SEJARAH PEPERA, UTUSAN PBB KECEWA ATAS KEPUTUSAN PEPERA

SEJARAH PEPERA, UTUSAN PBB KECEWA ATAS KEPUTUSAN PEPERA

suasana Pelaksanaan PEPERA/Google
Perang suku di Papua adalah (devide et impera), yang dibangun oleh indonesia untuk menutupi akar masalah PAPUA, Karena masalah Papua dalam Indoneisia yang belum selesai, akar masalah Papua yang belum selesai yaitu pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia pada saat PEPERA 1969,

A. HASIL PEPERA 1969 DALAM DOKUMEN PBB ANNEX I, A/7723.

Dr. Fernando Ortiz Sanz, perwakilan PBB, yang berada di Papua untuk mengawasi pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat rakyat tahun 1969, dalam laporanya menyatakan penyesalan karena pemerintah Indonesia tidak melaksanakan sesuai isi perjanjian New York XXII (22)tentang hak-hak dan kebebasang orang Papua. Laporan Ortiz Sanz dalam siding umum PBB bulan sebtember 1969 sebagai berikut:“saya dengan menyesal harus menyatakan keberatan-keberatan saya tentang pelaksanaan Pasal XXII (22) perjanjian New York, yang berhubungan dengan hak-hak termasuk hak-hak kebebasan  berbicara, kebebasan bergerak, kebebasan berkumpul, penduduk asli” (dokumen PBB, Annex I, A/7723, Paragraph 251, hal.70).

Kutipan aslinya:
“I regret to have to express my reservation regarding the implementation of article XXII of the New York Agreement, relating to “the rights, including the rights of free speech, freedom of movement and assembly, of the inhabitants of the area”. In spite of my constant efforts, this important provision was not fully implemented and the Administration exercised at all times a tight political control over the population” (UN doc. A/7723, annex I, paragraph 251, p.70

Pemerintah Indonesia telah menentang PBB dengan tidak melaksanakannya Perjanjian New York Pasal XXI (22). Penentangan itu terbukti dengan Surat Keputusan resmi Presiden Republik Indonesia, Ir. Sukarno bernomor: 8/Mei/1963 yang menyatakan:
“Melarang/menghalangi atas bangkitnya cabang-cabang Partai Baru di Irian Barat. Di daerah Irian Barat dilarang kegiatan politik dalam bentuk rapat umum, pertemuan umum, demonstrasi-demonstrasi, percetakan, publikasi, pengumuman- pengumuman, penyebaran, perdagangan atau artikel, pameran umum, gambaran-gambaran atau foto-foto tanpa ijin pertama dari gubernur atau pejabat resmi yang ditunjuk oleh Presiden” (SK, No. 8, Mei 1963).

Dr. Fernando Ortiz Sanz dalam laporannya kepada Sidang Umum PBB menyatakan pula tentang kekecewaannya. Karena pemerintah Indonesia tidak melaksanakan ketentuan-ketentuan dalam Perjanjian New York Pasal XVI (16) di Papua Barat.

“Saya harus menyatakan pada awal laporan ini bahwa, ketika saya tiba di Papua pada bulan Agustus 1968, saya diperhadapkan dengan masalah tentang tidak dilaksanakan dengan ketentuan-ketentuan Pasal XVI (16) Perjanjian New York. Walaupun, ahli PBB yang harus berada di Papua pada saat peralihan tanggungjawab administrasi sepenuhnya kepada Indonesia telah dikurangi, mereka tidak pernah mengetahui secara baik keadaan-keadaan dalam melaksanakan tugas-tugas mereka. Akibatnya, fungsi-fungsi dasar mereka untuk menasihati, membatu dalam persiapan untuk melaksanakan ketentuan-ketentuan tentang penentuan nasib sendiri tidak didukung selama masa bulan Mei 1963 s/d 23 Agustus 1969 …” (paragraph 23, hal. 12).

Kutipan aslinya:
“I must state at the outset of this report that, when I arrived in the territory in August 1968, I was faced with the problem of non-compliance with the provisions of article XVI of the Agreement. Though the United Nations experts who were to have remained in the territory at the time of the transfer of full administrative responsibility to Indonesia had been designated, they had never, owing to well known circumstances, taken up their duties. Consequently, their essential functions of advising on and assisting in preparation for carrying out the provisions for self-determinations had not been performed during the period May 1963 to 23 August 1969 …”(paragraph 23, p. 12).

Dr. Fernando Ortiz Sanz juga sangat menyesal, karena orang-orang Indonesia tidak melaksanakan Perjanjian New Yok Pasal XVIII (18) tentang sistem “satu orang, satu suara” sesuai dengan praktek internasional. Tetapi, orang-orang Indonesia memakai sistem lokal Indonesia, yaitu sistem “musyawarah”.“… pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas telah dilaksanakan di Irian Barat sesuai dengan praktek Indonesia, …(paragraph 253, hal. 70).“… an act of free choice has taken place in West Irian accordance with Indonesia practice, … (paragraph 253, p. 70).

Sang Diplomat Bolivia ini juga menyatakan dalam laporannya secara tegas dan jelas bahwa orang-orang Papua Barat dalam pernyataan-pernyataannya menyatakan berkeinginan kuat untuk merdeka dan tidak ingin dimasukkan ke dalam negara Indonesia.

“Pernyataan-pernyataan (petisi-petisi) tentang pencaplokan Indonesia, peristiwa-peristiwa ketegangan di Manokwari, Enarotali, dan Waghete, perjuangan-perjuangan rakyat bagian pedalaman yang dikuasai oleh pemerintah Australia, dan keberadaan tahanan politik, lebih daripada 300 orang yang dibebaskan atas permintaan saya, menunjukkan bahwa tanpa ragu-ragu unsur-unsur penduduk Irian Barat memegang teguh berkeinginan merdeka. Namun demikian, jawaban yang diberikan oleh dewan musyawarah atas pertanyaan yang disampaikan kepada mereka sepakat tinggal dengan Indonesia”( paragraph 250, hal. 70).

Kutipan aslinya:
“The petitions opposing annexation to Indonesia, the cases of unrest in Manokwari, Enarotali, and Waghete, the flights of number of people to the part of the island that is administrated by Australia, and the existence of political detainees, more than 300 of the population of West Irian held firm conviction in favour of independence. Nevertheless, the answer given by the consultative assemblies to the questions put to them was a unanimous consensus in favour of remaining with Indonesia” ( paragraph 250, hal. 70).

Ortiz Sanz juga melaporkan sikap orang-orang Indonesia yang menolak nasihat-nasihatnya kepada orang-orang Indonesia untuk melaksanakan Perjanjian New York Pasal XVI (16). Fernando menyatakan kecewa karena pendekatannya tidak diberikan jawaban yang menyenangkan.

“… Pada beberapa kesempatan, saya mendekati pemerintah Indonesia yang berkuasa pada saat itu untuk tujuan melaksanakan ketentuan-ketentuan pasal XVI (16), tetapi gagal mendapat jawaban yang menyenangkan. Pada tanggal 7 Januari 1965, sebagaimana diketahui, Indonesia menarik diri dari keanggotaan PBB, dan oleh karena itu tidak memungkinkan untuk mengutus ahli PBB ke West New Guinea (Irian Barat)” (paragraph 7, hal. 3).

Kutipan aslinya:
“… on several occasion, I approached the Government which was in power in Indonesia at the time for purpose of implementing the provisions of article XVI, but failed to obtain a favourable reply. On 7 January 1965, as is well known, Indonesia withdrew its co-operation with the United Nations and it therefore became impossible to send the United Nations experts West New Guinea (West Irian)” (paragraph 7, p. 3).

Mr. Fenando menggambarkan situasi yang sangat berbahaya di Papua karena pemerintah Indonesia menarik diri dari keanggotaan PBB dan karena itu tidak memungkinkan PBB mengutus tim PBB ke Papua untuk mengatur dan mengawasi pelaksanaan penentuan nasib sendiri di Papua tahun 1969. Fernando melihat bahwa pada saat tim PBB tidak berada di Papua, pemerintah Indonesia secara bebas mengejar, menangkap, menyiksa, membunuh dan menghilangkan orang-orang Papua.

“Pelaksanaan bagian kedua Perjanjian New York sangat berbahaya selama ketidakpastian waktu tidak hanya dengan penarikan diri sementara dari PBB tetapi juga dengan ketidakhadiran sebagaimana telah disebutkan dalam paragraph 14 di atas, ahli PBB yang harus berada di Papua sesuai dengan Pasal XVI (16 ) Perjanjian New York” ( paragraph 23, hal. 12).

Kutipan aslinya:
“The implementation of the second part of the Agreement was jeopardised during the certain period of time not only by the temporary withdrawal of Indonesia from the United Nations but also by the absence, as already mentioned in paragraph 14 above, of the United Nations experts who have to have remained in the territory in accordance with article XVI the Agreement” (paragraph 23, p. 12).

Ortiz Sanz sangat menyesal atas sikap dan tindakan pemerintah Indonesia, karena keinginan dan kesediaannya untuk datang kepada Papua secepat-cepatnya sengaja ditunda secara resmi oleh pemerintah Indonesia. 

“Saya memegang pekerjaan saya di Markas PBB di New York ditempatkannya kantor sekretariat dan personil. Walaupun keinginan dan kesediaan saya untuk berangkat ke Papua secepatnya sesudah jabatan saya, keberangkatan saya ditunda sampai 7 Agustus 1978 atas permintaan resmi dari pemerintah Indonesia” (paragraph 27, hal. 13).

Kutipan aslinya:
“I commenced my work at United Nations Headquarters in New York, were the Secretariat placed offices and personel at my disposal. Despite my willingness and readiness to travel to territory immediately after my appointment, my departure was postponed until 7 August 1968 at the official request of the Indonesian Government” ( paragraph 27, p. 13).

Sebagaimana dikutip di bawah ini, Ortiz Sanz menyatakan reaksi yang tidak resmi dari pemerintah Indonesia tentang usulannya untuk metode pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat di Papua Barat.

“Saya menerima reaksi tidak resmi atas nasihat saya berkaitan dengan pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang diajukan untuk dewan-dewan perwakilan dan metode yang memungkinkan untuk pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas sampai suatu pertemuan diadakan menteri luar negeri tanggal 10 Februari 1969, ketika pemerintah Indonesia menginformasikan kepada saya bahwa proposal metode diajukan untuk dewan-dewan perwakilan dalam konsultasi-konsultasi untuk diadakan selama bulan Maret 1969” (paragraph 83, hal. 29).

Kutipan aslinya:
“I received no official reactions to my suggestions concerning the questions to submitted to the representative councils and possible method for the act of free choice until a meeting held at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 10 February 1968, when the Government informed me of the method it proposed to submit to the representative councils in consultations to be held during the month of March 1969” (paragraph 83, p.29).

Fernando juga mengatakan sikap pemerintah Indonesia yang menipu perwakilan PBB tentang metode pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat rakyat Papua. Ortiz Sanz mengatakan, pemerintah Indonesia pikirannya tidak tetap tentang metode PEPERA.

“Ini berarti bahwa pemerintah Indonesia masih bermaksud melengkapi metode musyawarah untuk keputusan melalui perwakilan rakyat tetapi berlawanan dengan ide yang disampaikan pada 1 Oktober (lihat paragraph 8), itu direncanakan untuk melaksanakan pemilihan bebas tidak melalui satu badan 200 perwakilan, tetapi sebagai akibatnya melalui delapan wakil (perawakilan) terdiri dari 1.025 perwakilan” (paragraph 85, hal.30).

