from what I've seen. ⇔ ChristTrekker 04:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see my comments in the last paragraph at Template talk:Messianic Judaism/Exclusive MJ. mattbr³⁰ 07:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] where's the benevolent dictator when you need him?

Oh for crying out loud... Y'all have gone and gotten the template locked? This situation is clearly not going to improve. How do we go about requesting some kind of high-level arbitration or whatever-you-call-it? The only way I see this being resolved right now is if some neutral third party can come in with some authority and knock some heads around, and hands down an official statement of WP policies as applied to this topic. It's not just this template, it's the whole relationship between two RL communities bleeding over into blatant in-WP POV warring. I'd hoped that an understanding could be reached, but part of me knew that was overly optimistic. ⇔ ChristTrekker 15:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template

The current iteration of the template is enormously better than when I last saw it (during a deletion debate). Well done to all concerned. --Dweller 15:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Name a single aspect in which it is better. Because whereas the last template was a comprehensive linkbase of information relative to many different aspects of this religious movement, this one is written from an extremely angular perspective and censors any information certain groups don't like to be shown. Noogster 22:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It conforms much ore closely to the community consensus on TfD. That in and of itself is both necessary and sufficient. -- Avi 22:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Not when much of the TfD process was itself a farce. Noogster 22:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

And how exactly was it a farce? Because it didn't agree with your preconceived notions? And also, I think Messianic Judaism is a farce. Who cares? It doesn't matter. It's not relevant to this discussion. This talk page is for improving the Messianic Judaism template. I believe that by openly admitting you are a messianic, you're asking to be blocked per WP:COI. If you want an example of this, please see this, where a Scientologist was banned from editing the Scientology template, as well as all Scientology related articles. Don't make the same mistake. Looking at your behavior, I am sorry to say it may be too late. Thanks.--Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 23:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Note: In general, Noogster's being a Messianic would not be a conflict of interest but may be a point-of-view issue. A conflict of interest would be more along the lines of his editing of Messianic Jewish Alliance of America were he to be an employee or officer thereof. The Terryo case was NPOV, not COI, IIRC anyway. -- Avi 02:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so, but my general example still stands. Scientology and Messianic Judaism, while they have few supporters here in WP, those supporters are often very dogmatic regarding their views. I think the dogmatism of noogster and terryeo is comparable.--Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 02:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

To answer your question, it's no longer likely to be mistaken for the Judaism template, which was the problem many people were bothered by at the TfD. --Dweller 23:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Wait, WHAT, Kirby? You are telling me that it is a mistake to honestly reveal my identity (halakhic Messianic Judaism) and intentions for editing Wikipedia (improving the encyclopedia content, with a focus on the MJ articles), and ethical to do the opposite? Obviously whatever case you're talking about was bad stuff, and that scientologist guy had no business being unilaterally banned in such a fashion. Have you no shame or sense of justice? It's called a NPOV and everyone is responsible for maintaining one here. Noogster 00:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are. But they're also responsible for abiding by consensus on what is NPOV. We have a name for people who impose the true unbiased version on everyone else. They're called banned users. -Amarkov moo! 01:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested edit

This template is protected, and should be tagged with {{protected template}}, or another suitable protection template. Thanks – Qxz 20:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the protection in the hope that everyone can get along and use talk pages for consensus. Edit warring will just get this locked again. -- Avi 03:06, 16 March 2007 (UTC)