Hebrew Roots Movement – The Use of Midrash
Something that comes up repeatedly when one is exposed to those in the Hebrew Roots/Messianic Judaism movements is their primary method of interpreting Scripture called “midrash”. In various venues I’ve seen those in the HR/MJ camp invoke superior knowledge and insight rendered by the use of midrash, which they imply means
“context” - just from a decidedly Jewish point of view. They appeal to the Christian believer’s affinity for context by saying things like, “The Scriptures were written by Hebrews, about Hebrews, for Hebrews”, making their approach seem to make perfect sense. Never mind that if we really look at the actual context of several of the Epistles, the “by Hebrews, about Hebrews, for Hebrews” shtick doesn’t hold up. But I digress.
After all, as Christian believers, we’re all for looking at the Scriptures in context! Considering a Scripture passage’s author, time of writing, the history of the day, who the passage was written to/about, the cultural traditions/implications of all of those things, etc., etc. - we find that those things give us a better understanding of many biblical texts. For those who are serious about understanding the Scriptures, well, context is our thing!
That said . . .
While context may or may not be an element of midrash, it is at best a fragmentary element, as you will see below. As you will also see below, even if a midrash does contain even an element of context, the subjectivity of midrash cancels out any context because of that subjectivity! Add to that the rabbinic prejudices and the potential mystical components of midrash, and, well . . . just keep reading . . .
Let’s look at just what is Midrash:
From Faqs.org:
Midrash minimizes the authority of the wording of the text as communication, normal language. It places the focus on the reader and the personal struggle of the reader to reach an acceptable moral application of the text. While it is always governed by the wording of the text, it allows for the reader to project his or her inner struggle into the text. This allows for some very powerful and moving interpretations which, to the ordinary user of language, seem to have very little connection with the text. The great weakness of this method is that it always threatens to replace the text with an outpouring of personal reflection. At its best it requires the presence of mystical insight not given to all readers.
From Wikipedia:
Midrash (Hebrew: מדרש; plural midrashim, lit. “to investigate” or “study”) is a Hebrew term referring to the not exact, but comparative (homiletic) method of exegesis (hermeneutic) of Biblical texts, which is one of four methods cumulatively called Pardes. The term midrash can also refer to a compilation of homiletic teachings (commentaries) on the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible), in the form of legal and ritual (Halakhah) and legendary, moralizing, folkloristic, and anecdotal (Aggadah) parts.
What is PaRDeS? Also from Wikipedia:
The term, sometimes also spelled PaRDeS, is an acronym formed from the name initials of these four approaches, which are:
- Peshat (פְּשָׁט) — “plain” (simple) or the direct meaning.
- Remez (רֶמֶז) — “hints” or the deep (allegoric) meaning beyond just the literal sense.
- Derash (דְּרַשׁ) — from Hebrew darash: “inquire” (seek) — the comparative (midrashic) meaning, as given through similar occurrences.
- Sod (סוֹד) (pronounced with a long O as in gold) — “secret” (mystery) or the mystical meaning, as given through inspiration or revelation.
Each type of Pardes interpretation examines the extended meaning of a text. As a general rule, the extended meaning never contradicts the base meaning. The Peshat means the plain or contextual meaning of the text. Remez is the allegorical meaning. Derash includes the metaphorical meaning, and Sod represents the hidden meaning. There is often considerable overlap, for example when legal understandings of a verse are influenced by mystical interpretations or when a “hint” is determined by comparing a word with other instances of the same word.
From My Jewish Learning:
Midrash: The Interpretive Tradition
Midrash is a tool of interpretation which assumes that every word, letter, and even stroke of the pen in the Torah has meaning. Midrash Aggadah focuses on biblical narratives, Midrash Halakhah interprets legal passages. In modern times, midrash can include any retellings, additions, or twists on Torah stories.
From Jewish Virtual Library’s Glossary:
Midrash
(pl. midrashim). From darash, “to inquire,” whence it comes to mean “exposition” (of scripture). Refers to the “commentary” literature developed in classical Judaism that attempts to interpret Jewish scriptures in a thorough manner. Literary Midrash may focus either on halaka, directing the Jew to specific patterns of religious practice, or on (h)aggada, dealing with theological ideas, ethical teachings, popular philosophy, imaginative exposition, legend, allegory, animal fables—that is, whatever is not halaka.