Kupitan aslinya:
“This meant that the Government still intended to apply the consultation (musyawarah) method of decision through representative of the people but, in contradiction to the ideas expressed on 1 October (see paragraph 81), it planned to carry out the act of free choice not through no body of 200 representatives but consecutively through eight consultative assemblies, comprising some 1.025 representatives” (paragraph 85, p. 30).
Perwakilan PBB ini juga, melaporkan bahwa dia menerima keinginan dan pandangan orang Papua disampaikan dengan berbagai bentuk kepada Ortiz Sanz sebagai perwakilan PBB. “Pandangan dan keinginan rakyat dinyatakan melalui berbagai saluran. Pernyataan-pernyataan dan komunikasi lain disampaikan kepada saya secara tertulis atau lisan, demostarasi-demostrasi damai, dan beberapa terwujud pada ketidakpuasan rakyat, termasuk peristiwa-peristiwa sepanjang perbatasan antara Irian Barat dan wilayah Papua dan New Guinea yang dikuasai oleh Australia” (Paragraph 138, hal. 45).

Kutipan aslinya:
“The views and wishes of the people were gragually expressed through various channels: petitions and other communications submitted to me in writing or orally, peaceful demonstrations, and in some cases manifestation of public unrest, including incidents along the border between West Irian and Territory of Papua and New Guinea administrated by Australia” (paragraph 138, p. 45).

Dr. Fernando Ortiz Sanz melaporkan kepada Sidang Umum PBB bahwa selama dia berada di Papua telah menerima 179 pernyataan dari orang Papua. Simaklah kutipan di bawah ini: “Selama waktu misi saya berada di Papua, saya menerima sejumlah 179 pernyataan dari orang Irian Barat, politisi, sipil, dan kelompok mahasiswa, bahkan dari orang Irian Barat yang berada di luar negeri” (Paragrap 140, 46).

Kutipan aslinya:
“During the time my mission was in territory, I received a total of 179 petitions from West Irianese persons and political, civil, and student groups, as well as from Irianes residing abroad” (paragraph 140, p. 46).

Berkaitan dengan pernyataan-pernyataan orang Papua ini, “dalam arsif PBB di New York, secara rinci 156 dari 179 pernyataan yang masih bertahan terus, sesuai dengan semua yang diterima sampai 30 April 1969. Dari pernyataan-pernyaan ini, 95 pernyataan anti-Indonesia, 59 pernyataan pro-Indonesia, dan 2 pernyataan adalah neutral” (Lihat Dok PBB di New York: Six lists of summaries of political communications from unidentified Papuans to Ortiz Sanz, August 1968 to April 1969 UN: Series 100, Box 1, File 5).
Ortiz Sanz dalam laporannya dengan tegas mengatakan bahwa mayoritas orang Papua berkeinginan untuk mendukung pikiran mendirikan negara Papua Merdeka. Rakyat Papua kritik orang Indonesia dan menuntut supaya penentuan pendapat dilaksanakan dengan praktek internasional, yaitu satu orang satu suara (one man, one vote).

“Mayoritas menunjukkan berkeinginan untuk berpisah dengan Indonesia dan mendukung pikiran mendirikan negara Papua Merdeka. Rakyat Papua sering menyatakan kritik tentang administrasi Indonesia, mengadu kurangnya jaminan atas hak-hak dasar dan kemerdekaan, termasuk kebebasan untuk mengatur partai politik oposisi, permintaan pembebasan tahanan politik dan partisipasi dalam pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas seluruh orang Irian Barat, termasuk yang tinggal di luar negeri, pengaduan resolusi-resolusi dan pernyataan-pernyataan keinginan Indonesia sebagai kegagalan dan ditanda tangani oleh rakyat di bawa tekanan dari pemerintah resmi Indonesia; meminta untuk persyaratan sistem “satu orang satu suara= one man one vote” dalam pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas dan dipilih oleh dewan perwakilan rakyat, dan dinyatakan pandangan bahwa kelompok oposisi (lawan) hendaknya diberikan perwakilan dalam dewan-dewan” ( paragrap 143, hal. 47).

Kutipan aslinya:
“… The majority indicated the desire to sever ties with Indonesia and support the idea of the establishment of a Free Papua State. The petitioners often expressed criticism of the Indonesian administration; complained against acts of repression by the Indonesian armed forces; denounced the lacf of guarantees for basic rights and freedoms, including the freedom to orginise opposition political parties; requested the release of political prisoners and participation in the act of free choice of all Irianese, including those residing abroad; denounced resolutions and statements in favour of Indonesia as false and signed by people under pressure from Indonesian officials; asked for the application of the “one man, one vote” system in the act of free choice and in the election by the people of the representatives to the councils, and expressed the view that opposition groups should be given representation in the councils” (paragraph 143, p. 47).

Fernando melaporkan pula dalam laporannya bahwa orang-orang Papua berkeinginan melaksanakan penentuan pendapat rakyat dengan bebas tanpa tekanan militer Indonesia. Simaklah kutipan di bawah ini.

“Pemimpin-pemimpin penentang meminta penarikan pasukan-pasukan Indonesia dari Paniai dengan menjelaskan bahwa rakyat berkeinginan untuk melaksanakan hak pemilihan bebas tanpa tekanan. Sebuah pesawat pemerintah membawa dukungan 16 tentara, dan pada tanggal 30 April tembakan dimulai antara pasukan-pasukan Indonesia dan penentang dibantu oleh pembelot dari anggota tentara dan polisi” (paragrap 160, hal. 51).

Kutipan aslinya:
“The leaders of the insurgents requested the withdrawal of Indonesian troops from Paniai with the explanation that the people wanted to exercise the right of free choice without pressure. A government plane brought reinforcements of sixteen soldiers, and on 30 April shooting started between the Indonesian troops and the insurgents aided by the armed police deserters” (paragraph 160, p. 51).

Fernando melaporkan pula bahwa pelarian orang-orang Papua ke Papua New Guinea adalah karena ketidakpuasan terhadap pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat yang tidak demokratis, tidak jujur dan penuh intimidasi dan teror oleh kekuatan militer Indonesia.“Namun demikian, keadaan yang sulit daerah lintas batas selama misi saya di Irian Barat menunjukkan keputusan politik pasti tidak memuaskan bagian dari beberapa orang penduduk asli” (paragrap 172, hal. 54).

Kutipan aslinya:
“Nevertheless, the recurrence of border crossing during my mission in West Irian seems to show a certain degree of political dissatisfaction on the part of some of the inhabitants” (paragraph 172, p. 54).

Perwakilan PBB, Mr. Fernando mengetahui betul bahwa hasil-hasil PEPERA akan dicapai tidak sesuai dengan keinginan mayoritas orang Papua untuk merdeka. Tetapi, dia terus melaksanakan misinya untuk mengawasi pelaksanaan PEPERA 1969 yang tidak demokratis dan tidak jujur itu. 

“Walupun secara jujur hasil negatif dicapai pada saat itu, saya melanjutkan usaha saya supaya Pasal XXII (22) Perjanjian New York patut dilaksanakan pada pertemuan menteri luar negeri pada 24 Mei, saya berkata bahwa masalah pelaksanaan penuh Pasal XXII (22) Perjanjian New York, berhubungan dan hak-hak kebebasan dibicarakan pada saat itu, tidak ada usaha nyata untuk diterima. Saya menyarankan bahwa pemerintah Indonesia hendaknya mengijinkan lawan politik berkesempatan untuk menyatakan pandangan mereka, sejak itu waktu yang tepat untuk diterima” (paragrap 180, hal. 56).

Kutipan aslinya:
“Notwithstanding the fairly negative result achived up to that time, I continued my effort to have article XXII properly implemented. At a meeting at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 24 May, I said that the problem of the full implementation of article XXII concerning rights and freedoms had to be dealt with because, up to that time, no concrete measures had been adopted.I suggested that the Indonesian government should allow the opposition the opportunity to express its views, since that was the moment to adopt courageous and generous measures” (paragraph 180, p. 56). 

B. HASIL PEPERA 1969 DITOLAK OLEH BEBERAPA NEGARA ANGGOTA PBB

Secara jujur perlu disampaikan kepada para pembaca bahwa pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat rakyat di Papua 14 Juli s/d 2 Agustus 1969 di Papua Barat sangat tidak demokratis, tidak jujur dan penuh intimidasi dan tekanan-tekanan kekuatan militer Indonesia. Salah satu bukti, Surat Telegram Resmi Kol. Inf. Soepomo, Komando Daerah Militer XVII Tjenderawasih Nomor: TR-20/PSAD/196, tertanggal 20-2-1967, berdasarkan Radio Gram MEN/PANGAD No. :TR-228/1967 TBT tertanggal 7-2-1967, perihal: Penghadapi Referendum di IRBA tahun 1969 yang menyatakan:

“Mempergiatkan segala aktivitas di masing-masing bidang dengan mempergunakan semua kekuatan material dan personil yang organic maupun yang B/P-kan baik dari Angkatakan Darat maupun dari lain angkatan. Berpegang teguh pada pedoman. Referendum di IRBA tahun 1969 Uharus dimenangkan, harus dimenangkan.U Bahan-bahan strategis vital yang ada harus diamankan. Memperkecil kekalahan pasukan kita dengan mengurangi pos-pos yang statis. Surat ini berlaku sebagai perintah OPS untuk dilaksanakan. Masing-masing koordinasi sebaik-baiknya. Pandam 17/PANG OPSADAR”.

Apa yang dikutip ini hanya salah satu bukti tekanan-tekanan militer Indonesia dalam menghadapi rakyat di Papua Barat. Karena itu, 15 negara anggota PBB menilai bahwa pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat di Papua tidak demokratis dan melanggar hak-hak asasi rakyat Papua. Kita patut memberikan anjungan jempol kepada 15 negara anggota PBB tersebut. Perdebatan sengit pun tidak dapat dihindari dalam Sidang Umum PBB 1969 di Markas Besar PBB, New York. Perlawanan itu datang dari pemerintah Ghana dan Gabon. Simaklah kutipan tentang perlawanan sengit Mr. Akwei (pemerintah Ghana) dan Mr. Davin (pemerintah Gabon) sebagai berikut:

1. Mr. Akwei ( Pemerintah Ghana)
Mr. Akwei menyatakan kritiknya dalam hal metode pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat rakyat Papua, bahwa:

“… Mr. Ortiz Sanz membuat dua proposal untuk bahan pertimbangan pemerintah Indonesia: pertama, bahwa pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas didasarkan pada pemilihan langsung di daerah kota pesisir pantai dimana daerah sudah maju dalam pendidikan dan berpengalaman rakyat Irian Barat hendak berpartisipasi untuk menyatakan kehendak mereka dengan bebas, dan kedua, bahwa daerah pedalaman dimana tingkat pendidikan, komunikasi dan pendidikan yang sulit, dipakai satu sistem “musyawarah bersama” untuk prosedur pelaksanaan satu orang satu suara. Nasihat dari perwakilan Sekretaris Umum dalam hal ini ditolak oleh pemerintah Indonesia” ( Lihat : Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812PthP: Sidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 98, 19 Nopember 1969).

Kutipan aslinya:
“Mr. Ortiz Sanz made two proposals for the consideration of the Indonesian Government: first, that act of free choice should be based on direct voting in the cities in coastal areas where the general area of development, education and experience of the people of West Irian would quality them to express their options freely, and second, that in the hinderland, where the level of development, communication and education would be difficult, a system “of collective consultation” might be used to complement the one man, one vote, procedure. The advice of the Secretary-General’s Representative on this issu was rejected by the Indonesia Government” (see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 98, 19 November 1969).

Mr. Akwei juga memberi kritik dengan keras bahwa: 
“Seluruh laporan perwakilan Sekretaris Umum PBB memberi kesan bahwa Ortiz Sanz tidak puas dengan metode musyawarah, yang diputuskan oleh pemerintah Indonesia sebagai prosedur untuk dipakai penentuan pemilihan bebas, … ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 98, 19 Nopember 1969, paragraf 18, halaman 2).

Kutipan aslinya:
“Throughout the report of the Secretary-General’s Representative the impression is clear that Mr. Ortiz Sanz was not satisfied with the method of musyawarah, which has been decided upon by the Indonesian Government as the procedure to be used to determine the act of free choice, …( see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 98, 19 November 1969, paragraph 18, p. 2).

Sang Diplomat Ghana ini juga memberikan kritik atas tidak dilaksanakannya praktek internasional dalam penentuan nasib sendiri orang-orang Papua Barat. Kritiknya sebagai berikut: 

“ … PBB mengakui pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas adalah benar-benar suatu pelaksanaan penentuan nasib sendiri oleh rakyat Irian Barat atau kata-kata Perjanjian New York” sesuai dengan praktek internasional”. Di sini masalah lagi adalah laporan bahwa metode yang dipakai penentuan kehendak rakyat tidak sesuai dengan praktek internasional” pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas diadakan di Irian Barat sesuai dengan praktek Indonesia” (A/7723 dan Corr. 1, annex I, paragraph 235, tetapi tidak sesuai dengan praktek internasional” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 98, 19 Nopember 1969, paragraf 20, halaman 3).

Kutipan aslinya:
“… the United Nations to recognise the act of free choice as having been truly and act of self-determination by the people of West Irian or, in the words of the Agreement “ in accordance with international practice”. Here again it is matter of record that the methode adopted to determine the peoples will was not in accord with international practice. Hence the painful but clear verdict of Ambassador Ortiz Sanz that” an act of free choice has taken place in West Irian in accordance with Indonesia practice” (A/7723 and Corr.1, Annex I, paragraph 253, but not in accordance with internasional practice” (see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 98, 19 November 1969, paragraph 20, p. 3).

Mr. Akwei juga mengutip laporan Ortiz Sanz tentang sikap Menteri Dalam Negeri Indonesia yang tidak terpuji yang ditunjukkan dalam pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas di Papua Barat. 

“Lebih lanjut, yang dilaporkan oleh perwakilan Sekretaris Umum bahwa bukti-bukti peristiwa keputusan pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas adalah fenomena asing dimana Menteri Dalam Negeri naik di mimbar dan benar-benar kampanye. Saya mengutip dari laporan: “Dia, Menteri Dalam Negeri Indonesia” dia meminta anggota-anggota dewan musyawarah untuk menentukan masa depan mereka dengan mengajak bahwa mereka satu ideology, Pancasila, satu bendera, satu pemerintah. Satu negara dari Sabang sampai Merauke. Dia menambahkan, pemerintah Indonesia, berkeinginan dan mampu melindungi untuk kesejahteraan rakyat Irian Barat; oleh karena itu, tidak ada pilihan lain, tetapi tinggal dengan Republik Indonesia. Dia menyatakan atas sidang untuk membuat Merauke suatu awal kemenangan (A//7723 and Corr. 1, Annex I, paragraph 195)” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 98, 19 Nopember 1969, paragraf 28, halaman 4).

Kutipan aslinya:
“ Futher, it is reported by the representative of the Secretary-General that at the actual event of deciding the act of free choice the strange phenomenon wa regularly gone through whereby the Minister of Home Affairs took the floor and virtually campaigned, as it were. I quote from the report:“He”- the Minister of Home Affairs of Indonesia- “asked the members of the assembly to determine their future with courage and full responsibility bearing in mind that they had one ideology, Pancha Shila, one flag, one Government, and one country extending from Sabang to Merauke. It was the Indonesian Government, he added, which was willing and able to care for the welfare of the people of West Irian; therefore, there was no alternative but to remain within the Republic of Indonesia. He called upon the assembly to make Merauke the beginning of victory.” (A/7723 and Corr.1, annex I, paragraph 195.), ( see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 98, 19 November 1969, paragraph 28, p.4)

2.       Mr. Davin ( Pemerintah Gabon)
Delegasi pemerintah Gabon dalam kritiknya dengan tegas mengatakan ketidakjujuran dan penipuan pemerintah Indonesia terhadap orang Papua dalam melakasnakan PEPERA di Papua Barat. Simaklah kutipan-kutipan di bawah ini. 

“Setelah mempelajari laporan ini, utusan pemerintah Gabon menemukan kebinggugan yang luar biasa, itu sangat sulit bagi kami menyatakan pendapat tentang metode dan prosedur yang dipakai untuk musyawarah rakyat Irian Barat. Kami dibinggungkan luar biasa dengan keberatan-keberatan yang dirumuskan oleh Mr. Ortiz Sanz dalam kata-kata terakhir pada penutupan laporannya” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 106, 20 Nopember 1969, paragraf 11, halaman 2).

Kutipan aslinya:
“After studying this report, the Gabonese delegation finds itself extremely perplexed. It is very hard to us to pass judgement on the methods and procedures that were used to consult the people of West Irian. We are greatly disturbed by the reservations formulated by Mr. Ortiz Sanz in the final remarks at the close of his report” (see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 108, 20 November 1969, paragraph 11, p.2).

“Berkenaan dengan metode-metode dan prosedur-prosedur ini, jika utusan saya berpikir perlunya untuk menyampaikan pertanyaan mendasar, itu dengan pasti menarik perhatian peserta sidang untuk memastikan aspek-aspek yang ada, untuk menyatakan setidak-tidaknya luar biasa. Kami harus menyatakan kekejutan kami dan permintaan penjelasan tentang sejumlah bukti-bukti yang disampaikan dalam laporan perwakilan Sekretaris Umum. Contoh; kami dapat betanya mengapa sangat banyak jumlah mayoritas wakil-wakil diangkat oleh pemerintah dan tidak dipilih oleh rakyat; mengapa pengamat PBB dapat hadir dalam pemilihan hanya 20 persen wakil, beberapa dari mereka hanya sebentar saja; Mengapa pertemuan konsultasi dikepalai oleh Gubernur; dengan kata lain, oleh perwakilan pemerintah; mengapa hanya organisasi pemerintah dan bukan gerakan oposisi dapat hadir sebagai calon” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 106, 20 Nopember 1969, paragraf 12, halaman 2).

Kutipan aslinya:
“As regards these methods and procedures, if my delegation had thought it necessary to speak on the substance of the question, it would certainly have drawn the Assembly’s attention to certain aspect which are, to say the least, unusual. We might have expressed our surprise and requested an explanation concerning a number of fact brought out in the report of the Representative of the Secretary-General. For example, we might asked why the vast majority of the deputies were appointed by the government and not elected by the people; why the United Nations observers were able to be present at the election of only 20 per cent of the deputies, some of whom, incidentally, were elected automatically because they belonged to official representative bodies; why the consultative assemblies were presided over by the Governor of the district, in others, by the representative of governmental authority; why only Government authorised organisations, and not opposition movements, were able to present candidates(see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 108, 20 November 1969, paragraph 12, p.2).

“Kami dapat bertanya mengapa prinsip “one man, one vote” direkomendasikan oleh perwakilan Sekretaris Umum tidak dilaksanakan; Mengapa tidak ada perwakilan rahasia, tetapi musyawarah terbuka yang dihadiri pemerintah dan militer; Mengapa para menteri dengan sengaja hadir dan mempengaruhi wakil-wakil di depan umum dengan menyampaikan mereka bahwa “hanya hak menjawab atas pertanyaan untuk mengumumkan bahwa mereka berkeinginan tinggal bersatu dengan Indonesia”; Mengapa hak-hak pengakuan dalam Pasal XXII (22) Perjanjian New York, berhubungan dengan kebebasan menyatakan pendapat; perserikatan dan perkumpulan; tidak dinikmati oleh seluruh penduduk asli Papua” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 106, 20 Nopember 1969, paragraf 14, halaman 2).

Kutipan aslinya:
“We might have asked why the principle of “one man, one vote”, recommended by the Representative of the Secretary-General, was not adopted; why there was not a secret ballot, but a public consultation in the presence of the government authorities and the army; why rights recognised in article XXII of the Agreement, concerning freedom of opinion statement, association and assembly, were not enjoyed by all citizens” (see: United Nations Official Records: 1812PthP Plenary Meeting of the UN General Assembly, agenda item 108, 20 November 1969, paragraph 14, p.2).
“…. Saya sangat menyesal, saya tidak menemukan jawaban yang memuaskan dalam laporan. Bahwa bukti-bukti menambah keprihatinan kita, jika memungkinkan, dengan diikuti keberatan dibuat oleh Perwakilan Sekretaris Umum:

“Saya dengan menyesal harus menyatakan keberatan-keberatan saya tentang pelaksanaan Pasal XXII (22) Perjanjian New York, yang berhubungan dengan hak-hak termasuk hak-hak kebebasan berbicara, kebebasan bergerak, kebebasan berkumpul, penduduk asli” (Dokumen PBB, Annex I, A/7723, paragraph 251, hal. 70). ” ( lihat: Laporan resmi PBB: Pertemuan Paripurna 1812Pth PSidang Umum PBB, agenda pokok 106, 20 Nopember 1969, paragraf 14, halaman 2).

Kutipan aslinya:
“I regret to have to express my reservation regarding the implementation of article XXII of the New York Agreement, relating to “the rights, including the rights of free speech, freedom of movement and assembly, of the inhabitants of the area”. In spite of my constant efforts, this important provision was not fully implemented and the Administration exercised at all times a tight political control over the population” (UN doc. A/7723, annex I, paragraph 251, p.70)

Dalam tulisan ini juga, penting ditulis apa yang disampaikan oleh Dr. Hans Meijer, Sejarahwan Belanda dalam penelitiannya yang berhubungan dengan hasil PEPERA 1969 di Papua Barat. Hans menyatakan bahwa:

“Sebagian besar hal yang menarik adalah tentang dokumen-dokumen yang benar-benar tertulis dalam arsif. Sebab Menteri Luar Negeri Belanda, Lunz, dia menyatakan secara jelas dalam arsip surat bahwa dia percaya bahwa PEPERA 1969 tidak jujur sebab jikalau jujur orang-orang Papua bersuara melawan Indonesia …, sungguh-sungguh itu tidak demokratis dan itu suatu lelucon. Lunz juga, mengadakan pertemuan sangat rahasia dengan Menteri Luar Negeri Indonesia, Adam Malik, bahwa Belanda meninggalkan Papua ketika PEPERA dilaksanakan. Bahkan Belanda telah mengetahui bahwa PEPERA tidak demokratis, mereka tidak berbuat apa-apa tentang itu. Mr. Saltimar yang adalah Duta Besar Belanda di Jakarta, pada waktu pelaksanaan PEPERA, dia menulis surat kepada Mr. Schiff sebagai Sekretaris Umum Luar Negeri, bahwa tentu saja dia melihat banyak hal yang salah tetapi itu bukan tanggungjawabnya untuk melaporkan tentang itu dalam dokumen-dokumen resmi”.