From VirtualReligion.net:
Midrash
Hebrew term for “Interpretation” or “Exposition.” The word generally used for any written or oral commentary on a biblical text. The original purpose of midrash was to resolve problems in the Hebrew text of the Bible. As early as the 1st c. CE rabbinic principles of hermeneutics & philology were used to bring the interpretation of difficult passages in the literal text of scripture into line with the religious & ethical values of the teachers. This method of interpretation was eventually expanded to provide scriptural pretexts to justify oral tradition. Thus, midrash exposes the values & worldview of the rabbinic interpreter & audience rather than the original intention of the author of the biblical text.
There is more information about midrash online and a myriad of websites out there with “midrashic” points of view, but one gets the general idea from the references above.
When one uses a midrash as a lens through which to interpret Scripture, based on the above it is likely that that person is seeking to mold Scripture to a predetermined opinion or belief system, rather than seeking to mold their opinion or belief system to what Scripture actually says. Even if one is sincere in their desire to seek truth using midrash, the method of midrash is fundamentally flawed, from its subjective nature (not to mention its rabbinic prejudice) to the possibility of mystical influence.
It is also interesting to note the Scripture passages that are targeted for midrash within the HR/MJ belief system. Those passages are not limited to Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament) as with Judaism, but are often those New Testament Scriptures (which were written in Greek) that deal with issues such as the Old and New Covenants, whether or not those who have faith in Jesus Christ are or are not subject to the Law of Moses, even the issue of the Deity of Jesus Christ. The list goes on, and the topics subjected to midrashic methods typically line up with the basic tenets of Christianity in an effort to tear them down or “modify” them one by one. A number of HR/MJ teachers and lay people even claim that the New Testament was written in Hebrew in an attempt to justify their use of midrashic techniques.
So if someone is trying to tell you that midrash is a “Bible study” or that it is looking at the Scriptures “in context”, or that midrash is simply looking at Scripture from a “Jewish perspective as opposed to our Western mindset”, don’t buy it. Those telling you such things likely believe them to be true - I don’t doubt the sincerity of most folks who are in the HR/MJ movements. But if you go to the simple definitions of midrash, its origins, and read what leadership influencing those in the HR/MJ movements has to say about and how they use midrash, deep flaws in the use of such a subjective method of interpretation comes into focus.
For further reading related to this topic, see
Doublemindedness in the Hebrew Roots Movement – The Use of Kabbalah and Gemetria
Hebrew Roots Movement – Messin’ With the Word
Hebrew Roots Movement – The Issue of Hellenization
Hebrew Roots Movement – Salesmanship 101
May God grant you wisdom and discernment as you consider all of these things.
-JGIG
Tags: "Law Keepers", Christianity, Discernment, Hebraic Roots, Hebrew Roots Movement, Messianic Judaism, Midrash, Religion, Teachable/Unteachable
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
June 22, 2009 at 12:04 pm
“So if someone is trying to tell you that midrash is a “Bible study” or that it is looking at the Scriptures “in context”, or that midrash is simply looking at Scripture from a “Jewish perspective as opposed to our Western mindset”, don’t buy it.”
What a silly thing to say. Midrash is any attempt to derive meaning through a number of techniques, including simply laying two texts side by side. Your whole post is an example of someone who thinks that, because she has a read a few articles, she is expert in a topic with which she is completely unfamiliar.
June 22, 2009 at 4:08 pm
[...] Hebrew Roots Movement – The Use of Midrash [...]
June 22, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Hey there, Mishkan! Welcome to JGIG!
For the reader, Mishkan and I have had the opportunity to banter a bit on the Messianic Judaism forum at CARM.
On to your comment. You wrote:
Midrash is any attempt, no matter how subjective, no matter the source of the “techniques”, to derive meaning from a text. That’s the problem with the method. It’s inconsistent at best, subjective at worst, and an abomination when mysticism is employed.
I appreciate your attempt to minimize midrash’s dangers by saying its methods include “simply laying two texts side by side”. Okay, while that may be true, there are other really faulty techniques that are employed that you deliberately try to deflect attention from.