Dr. Hans menambahkan bahwa
“…. Khusunya sebagaimana saya mempunyai teman dari British namanya ialah John Saltford dan dia meneliti peranan PBB dalam penentuan pendapat rakyat (PEPERA) dan dengan penelitian saya dan penelitiannya saya berpikir orang-orang Papua mempunyai masalah yang sangat kuat untuk menunjukkan kepada dunia bahwa PEPERA adalah suatu penghinaan dan itu sesungguhnya tidak jujur dan bahwa itu perlu ditinjau kembali”.

Meijer mengatakan pula
“Dan sekarang itu masalah untuk Indonesia bahwa ketika orang-orang Papua menerima semua dokumen-dokumen saya dan mereka menghadap Presiden Wahid, dan Wahid akan datang kepada pemerintah Belanda dan berkata: “Baik, saya sangat tidak gembira dengan apa yang terjadi di Holland tentang diskusi mengenai apa yang kita lakukan dengan pelaksanaan penentuan pendapat rakyat. Demikian pemerintah Belanda sangat tidak sungguh-sungguh mengumumkan semua penelitian saya. Mereka bahkan tidak bereaksi. Mereka sendiri mempunyai penelitian resmi tetapi hasil penelitian itu memakan waktu bertahun-tahun. Dan mengapa? Sebab mereka tidak gembira tentang hasil, sebab itu akan sangat memusingkan kedua negara” (Lihat: Documents show Dutch support for West Papua take-over, ABC Radio National Asia/Pasific Program, first broadcasting, 17 April 2001).

C. RESOLUSI PBB TENTANG HASIL PEPERA 1969

Perjanjian antara Republik Indonesia dan Kerajaan Belanda tentang New Guinea Barat (Irian Barat). Draf Resolusi PBB No. A./L.574 dari Belgium, Indonesia, Malaysia dan Thailand:
Sidang Umum: 
Mengingat resolusi 1752 (XVII) 21 September 1962 menerima perjanjian antara Republik Indonesia dan Belanda berhubungan New Gunea Barat (Irian Barat), peran atas Sekretaris -General dalam perjanjian dengan menggunakan dan untuk melaksanakan tugas-tugas yang dipercayakan kepadanya, Mengingat juga keputusan 6 Nopember 1963 menerima laporan Sekretaris-General penyelesaian UNTEA dI irian Barat, Mengingat lebih lanjut, bahwa persiapan-persiapan untuk pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas adalah tanggung jawab Indonesia untuk menasihati, membantu dan partisipasi dari perwakilan khusus Sekretaris-General, sebagai mana ditentukan dalam Perjanjian, Menerima laporan hasil-hasil pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas yang disiapkan oleh Sekretaris-General sesuai dengan pasal XXI, pragrap 1 menyetujui Perjanjian dan hasil-hasilnya, Mengingat, sesui dengan pasal Perjanjian XXI paragrap 2, dua negara mengakui hasil-hasil ini.

Menerima bahwa Pemerintah Indonesia, dalam melaksanakan rencana pembangunan nasional, memberikan perhatian khusus untuk pengambangan Irian Barat, mengingat keadaan penduduk, dan bahwa Pemerintah Belanda, bekerjasama dengan Pemerintah Indonesia, akan melanjutkan untuk memberikan bantuan keuangan untuk tujuan ini, khususnya melalui Bank pembangunan Asia dan lembaga-lembaga PBB.

1. Menerima Laporan Sekretaris General menyatakan dengan penghargaan bahwa penyelesaian oleh   Sekretaris General dan perwakilannya dari tugas-tugas yang dipercayakan kepada mereka dibawah perjanjian 1962 antara Indonesia dan Belanda;

2. menghargai beberapa bantuan yang disediakan melalui Bank Pembangunan Asia, melalui lembaga-lembaga PBB atau melalui orang-orang lain kepada Pemerintah Indonesia dalam usaha untuk meningkatkan ekonomi dan sosial Irian Barat; (lihat: United Nations General Assembly: A/L.574, 12 November 1969, seventy-fourth session, Agenda item 98).

Dari Ghana mengamandemen draf Resolusi yang disampaikan oleh Belgium, Indonesia, Luxemburg, Malaysia, Belanda dan Thailand: (A/L.574).

1. Menggantikan peranggap keempat pembukaan sebagai berikut:Menerima laporan pekerjaan terakhir Sekretrais-General perwakilannya di Indonesia sesuai Perjanjian.

2. Menggantikan paragrap kelima pembukaan sebagai berikut:Mengingat kepentingan dan kesejahteraan rakyat Irian Barat seperti dinyatakan dalam pembukaan Perjanjian.

3. Memasukan paragrap baru keenam pembukaan bacanya sebagai berikut:Lebih lanjut mengingat pasal XVIII Perjanjian dan sebaliknya, menyebutkan untuk pelaksanaan pemilihan bebas sesuai dengan praktek internasional,”

4. Memasukan paragrap baru ketujuh pembukaan bacanya sebagai berikut:“Menegaskan, melanjutkan perhatian PBB sesuai tujuan Perjanjian,”

5. Pada akhir paragrap pembukaan, menghilangkan kata-kata “Bank Pembangunan Asia dan”

6. Menggantikan paragrap 1 yang berlaku sebagai berikut:“1. Menerima laporan Sekretaris-General dan perwakilannya dalam usaha-usaha untuk memenuhi tanggungjawab mereka di bawah Perjanjian 1962 antara Indonesia dan Belanda,”

7. Memasukan paragrap 2 yang baru berlaku sebagai berikut:“2. Memutuskan bahwa Rakyat Irian Barat hendaknya diberikan kesempatan lebih lanjut, akhir tahun 1975 untuk melaksanakan pemilihan bebas sesuai dengan Perjanjian;”

8. Menempatkan kembali, paragrap 2 sebagai berikut:“3. Menghargai beberapa bantuan yang disediakan melalui lembaga-lembaga PBB untuk menambah usaha-usaha pemerintah Indonesia demi meningkatkan pembangunan ekonomi dan sosial di Irian barat” (Lihat: United Nations General Assembly: A/L.576, 19 November 1969, Twenty-fourth session, Agenda item, 98).

Dalam kaitan dengan pengungkapan rekayasa PEPERA 1969 ini, Dr. John Saltford dalam penelitiannya di Markas Besar PBB di New York, dengan Judul “ UNITED NATIONS INVOLVEMENT WITH THE ACT OF SELF-DETERMINATION IN WEST IRIAN ( INDONESIAN WEST NEW GUINEA) 1968 TO 1969” mengungkapkan dokumen-dokumen signifikan tentang pelaksanaan PEPERA 1969 yang tidak demokratis di Papua.

Moshiach in Hebrew : the Annoited One !

Moshiach

Two of the most fundamental tenets of the Jewish faith – as listed by Maimonides among the Thirteen Principles of the Jewish Faith – are the belief in the ultimate redemption, an awaited era of world peace, prosperity and wisdom, and the belief that the dead will be resurrected at that time.

The Messianic Era will be ushered in by a Jewish leader generally referred to as the Moshiach (messiah: Hebrew for "the anointed one"), a righteous scion of King David. He will rebuild the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and gather the Jewish people from all corners of the earth and return them to the Promised Land.

At that time, "delicacies will be commonplace like dirt." All the nations will "beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore" (Micah 4:3). Humankind will be preoccupied with only one pursuit: the study of G‑dly wisdom. "The earth shall be filled with knowledge of G‑d as water covers the seabed" (Isaiah 11:9).

Okay, so it's going to happen—that's what we believe. But why is this important today? Why is the coming of Moshiach so central to the Jewish belief system?

Because the Torah teaches us that there is purpose to our world. And the Messianic Era is the actualization of that idea.

There are those who maintain that this crass physical world is merely a strategic challenge; one that the soul must battle and transcend en route to a heavenly paradise. According to this line of thinking, the physical and mundane has no intrinsic worth, it retains no value whatsoever once its function has been fully served—it is a means to a spiritual end.

While Jewish belief also speaks of the soul's reward in the hereafter, earned through its toil in the course of life's journey, it sees the refinement of the physical and the infusion of holiness and purpose into the mundane as the paramount objective. It is the sanctification of the human body and the world at large that constitutes the very purpose of its creation.

From the dawn of time, G‑d envisioned for Himself a "dwelling place" right here on Planet Earth. And He put us here to fashion this home. To transform darkness into light.

And soon the day will come when G‑d's glory will be revealed in this nether-realm, and we will enjoy the fruits of our millennia-long work, the end-product of our labor of love.

The curtain will be ripped aside, and all flesh will perceive G‑d. It will be the culmination of the master plan.

The belief in Moshiach has sustained our nation throughout a 2,000 year exile fraught with pogroms, expulsions and persecution—our ancestors' firm belief in a better time to come, and their trust that they would be resurrected to witness that day. And today, finally, we stand at the threshold of redemption. One more good deed by one more person may be all that's needed to seal the deal.

Two of the most fundamental tenets of the Jewish faith – as listed by Maimonides among the Thirteen Principles of the Jewish Faith – are the belief in the ultimate redemption, an awaited era of world peace, prosperity and wisdom, and the belief that the dead will be resurrected at that time.

The Messianic Era will be ushered in by a Jewish leader generally referred to as the Moshiach (messiah: Hebrew for "the anointed one"), a righteous scion of King David. He will rebuild the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and gather the Jewish people from all corners of the earth and return them to the Promised Land.

So it's going to happen—that's what we believe. But why is this important today? Why is the coming of Moshiach so central to the Jewish belief system?At that time, "delicacies will be commonplace like dirt." All the nations will "beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore" (Micah 4:3). Humankind will be preoccupied with only one pursuit: the study of G‑dly wisdom. "The earth shall be filled with knowledge of G‑d as water covers the seabed" (Isaiah 11:9).

Okay, so it's going to happen—that's what we believe. But why is this important today? Why is the coming of Moshiach so central to the Jewish belief system?

Because the Torah teaches us that there is purpose to our world. And the Messianic Era is the actualization of that idea.

Who Is Moshiach (the Jewish Messiah)?

The Messianic Redemption will be ushered in by a person, a human leader, a descendant of Kings David and Solomon, who will reinstate the Davidic royal dynasty. According to tradition, Moshiach will be wiser than Solomon, and a prophet around the level of Moses.

Ever since the destruction of the Holy Temple, in every generation there is an individual, a scion of the House of David, who has the potential to be the Moshiach. If at any moment the Jews are worthy of redemption, this person would be directed from Above to assume the role of the redeemer.

During the Messianic Era, the Moshiach will serve a dual role. He will be a monarch, ruling over all of humanity with kindness and justice, and upholding the law of the Torah—613 commandments for the Jews, and seven for the non-Jews. He will also be the ultimate teacher, the conduit for the deepest and most profound dimensions of the Torah which will then be revealed by G‑d.

How are we to identify the Moshiach?

Moshiach is not identified by his ability to perform earth-shattering miracles. In fact, he isn't required to perform any miracles at all (although the performance of miracles doesn't disqualify him either).

The following are the criteria for identifying the Moshiach, as written by Maimonides:

If we see a Jewish leader who (a) toils in the study of Torah and is meticulous about the observance of the mitzvot, (b) influences the Jews to follow the ways of the Torah and (c) wages the "battles of G‑d"—such a person is the "presumptive Moshiach."

If the person succeeded in all these endeavors, and then rebuilds the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and facilitates the ingathering of the Jews to the Land of Israel—then we are certain that he is the Moshiach.
There are those who maintain that this crass physical world is merely a strategic challenge; one that the soul must battle and transcend en route to a heavenly paradise. According to this line of thinking, the physical and mundane has no intrinsic worth, it retains no value whatsoever once its function has been fully served—it is a means to a spiritual end.

While Jewish belief also speaks of the soul's reward in the hereafter, earned through its toil in the course of life's journey, it sees the refinement of the physical and the infusion of holiness and purpose into the mundane as the paramount objective. It is the sanctification of the human body and the world at large that constitutes the very purpose of its creation.

From the dawn of time, G‑d envisioned for Himself a "dwelling place" right here on Planet Earth. And He put us here to fashion this home. To transform darkness into light.

The curtain will be ripped aside, and all flesh will perceive G‑dAnd soon the day will come when G‑d's glory will be revealed in this nether-realm, and we will enjoy the fruits of our millennia-long work, the end-product of our labor of love.

The curtain will be ripped aside, and all flesh will perceive G‑d. It will be the culmination of the master plan.

The belief in Moshiach has sustained our nation throughout a 2,000 year exile fraught with pogroms, expulsions and persecution—our ancestors' firm belief in a better time to come, and their trust that they would be resurrected to witness that day. And today, finally, we stand at the threshold of redemption. One more good deed by one more person may be all that's needed to seal the deal.

Hari Raya Hanukkah

Cara Merayakan Hanukkah
Pelajaran : Bahagian terakhir.

Oleh: Aspenas Warkey Cohen 🇮🇱

Walaupun biasanya selalu disebut sebagai Natal orang Yahudi, sebenarnya yang pastinya  : Hanukkah adalah sesuatu yang benar-benar berbeda, Hanukkah bukanlah perayaan Natal,

Tetapi : Hanukkah dikenal sebagai Festival Cahaya Yahudi (Jewish Festival of lights) sebagai inti dari festival ini adalah menghidupkan 8 lilin Chanukah selama 8 hari festival.

Walapun Hanukkah bukan salah satu dari perayaan hari suci yang benar-benar sakral dalam budaya Yahudi, namun Hanukkah masih dirayakan dengan makanan dan upacara tertentu .

Langkah: 1
Mempelajari Hanukkah. 

Hanukkah sebenarnya merupakan tentang perlindungan Tuhan terhadap Israel, dan keajaiban yang terjadi pada hari tersebut.

Festival ini memperingati kemenangan dari iman dan keberanian atas dari kekuatan militer, ketika sekelompok orang Israel memperjuangkan hak-nya untuk menjadi Yahudi.

Mereka dilarang untuk mempelajari teks-teks suci atau melakukan firman HaShem dengan ancaman hukuman mati jika terbukti melakukan kegiatan-kegiatan tersebut.

Kuil suci mereka telah dinodai, dan mereka diperintahkan untuk memuja Dewa yang lain,dewa Goyim dewa orang kafir.

Namun, sekelompok orang Israel yang setia dengan imannya, disebut Maccabees, memperjuangkan dan mengalahkan para penyusup, mengambil alih Kuil, dan mendedikasikan ulang kuil tersebut untuk HaShem.

Api Abadi yang berada di “Menorah” (sebuah lampu berdiri) harus dihidupkan.

Namun minyak zaitun suci yang diperlukan untuk menyalakan api tersebut membutuhkan 8 hari untuk di-press dan dimurnikan.

Para orang Yahudi hanya memiliki pasokan minyak untuk sehari saja.

Mereka memutuskan, dengan penuh iman, untuk menerangkan api itu bagaimanapun juga.

Dan, sebuah keajaiban terjadi.

Kendi minyak terisi sendiri setiap hari dengan minyak yang cukup untuk menerangi lampu candi yang agung, dan ini terus terjadi selama 7 hari, yang merupakan waktu yang diperlukan untuk mempersiapkan minyak baru!

Ini adalah kesalahpahaman umum bahwa minyak itu terbakar terus menerus selama 8 hari.

Cerita ini bahkan pernah dikatakan oleh Josephus, abad pertama sejarah Yahudi.

1.Semenjak saat itu, Hanukkah telah dirayakan selama 8 hari untuk memanggil kembali keajaiban ketika lampu Menorah terbakar selama 8 hari di kuil.

Keajaiban utama dari Hanukkah adalah kemenangan Maccabees melawan tentara terkuat di dunia.

Langka ke- 2
Mendapatkan sebuah “Hanukkiah”.

Dasar yang paling utama yang kamu butuhkan untuk merayakan Hanukkiah adalah sebuah tempat lilin bercabang 9, disebut sebagai “Hanukkiah” (atau sering juga disebut “Menorah”, meskipun secara teknis “Menorah” adalah tempat lilin bercabang 7), dan lilin.

Delapan cabang dari tempat lilin mewakili 8 malam tersebut, sedangkan yang terakhir (dengan ketinggian yang berbeda, biasanya lebih tinggi dari yang lainnya) dipanggil “Shamash” atau lilin pembantu, dan digunakan untuk menerangkan lilin – lilin lainnya.

Hanukkiah biasanya dihidupkan saat atau tepat setelah matahari terbenam.

Pada malam pertama, Shamash dinyalakan, sebuah pemberkatan dibacakan, dan lilin pertama dinyalakan.

Lilin pertama menempati bagian paling kanan pada Hanukkiah.

🕎Lilin – lilin diletakkan dari kanan ke kiri, tetapi dinyalakan dari kiri ke kanan.

🕎Lilin yang Anda nyalakan pertama selalunya adalah lilin terakhir yang Anda letakkan pada Hanukkiah; sebaliknya, lilin terakhir yang Anda nyalakan selalunya adalah lilin pertama yang Anda letakkan pada Hanukkiah.

Pada malam kedua, Shamash beserta dua lilin dinyalakan dan akan menyala sampai malam ke delapan, ketika 9 cabang tedapat lilin – lilin yang menyala.

Secara tradisional, Hanukkiah yang menyala diletakkan dekat sebuah jendela, jadi semua orang yang lewat akan teringat keajaiban Hanukkah. Amen Halelu-Yah.

Beberapa keluarga yang meletakkan Hanukkiah dekat jendela, menyusun lilin – lilinnya dari kiri ke kanan, sehingga lilin tersebut akan muncul dari kanan ke kiri untuk orang-orang yang lewat.

Langka ke: 3

Membaca pemberkatan ketika Anda menyalakan hanukkiah, atau Menora.

Pemberkatan adalah cara untuk memberikan penghormatan kepada HaShem dan untuk para leluhur yahudi.

Pada hari pertama Hanukkah, bacalah pemberkatan berikut :

🕎Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, asher kidshanu b’mitzvotav v’tzivanu l’hadlik ner shel Hanukkah.

Teberkatilah Engkau, O Hashem Penguasa, Tuhan kami, Penguasa alam semesta, yang mengkuduskan kami  dengan perintah – perintahMu dan memimpin kami untuk menyalakan cahaya – cahaya Hanukkah.Amen

🕎Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, she’asah nisim l’avoteinu, b’yamim haheim bazman hazeh.

Teberkatilah Engkau, O HaShem Penguasa, Tuhan kami, Penguasa alam semesta, yang membuat keajaiban kepada nenek moyang kami pada hari itu di waktu ini.Amen

Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, shehekheyanu, v’kiyamanu vehegianu lazman hazeh.

Terbekatilah Engkau, O HaShem Penguasa, Tuhan kami, Penguasa alam semesta, yang menjaga kami agar tetap hidup, memperpanjang umur kami dan membawa kami ke waktu ini.Amen

Pada malam-malam Hanukkah berikutnya, ketika anda menyalakan Hanukkiah, bacalah pemberkatan berikut:

🕎Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, asher kidshanu b’mitzvotav v’tzivanu l’hadlik ner shel Hanukkah.

Terbekatilah Engkau, O  HaShem Penguasa, Tuhan kami, Penguasa alam semesta, yang mengkuduskan kami  dengan perintahmu dan membawa kami untuk menyalakan cahaya Hanukkah.

Baruch Atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, she’asah nisim l’avoteinu, b’yamim haheim bazman hazeh.

Terbekatilah Anda, O Penguasa, Tuhan kami, Penguasa alam semesta, yang membuat keajaiban kepada nenek moyang kita pada hari itu di waktu ini.

Langka ke: 4

Memainkan dreidel.

Sebuah benda bersisi empat, disebut dreidel atau sivivon yang digunakan untuk bermain sebuah permainan judi dengan permen kecil atau kacang – kacangan.

Pemain mendapatkan jumlah permen yang sama, dan sebagian ditempatkan kedalam “vas” yang berada di pusat.

Pemain mendapatkan giliran memutar dreidle.

Tiap sisi dreidel muncul surat yang mengatakan apakah pemain ingin memasukkan atau mengeluarkan permen.

Permainan ini berakhir jika seseorang mempunyai semua permen, atau ketika permen sudah dimakan semuanya (biasanya merupakan kasus di rumah karena adanya anak kecil!)

Langka ke: 5.

Memberikan sedikit koin kepada anak- anak. Hadiah ‘kecil’ berupa uang kecil (“gelt”) diberikan kepada anak - anak pada setiap malam Hanukkah.

Coklat koin juga terkenal sebagai traktiran dan hadiah selama Hanukkah.

Pertimbangkan memberi masing - masing anak sebuah cek 5 dolar pada setiap malam untuk membiarkan mereka memberikan amal sesuai dengan pilihan mereka masing-masing.

Hadiah yang disediakan pada hari Hanukkah juga bisa diberikan kepada orang dewasa, Atau kepada org miskin dan kepada orang yg paling melarat.

Walaupun Hanukkah dirayakan pada saat masa – masa liburan festival Kristian, ia-nya bukanlah “Natal orang Yahudi” seperti yang telah dianggap selama ini.

Hadiah Hanukkah yang menakjubkan bagi orang dewasa antara lain lilin Hanukkiah yang cantik, minyak masak yang berkualitas, atau sebuah buku masak Yahudi.

Langka ke: 6

Memakan makanan yang dimasak memakai minyak. 

Hanukkah tidak akan sama tanpa adanya Latkes tradisional dan saus apel.

Latkes (kue Loyang yang terbuat dari potongan kentang , bawang, matzoh meal dan garam) digoreng di minyak sampai coklat emas garing, dan kemudian disajikan dengan saus apel (dan sering dengan krim asam).

Minyak goreng itu mengingatkan perayaan keajaiban dari minyak.

Donat yang ditaburi gula-gula halus, yang disebut “Sufganiyot” juga merupakan sebuah suguhan terkenal saat Hanukkah, terutama di Israel.

Makanan yang digoreng dan kaya minyak adalah temanya!

Selain itu, susu dikonsumsi oleh banyak orang selama Hanukkah, sebagai jalan untuk mengingat peristiwa kisah Judith.

Judith menyelamatkan desanya dari taklukan jenderal Suria dengan mempermainkannya menggunakan keju asin dan anggur.

Ketika Ia pingsan, Judith mengambil pedang jenderal tersebut dan memenggalnya, itulah ceritanya.

Karenanya, latkes keju dan kue panekuk keju sangatlah diminati saat Hanukkah.