Then the superior attitude comes into play, poo-pooing me, in your view, because I’ve read “a few articles”. You could not discount the post itself, so you found it necessary to try to discredit me. That’s fine, I can take it =o).
Back to the realities of the results of Midrash . . . In discourse with several different folks in the HR/MJ movements, as I’ve encountered issues where midrash was used by those holding to the HR/MJ belief system, it was like Scriptural texts were taken into a carnival fun house full of those wavy mirrors, and what was reflected there is what the HR/MJ belief system took out the other end and labeled as truth. Some of the doctrines that come through the midrashic process are unrecognizable when compared with the plain and obvious meaning of a Biblical text.
So it’s not just a matter of “reading a few articles” that have brought me to the conclusions I’ve drawn for this post, it’s real experience and real observation in comparing what Scripture plainly says when compared with the “midrash version” of a topic/passage/doctrine. As I investigated the definitions, methods, and mystical elements of midrash, it made perfect sense why the HR/MJ interpretations of Scripture were so different from the plain meaning of the text in key areas – those interpretations were/are the result of distorting methods.
Am I an expert? No =o). I’m just a simple heart living a simple faith, just like the tag line under my blog title says. That does not mean, however, that the Holy Spirit does not give me discernment and the Scriptures as a plumb line by which to measure belief systems. ‘Nough said.
-JGIG
June 25, 2009 at 1:56 pm
>> I appreciate your attempt to minimize midrash’s dangers by saying its methods include “simply laying two texts side by side”. Okay, while that may be true, there are other really faulty techniques that are employed that you deliberately try to deflect attention from. <> Then the superior attitude comes into play, poo-pooing me, in your view, because I’ve read “a few articles”. You could not discount the post itself, so you found it necessary to try to discredit me. That’s fine, I can take it =o). <> it was like Scriptural texts were taken into a carnival fun house full of those wavy mirrors, and what was reflected there is what the HR/MJ belief system took out the other end and labeled as truth. <> Some of the doctrines that come through the midrashic process are unrecognizable when compared with the plain and obvious meaning of a Biblical text. <> So it’s not just a matter of “reading a few articles” that have brought me to the conclusions I’ve drawn for this post, it’s real experience and real observation in comparing what Scripture plainly says when compared with the “midrash version” of a topic/passage/doctrine. As I investigated the definitions, methods, and mystical elements of midrash, it made perfect sense why the HR/MJ interpretations of Scripture were so different from the plain meaning of the text in key areas – those interpretations were/are the result of distorting methods. <> I’m just a simple heart living a simple faith, just like the tag line under my blog title says. That does not mean, however, that the Holy Spirit does not give me discernment and the Scriptures as a plumb line by which to measure belief systems. <> ‘Nough said. <<
Yeah, I agree.
Thanks for the dialog. I know you don't have to allow these comments to go public.
June 26, 2009 at 4:06 pm
If you’re going to remove all my words from the text, I’d prefer if you simply deleted my comments. It is dishonest to re-post only your words, and keep only “Yeah, I agree” from my own post. It disappoints me that you prefer to lie than to deal with what I said. So much for all that high-sounding anti-Torah moral superiority.
One more validation for my choice to leave the traditional Christian churches 30 years ago.
June 26, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Hi Mishkan,
Unlike a forum like CARM, where there are threads within topics and quoting the text of one you are responding to helps with continuity for the reader, blog comments are more of a rolling dialogue.
Most readers scroll down through the comments and have no trouble seeing the conversation as it evolves. As for your comment DIRECTLY ABOVE this comment, I’ll let it speak for itself.
Grace and Peace,
-JGIG
October 14, 2009 at 10:20 pm
I think the methodology involved in the above 4 ways sound eisegetical in their approach. Now, that can not be avoided, a certain amount of bias and subjectivity comes into play no matter what the situation is. A safer method of scriptural investigation would be to look at the four areas of Historical, Canonical, Symbolic and Rational; the Exegesis method, combined with the science of Hermeneutics. A Great Commentary also helps!!:))
November 3, 2009 at 2:25 am
Hi Laurie,
Well put. Midrash is just WAY too subjective a process to use as a method with which to interpret Scripture. Thanks for your comment!
In Him,
JGIG