Langka ke: 7
Berlatih “Tikun Olam”.

Gunakan hari libur sebagai sebuah kesempatan untuk berbicara dengan anak –anak tentang apa yang mereka percayai dan apa artinya untuk memperjuangkan keyakinanmu.

Cari penyebab yang mendukung kebebasan berbicara dan kebebasan beragama, dan bantu mereka untuk menyebarkan pesan yang berabad-abad ada setelah keajaiban Hanukkah.

Bagaimanapun juga, Hanukkah adalah cerita orang Israel melawan untuk kebebasan beragama!

Advertisement.

Peringatan  :

Jangan mencoba untuk membandingkan Hanukkah dengan Natal.

🕎Hanukkah adalah Perayaan kemenangan Yahudi atas bangsa Goyim,

👉Sementara Natal adalah perayaan bangsa Kafir Romawi Goyim untuk menyembah kepada dewa Matahari  lihat Tongkat Paus Lambang matahari.

Walaupun mereka terjadi pada waktu yang kuran lebih sama, namun mereka sama sekali tidak berhubungan.

Nikmati liburan sebagaimana arti dari liburan tersebut bagi kehidupan kita mengenai iman, dan memperjuangkan sebuah keyakinan seseorang walaupun menghadapi oposisi yang kuat.

Jangan lupa bahwa Hanukkah adalah waktu untuk kesenangan dan kenikmatan.
Dan anda membagi kelebihan berkat anda kepada orang miskin itulah hanucha.

Menjadi kebiasaan kami di kehilla HaOhr Cohanim Kupang selalu memberikan kado Istimewa k pada org miskin.

Bedah dengan Kristen dalam perayaan natal selalu pesta pora dan senang dengan hal-hal duniawi banget..😂🤣

Membaca Bagaimana Cara Bermain Dreidel untuk info lebih lanjut mengenai dreidels.

Hanukkah bisa disebut dengan beberapa cara, termasuk Chanukah, Chanukkah, Chanucah, Hannukah.

Semuanya benar, karena kata-kata tersebut adalah terjemahan daripada bahasa Hebrew.

Peringatan :
Jangan meniup mati lilin kecuali benar-benar diperlukan.

Objeknya adalah membiarkan lilin hidup hingga habis.

Kecuali jika Anda akan meninggalkan rumah dan tidak ada yang menjaga lilin, biarkan lilin tersebut hidup selama mungkin.

Jika Anda khawatir akan kotor, gunakan lilin yang tidak menetes, atau letakkan kertas perak di bawah Hanukkiah.

Ketika hari Hanukkah dimulai saat malam Jumat, pastikan bahwa lilin dihidupkan “sebelum” Shabbat dimulai (Hari Sabbath orang Yahudi), karena dilarang untuk menghidupkan api setelah matahari terbenam.

Selalu memperhatikan lilin yang hidup. Jangan meletakkan Hannukiah di pinggiran, dekat tepi atau permukaan, atau dekat dengan apapun yang mungkin bisa terbakar.

Pastikan bahwa anak kecil, rambut panjang, dan pakaian yang longgar selalu jauh dari api.

Semoga Artikel ini dapat menjadi berkat bagi anda dalam pelayanan, Amen.

Shalom Aleichem
Biblical Hebrew Institute Cohen Indonesia Kupang NTT 🇮🇱❤️🇲🇨

Markas Kehilla HaOhr Cohanim Kupang NTT 🇮🇱❤️🇲🇨

Aspenas Warkey Cohen 🇮🇱

Prophecy about YESHUA THE MESSIAH OF ISRAEL has fullfilled

Menu “My servant has a different spirit ...” (Num 14:24) about creed sitemap HOME EVIDENCE PROPHECY FULFILLED Bible prophecy fulfilled Your faith is worth more than gold ~ 1 Peter 1:7 If the many prophecies about the Messiah were not fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth then the New Testament writers, all of them Jews, must have invented an elaborate story and must have created details to fit what was foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures. Why would they have bothered? They gained nothing out of it and, instead, attracted persecution. If Jesus did not fulfill the Old Testament prophecies then the Messiah is still to come and His life and deeds must match all these promises. The Messiah would be born of a virgin ... the Lord Himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14) Jesus was born of a virgin This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Matthew.1:18 (see also Luke 1:30-35) The Messiah would be the Son of God I will proclaim the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father.” Psalms 2:7 (see also 1 Chronicles 17:11-14) God called Jesus His Son Jesus ... went up out of the water. At that moment ... he saw the Spirit of God ... lighting on Him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is My Son, whom I love; with Him I am well pleased.” Matthew 3:16-17 (see also John 5:18) The Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham The Lord had said to Abram, “... all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.” Genesis 12:1-3 (see also Genesis 22:15-18) Jesus is a descendant of Abraham A record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham ... Matthew 1:1 (see also Galatians 3:16) The Messiah would be a descendant of Isaac ... God said to Abraham, “... it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” Genesis 21:12 Jesus is a descendant of Isaac ... Jesus ... was the son ... of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham ... Luke 3:23-34 The Messiah would be a descendant of Jacob God said to him, “Your name is Jacob, but ... your name will be Israel” ... And God said to him, “I am God Almighty ... A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will come from your body.” Genesis 35:10-11 Jesus is a descendant of Jacob Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers ... Matthew 1:2 The Messiah would be a descendant of Judah The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until He comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is His. Genesis 49:10 (see also Micah 5:2) Jesus is a descendant of Judah Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers ... Matthew 1:2 (see also Hebrews 7:14) The Messiah would be a descendant of Jesse A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit ... In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to Him, and His place of rest will be glorious. Isaiah 11:1,10 Jesus is a descendant of Jesse ... and Jesse the father of King David ... Matthew 1:6 (see also Luke 3:23-32) The Messiah would be a descendant of King David “The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch, a king who will reign wisely ...” Jeremiah 23:5 Jesus is a descendant of King David A record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham ... and Jesse the father of King David ... Matthew 1:1,6 (see also Luke 3:23-31, Revelation 22:16) The Messiah would be born in Bethlehem But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for Me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. Micah 5:2 Jesus was born in Bethlehem Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod ... Matthew 2:1 The Messiah would be called Lord Of David. A psalm. The Lord says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” Psalms 110:1 (see also Jeremiah 23:5-6) Jesus was called Lord Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; He is Messiah the Lord. Luke 2:11 (see also Matthew 22:42-45) The Messiah’s name would be Immanuel Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: The virgin will ... give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 Jesus fulfilled this prophecy “She will give birth to a son, and you are to give Him the name Jesus, because He will save His people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will ... give birth to a son, and they will call Him Immanuel” — which means, “God with us” Matthew 1:21-23 The Messiah would be a prophet like Moses I will raise up for them a prophet like you ... I will put My words in His mouth, and He will tell them everything I command Him. Deuteronomy 18:18 Jesus was a prophet They were all filled with awe and praised God. “A great prophet has appeared among us,” they said. “God has come to help His people.” Luke 7:16 The Messiah would be a priest The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” Psalms 110:4 Jesus was a priest, not of the tribe of Levi but of an eternal order Therefore ... fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess. Hebrews 3:1 The Messiah would have pre-existence The Lord brought Me forth as the first of His works, before His deeds of old; I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began. Proverbs 8:22-23 Jesus had pre-existence In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. John 1:1-3 (see also Colossians 1:12-17) The Messiah would be preceded by a messenger “See, I will send My messenger, who will prepare the way before Me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to His temple; the messenger of the covenant, whom you desire, will come,” says the Lord Almighty. Malachi 3:1 (see also Isaiah 40:3) Jesus was preceded by John the Baptist ... John the Baptist came, preaching in the desert of Judea and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: “A voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for Him.’” Matthew 3:1-3 (see also Luke 1:13-17) The Messiah would have the anointing of God’s Spirit Here is My servant, whom I uphold, My chosen one in whom I delight; I will put My Spirit on Him and He will bring justice to the nations. Isaiah 42:1 (see also Isaiah 11:1-2, Isaiah 61:1) Jesus was anointed by the Spirit of God As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on Him like a dove. Mark 1:10 (see also Matthew 3:16) The Messiah would perform miracles “... your God will come ... He will come to save you.” Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy ... Isaiah 35:4-6 (see also Isaiah 32:1-4) Jesus performed many miracles Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness. Matthew 9:35 (see also Luke 7:21-22) The Messiah would teach using parables I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter hidden things, things from of old ... Psalms 78:2 Jesus taught with parables Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; He did not say anything to them without using a parable. Matthew 13:34 The Messiah would enter Jerusalem on a donkey Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your King comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. Zechariah 9:9 Jesus entered Jerusalem on a donkey This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet: “Say to the Daughter of Zion, ‘See, your King comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’” Matthew 21:4-5 The Messiah would be rejected by His own people I am a stranger to My brothers, an alien to My own mother’s sons ... Psalms 69:8 (see also Isaiah 53:3) Jesus was rejected by His own people For even His own brothers did not believe in Him. John 7:5 (see also Matthew 23:37) The Messiah would be hated without reason Those who hate Me without reason outnumber the hairs of My head; many are My enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy Me ... Psalms 69:4 Jesus was hated without reason ... now they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both Me and My Father. But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: ‘They hated Me without reason.’ John 15:24-25 The Messiah would be a stumbling stone for Israel ... He will be a sanctuary; but for both houses of Israel He will be a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall. And for the people of Jerusalem He will be a trap and a snare. Many of them will stumble; they will fall and be broken, they will be snared and captured. Isaiah 8:14-15 Jesus was a stumbling stone for the Jews who rejected Him For in Scripture it says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in Him will never be put to shame.” Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,” and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” 1 Peter 2:6-8 (see also Romans 9:27-33) The Messiah would be a light to the gentiles ...The Lord says – He who formed Me in the womb to be His servant to bring Jacob back to Him and gather Israel to Himself ... “It is too small a thing for You to be My servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make You a light for the Gentiles, that You may bring My salvation to the ends of the earth.” Isaiah 49:5-6 (see also Isaiah 60:3) Jesus would bring the revelation of Israel’s God to the gentiles “... I am saying nothing beyond what the prophets and Moses said would happen – that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would proclaim light to His own people and to the Gentiles.” Acts 26:22-23 (see also Acts 13:47) The Messiah would be betrayed by a friend Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me. Psalms 41:9 (see also Psalms 55:12-14) Jesus was betrayed by Judas, one of His disciples ... Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, “I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me.” His disciples stared at one another, at a loss to know which of them He meant. One of them ... was reclining next to Him ... Leaning back against Jesus, he asked him, “Lord, who is it?” Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.” Then, dipping the piece of bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon. John 13:21-26 The Messiah would be sold for 30 pieces of silver I told them, “If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it.” So they paid me thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said to me, ‘Throw it to the potter’ – the handsome price at which they priced Me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord to the potter. Zechariah 11:12-13 Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver When Judas, who had betrayed Him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood” ... Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests ... decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field ... Matthew 27:3-7 (see also Matthew 26:14-16) The Messiah would remain silent before His accusers He was oppressed and afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; He was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so He did not open his mouth. Isaiah 53:7 Jesus remained silent before His accusers When He was accused by the chief priests and the elders, He gave no answer. Then Pilate asked Him, “Don’t You hear the testimony they are bringing against You?” But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge – to the great amazement of the governor. Matthew 27:12-14 The Messiah would be wounded and pierced But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:5 Jesus was beaten and pierced ... he had Jesus flogged, and handed Him over to be crucified. Then the governor’s soldiers ... twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on His head ... “Hail, king of the Jews!” they said. They spit on Him, and took the staff and struck Him on the head again and again. Matthew 27:26-30 The Messiah would be beaten and spat upon I offered My back to those who beat Me, My cheeks to those who pulled out My beard; I did not hide My face from mocking and spitting. Isaiah 50:6 (see also Micah 5:1) Jesus was beaten and spat upon Then they spit in His face and struck Him with their fists. Others slapped Him ... Matthew 26:67 (see also Luke 22:63) The Messiah would be mocked All who see Me mock Me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: “He trusts in the Lord; let the Lord rescue Him. Let Him deliver Him, since He delights in Him.” Psalms 22:7-8 Jesus was mocked ... They put a staff in His right hand and knelt in front of Him and mocked Him. “Hail, king of the Jews!” they said. They spit on Him, and took the staff and struck Him on the head again and again. After they had mocked Him ... they led Him away to crucify Him. Matthew 27:29-31 The Messiah’s hands and feet would be pierced Dogs have surrounded Me; a band of evil men has encircled Me, they have pierced My hands and My feet. Psalms 22:16 Jesus’ hands and feet were pierced by nails when He was crucified ... the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in His hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe it.” John 20:25 The Messiah would be crucified with criminals ... He poured out His life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors ... Isaiah 53:12 Jesus was crucified between two thieves Two robbers were crucified with Him, one on His right and one on His left. Matthew 27:38 The Messiah would intercede for His persecutors ... He poured out His life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. Isaiah 53:12 Jesus interceded for those who crucified Him Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” Luke 23:34 The Messiah’s garments would be divided and lots would be cast for them They divide My garments among them and cast lots for My clothing. Psalms 22:18 Jesus’ clothes were divided and lots were cast for them When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. “Let’s not tear it,” they said to one another. “Let’s decide by lot who will get it...” John 19:23-24 The Messiah would suffer thirst and be given vinegar to drink They put gall in My food and gave Me vinegar for My thirst. Psalms 69:21 (see also Psalms 22:15-16) Jesus was thirsty and was given vinegar to drink Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. John 19:28-29 The Messiah’s bones would not be broken ... He protects all His bones, not one of them will be broken. Psalms 34:20 Jesus’ bones were not broken The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. But when they came to Jesus and found that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. John 19:32-33 The Messiah would be pierced I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on Me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for Him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for Him as one grieves for a firstborn son. Zechariah 12:10 Jesus was pierced Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. John 19:34 The Messiah would be buried in a rich man’s tomb He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in His death... Isaiah 53:9 Jesus was buried in a rich man’s tomb As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away. Matthew 27:57-60 The Messiah would be raised from the dead ... You will not abandon Me to the grave, nor will You let Your Holy One see decay. Psalms 16:10 (see also Psalms 30:3) Jesus was raised from the dead “Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried ... But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that He would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that He was not abandoned to the grave, nor did His body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact.” Acts 2:29-32 (see also Acts 13:27-38) Evidence that the Bible is the Word of God – Related messages: Is the Bible true and accurate? The Bible is accurate history, with one purpose, one moral standard, one plan of salvation and one explanation for everything. Israel regathered God warned Israel that He would scatter them if they disobeyed Him. He also promised that He would regather them in the last days. Those prophecies, given thousands of years ago, are being fulfilled now. Only God could have known. The Dead Sea Scrolls The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls proved the accuracy of the Hebrew Scriptures. Bible numerics The original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures feature many striking numeric patterns. The Torah Code An underlying pattern of words can be found at equidistant letter skip sequences throughout the original text of the Hebrew Bible. What did Jesus look like? The regathering of Israel to the Promised Land RELATED MESSAGES Part 1: Evidence that the Bible is the Word of God Part 2: Prophecies about the Messiah fulfilled in Jesus Part 3: Israel regathered to the land Part 4: The Dead Sea Scrolls Part 5: Bible numerics Part 6: Torah Code I have come that they may have life ... (John 10:10) MORE ABOUT JESUS Jesus was a Jew Jesus in the Passover What language did Jesus speak? Who killed Jesus? What does the Bible say about Jesus’ crucifixion? Why did so many Jews reject Jesus? VIDEOS ... “You are gods”. What did Jesus mean? » In John 10:34 Jesus was speaking to Jews when He said: “Scripture says: ‘You are gods’.” The Jews were very human in their behavior ... not at all god-like. What did Jesus mean? This is the first in a seminar series called “Bringing sons to glory” View video » God’s Grand Design » Free online video teaching – the wonders of God’s design in Scripture. www.thelivingword.org.au What does it mean to be “saved”? » What you need to know. www.4salvation.org Other featured videos » DIFFERENTSPIRIT.ORG DifferentSpirit.org is a non-denominational Christian Bible teaching ministry. Material on this website, and on the associated websites www.thelivingword.org.au, and www.4salvation.org, is authored by John Nuyten.       Home To Israel Evidence Resources Videos Opinion Blog Salvation Creed About us Sitemap Home To Israel Evidence - Is the Bible true?- Prophecy fulfilled- Israel regathered- Dead Sea Scrolls- Bible numerics- The Torah Code Resources - The Land- Promised borders- Jerusalem- Temple Mount- The Passover- The Canon- Timeline- GlossaryVideos- A Bible mystery- Revelation in Genesis- Israel and the end- The meaning of life- Angry Jesus! Opinion - Opinion pieces- Blog posts Salvation

Messianic Jews: A brief History

Menu AboutMake My Gift Search Search… a Jewish Resources | Community Messianic Jews: A Brief History Who are Messianic Jews? The term Messianic Jew is one of several titles by which Jews who have come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah describe themselves. Over the centuries Jews who embraced Jesus have called themselves Nazarenes, Hebrew-Christians, Jewish-Christians, Jewish believers, and Messianic Jews. The Modern Messianic Jewish Movement (MMJM), describes the larger community of Jewish people in recent days who have embraced Jesus and continue to self-identify as Jews as Messianic Jews. Some have tried to articulate more detailed definitions of this community. One organization, the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, describes the MMJM as: The movement of Jewish congregations and groups committed to Yeshua the Messiah that embrace the covenantal responsibility of Jewish life and identity rooted in Torah, expressed in tradition, and renewed and applied in the context of the New Covenant.[1] Another organization, the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, defines the MMJM as the: Biblically-based movement of people who, as committed Jews, believe in Yeshua (Jesus) as the Jewish Messiah of Israel of whom the Jewish Law and Prophets spoke.[2] Some define the MMJM more broadly to simply encompass all Jews who believe in Jesus and identify as Jewish. Ethnic Jews, embracing Jesus, still Jewish Regardless of which definition someone chooses, each describes a (1) community of ethnically Jewish people who (2) have embraced Jesus and (3) continue to self-identify as Jews, constructing like communities, and integrating Jewish practice with faith in Jesus. Note that some have labeled the entire movement, along with individual Jews who have embraced Jesus, as Jews for Jesus. The organization Jews for Jesus; however, is only one organization that has emerged as part of the wider MMJM. A Brief History: The Early Days Though the term Messianic Jew is relatively new, the movement of Jews following Jesus began nearly two thousand years ago with the first followers of Jesus. This early Jesus-movement was at the outset a Jewish movement. Jesus was himself Jewish, of course, and he taught throughout Israel in Jewish communities and synagogues as well as in the Temple in Jerusalem. His Hebrew name was Yeshua and his audience were almost entirely Jews. (Some Gentiles attended synagogue without converting to Judaism. Known as “God-fearers,” they would also have numbered among his listeners.) His language was Aramaic (the language of daily life) as well as Hebrew (used in the liturgy). He gave explanations of the Tanakh (Old Testament) and told parables, which were stories with a point understandable within the Jewish culture of the time. The New Testament records an occasion when Jesus was invited to speak in the synagogue of his hometown. On one Shabbat, he received what today we would call an aliyah (a call to the bema or pulpit). Reading the Haftarah portion from Isaiah 61 which described the mission of the Messiah, Jesus declared that he himself was that Messiah described by Isaiah (see Luke 4:16-21). While his sermon provoked controversy, it is clear that his early ministry began in Jewish houses of worship.[3] Jesus’ Jewish followers Likewise, the first followers of Jesus were Jewish. They observed the Jewish holidays, practiced Jewish traditions, spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, and believed that Jesus was the Messiah promised in the Hebrew Scriptures. Papias, a non-Jewish leader in the early church, even claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. His claim has not been universally accepted, but many agree that if Matthew did not write his gospel in Hebrew, he clearly wrote it in a Jewish dialect of Greek, because its grammar mirrors that of Aramaic and is distinct from that of other New Testament books.[4] One scholar describes the early Jewish followers of Jesus as those who, “practice circumcision, [and] persevere in the observations of those customs which are enjoined by the Law.”[5] For the original Jesus-movement, the first dilemma they wrestled with did not concern Jews believing in Jesus but Gentiles who did. Leaders of the movement debated how their communities should think about Greek and Roman followers of Jesus. Did Gentile believers in Jesus need to convert to Judaism? At a council held in Jerusalem, the leaders decided that Gentiles may follow Jesus without converting to Judaism, because in fulfillment of God’s promises in the Tanakh, Jesus is the savior of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 15). In other words, faith in Jesus was open to non-Jews and not just to Jews—a striking reversal from the way many people think about faith in Jesus today. So, What Happened? The “Parting of the Ways” If the original Jesus-movement was thoroughly Jewish, how did that movement (the Church) become largely Gentile? The “parting of the ways” came about slowly and over the course of centuries. However, there were specific events that brought about the parting of the Church from her Jewish origins. One early development was the expulsion of Jesus’ followers from synagogues (John 9:22). This would have forced them to establish independent communities. Divisions deepened in the First Jewish Revolt against Rome in the years leading up to 70 AD. During the Roman siege of Jerusalem, with armies surrounding the city, Jewish followers of Jesus recalled his prophecy that the city would be destroyed and his instructions to flee (Matt. 24:16). They left for Pella, located on the east bank of the Jordan. There they established their own community.[6] The wider Jewish community viewed these refugees as unpatriotic traitors for abandoning the nation in its time of distress. Destruction of Jerusalem 70 AD Resentment further intensified in 135 AD when Bar Kochba led a second revolt against the Romans. Rabbi Akiva, the famous sage, declared the leader of the insurrection, nicknamed Bar Kochba, to be the Messiah. He predicted that Bar Kochba would defeat the Romans and usher in the Messianic Age. Jewish followers of Jesus could not in good faith follow someone they considered a false Messiah and so withdrew their support. Though the rebellion was quashed, and Bar Kochba was indeed found to be a false messiah, Jesus-followers were further ostracized from the Jewish community.[7] In the Second and Fourth Centuries In spite of growing resentment and theological divide, many continued to secretly attend the synagogue. Historian Philip Alexander described a thriving Messianic Jewish community in the Galilee during the second century AD when rabbinic Judaism was emerging. Messianic Jews attended synagogues, lived among other Jews, and practiced Torah. Jewish-Christians were scattered through the Jewish towns and villages of the Galilee. They lived like other Jews. Their houses were indistinguishable from the houses of other Jews. They probably observed as much of the Torah as did other Jews. They studied Torah and developed their own interpretations of it.”[8] Epiphanius, a fourth-century church leader, described one particular Messianic Jewish community of his century. He wrote that they called themselves Nazarenes, kept kosher, practiced Torah, and lived in the Jewish community. [They] live according to the preaching of the Law as among the Jews…. They have a good mastery of the Hebrew language.… Only in this respect they differ from the Jews and Christians: with the Jews, they do not agree because of their belief in Christ, with the Christians because they are trained in the Law, in circumcision, the Sabbath and the other things.[9] Further Divisions Despite the fact that many Jewish believers remained integrated into Jewish life, as rabbinic Judaism developed and took form, the Tannaim—the earliest generation of Talmudic rabbis—sought to define established Judaism. They attempted to draw a line distinguishing those who were “in” from those who were “out.” The stage for this struggle was in the community center of Jewish life—the synagogue. In the second century, if not earlier, a prayer was introduced to the liturgy to expose Messianic Jews for the purpose of banishing them from communal life. Called the Birkat HaMinim (Benediction of the Apostates), it was introduced into the Amidah, part of the Shabbat liturgy. It called for the destruction of apostates, among whom Jewish followers of Jesus were included. A copy of this benediction, found in an ancient Cairo synagogue, condemned the Nazarenes and called a curse upon them. It read, “May the Nazarenes … instantly perish: may they be blotted from the book of the living.”[10] Secret believers ended up outing themselves when they omitted the benediction during the synagogue service, for they would not pronounce a curse upon themselves. Over time, Jewish followers of Jesus either voluntarily or unwillingly left the synagogue and ultimately the Jewish community. Greece and Rome Early Greek and Roman Christians played their part as well in ostracizing the early Messianic Jews. As the Church became predominately Gentile, these non-Jewish Christians assumed that God had rejected the Jewish people for their rejection of Jesus. They looked down up Jewish Christians and Jewish Christianity, preferring Greco-Roman over Hebrew culture. John Chrysostom, in a series of homilies against Jewish believers in Jesus, condemned them as apostates for maintaining their Jewish traditions. Moreover, he condemned Christians who continued to celebrate the Passover or maintain Jewish traditions. “Indeed, their Passover and Feast of Tabernacles, and whatever else they do, are profane and abominable.”[11] Interestingly, this shows an undercurrent of pro-Jewish feeling among the common people, even as their leaders pushed in the opposite direction. As time went on, Jewish believers in Jesus were pressed to fully embrace the Greco-Roman culture, and to take on Christian names when they were baptized. They were forbidden from forming Jewish-oriented communities or maintaining Jewish traditions. Ejected from the Jewish community, and forced to assimilate into the Church, the visible Messianic Jewish community had all but disappeared by the fourth century, despite Epiphanius’ comments mentioned above. “Direct evidence of Jews who practiced Messianic Judaism after the First Council of Nicaea [325 A.D.] is scanty. This is because the view that Jews could not become Christians and remain Jews.”[12] Through the Centuries: A Remnant of Jewish Believers in Jesus Painting of Saint Jerome by Caravaggio Nevertheless, a remnant of Jewish believers survived throughout church history, though the extent of their self-identification as Jews is unclear. Jerome, who translated the Vulgate (the Latin Bible), claimed he learned Hebrew from, and was assisted by, a Jewish Christian in his monumental task.[13] Count Joseph was another such Jewish believer. A disciple of none other than the eminent Rabbi Hillel II, he came to embrace Jesus during his rabbinic studies. When his beliefs were found out, he was expelled from the synagogue. Constantine discovered him and appointed him as a count in the Roman Empire. Count Joseph, as he became known, went on to build churches in Judea and Asia Minor.[14] Solomon Halevi Solomon Halevi Solomon Halevi, son of a wealthy Jewish merchant, was born in Burgos in 1351. He became learned in the Talmud and was ordained the Rabbi of Burgos where he attained renown for Jewish scholarship. He was praised by the Medieval Rabbi Abarbanel for his exegetical commentary on Isaiah 34. In the course of his studies, he began discussing theology with Christian theologians over the writings of Thomas Aquinas. He was so impressed that he began his own personal investigation of Christian theology which led him to explore the Messianic prophecies that described Jesus. He went on to study the New Testament. In 1390, he embraced Jesus along with the rest of his family. Solomon went on to study theology at the University of Paris, earning a doctorate. He continued interacting with Jewish scholars and even wrote a Purim Play.[15] Gregory Abu’l Faraj Gregory Abu’l Faraj (surnamed Gregory Bar-Hebraeus) was born 1226 AD, in Melitena, Greece, just on the border of modern Bulgaria. His father was a Jewish physician in the Jewish community. At some point in his youth, his father embraced Jesus along with the rest of the family. When he was 20, the family moved to Antioch and Gregory pursued a theological education. He was ordained Bishop of Gubus and ministered in the Byzantine Church. He mastered Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, and Arabic. However, he had a special passion for his Jewish heritage. “He possessed the Jewish whole-heartedness and love of thoroughness.”[16] Gregory was a prolific writer. He authored a history of the world titled The Chronicon Syriacum. He compiled a two-volume history of the church, Ecclesiastical Chronicle, still in use by the Eastern Orthodox Church. He edited a Syriac encyclopedia, and a grammar of the Syriac language, remaining a valuable reference for scholars of the Syriac and ancient literature today.[17] Benjamin Disraeli Benjamin Disraeli Some Jewish believers became heads of state. During the reign of Queen Victoria in the late nineteenth century, the Hebrew-Christian[18] Benjamin Disraeli was elected Prime Minister of the British Empire. Many British citizens were suspicious of a Jew as their head of state. They accused Disraeli of being a crypto-Jew, a convert to Christianity who secretly practiced Judaism. His Christian beliefs were frequently questioned. Disraeli vehemently denied these charges. He declared that he was fully Jewish and fully Christian. When the queen asked him if he was a Jew or a Christian, he replied, “Madam, I am the missing page between the Old and the New Testament!”[19] Daybreak: The Dawn of the Modern Messianic Jewish Movement With the dawn of the Enlightenment, religious tolerance became more widespread. Jewish followers of Jesus found it easier to assemble, and identified as Hebrew-Christians.[20] Joseph Samuel Frey founded a Hebrew-Christian congregation in London in the early nineteenth century. Frey was a German Jew who had come to faith in Jesus on the Continent. He moved to London and applied for missionary service with the Church of England, but was rejected because of his Jewish background! He decided to remain in London where he could reach his own Jewish people and establish a Hebrew-Christian community. The organization he established became known as the London Society for the Propagation of the Gospel among the Jewish People. His congregation was called Beni Abraham (Children of Abraham).[21] The congregation celebrated Jewish holidays, held services, and attracted Jewish inquirers to its meetings. The organization continues today as the Christian Ministry Among the Jews. Joseph Rabinowitz Joseph Rabinowitz In Eastern Europe, a Zionist and former Hasidic Jew embraced Yeshua and founded a Torah-practicing Messianic synagogue in the heart of the Jewish Pale of Settlement. Joseph Rabinowitz grew up in Russia in a Hasidic community. At age 19, after getting married, his brother-in-law gave him a Hebrew New Testament. Rabinowitz left the Hasidic community and traveled to Palestine, thereby escaping economic and political persecution. He became disillusioned with secular Zionism and despaired about the equally depressed condition of the Jewish community in Palestine. As he looked upon the Temple Mount, he was inspired that the future of Israel was in the hands of Yeshua. Right on the Mount of Olives, he embraced Yeshua. He returned to Europe where he was baptized and settled in Kishinev, Moldovia. There he preached the gospel, gathered a community of Messianic Jews, and established a Messianic Synagogue that he called Israelites of the New Covenant. The congregation met on Saturday, observed Jewish customs, and identified themselves with the local Jewish community all the way up to World War II when the community was eradicated.[22] Leopold Cohn Leopold Cohn Another figure in the modern Messianic Jewish movement was Leopold Cohn, a Talmudic scholar and Austria-Hungarian rabbi.[23] One evening as he studied Talmud he wrote, “I at one time read the following: ‘The world is to stand six thousand years: two thousand confusion…two thousand with the law, and two thousand the time of the Messiah.”[24] Realizing the world is more than six-thousand years old, according to the Hebrew calendar, he concluded the Messiah should have come. “I was suprprised , and asked myself, ‘Is it possible that the time…of our Messiah has passed away?”[25] Cohn immigrated to the U.S. in the late nineteenth century. In 1892, he met a group of Hebrew Christians in New York City who gave him a Yiddish New Testament. After reading it, he realized that Jesus was the promised Jewish Messiah. “My feelings could not be described! For many years my thoughts had been occupied almost continually with the coming of the Messiah. Surely this book has come to me directly from above.”[26] Cohn subsequently embraced Jesus and founded the American Board of Missions to the Jews, today known as Chosen People Ministries. This organization helped meet the physical and spiritual needs of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe by providing food, clothing, and education, while seeking to share the gospel. Their Hebrew Christian community in New York held services in Yiddish, and observed Jewish holidays.[27] More Hebrew-Christian congregations were formed in the nineteenth century and early twentieth century. In 1866, Carl Schwartz founded an association known as the Hebrew-Christian Alliance of Great Britain. This alliance brought together Jewish believes, congregations, and religious organizations. In the early twentieth century, a similar alliance was formed in the U.S., where congregations thrived in Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia. These congregations celebrated Hanukkah, Passover, and observed the High Holidays. Most, however, still met on Sundays. They were associated with Christian denominations or mission organizations, and carefully avoided appearing too Jewish, because many church leaders were suspicious that their Jewish practices meant that they were drifting from religious orthodoxy.[28] But this was also in keeping with the fact that throughout the 1930s and ’40s, most Jewish-Americans downplayed their Jewishness. Anti-Semitism was on the rise in Europe, and anti-immigrant nativism was thriving in the U.S. Among Jews, it was not advantageous to flaunt their ethnic identity and stick out. The Birth of the Modern Messianic Jewish Movement However, beginning in the 1960’s, a cultural revolution swept across North America. Young adults broke away from their parents’ traditions. African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and Jewish-Americans took pride in their identity and heritage. For decades, Jewish-Americans had maintained a low profile. Now, though, a new generation of young people enthusiastically brandished their identity, and were proud to be called Jews. Jewish pride peaked following the Six-Day war, when in 1967 the State of Israel recaptured East Jerusalem. For the first time in almost 2,000 years, Jerusalem was again in Jewish hands, and Jews had access to the ancient Wailing Wall. Along with the wave of Jewish patriotism, Christians began taking new interest in the Jewish roots of their faith. They encouraged Jewish believers to be proud their Jewish roots and explore their rightful heritage.[29] In 1972, at a conference of the Hebrew-Christian Alliance, a group of young Jewish believers voted to change the organization’s name to the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America (MJAA). They described themselves as Messianic Jews instead of Hebrew Christians, and identified their practice as Messianic Judaism instead of Hebrew-Christianity. They called their congregations Messianic Synagogues, and their religious leaders rabbis. Many congregations, who still met on Sunday, moved their Shabbat services to Friday night or Saturday morning. They held Torah services and used Messianic siddurim (prayer books). A heated division grew between these young people and the older traditional Hebrew Christians. Older Hebrew Christians were concerned about the ramifications of these young people flaunting their Jewishness. “On the old guard’s side, the initial reaction was that of shock, alarm, and fear— perhaps not unlike that of the American establishment toward the young people’s rebellious counterculture.”[30] Furthermore, some Christians feared that this new movement was sectarian, was bringing Jewish Christians back to Judaism, and taking them away from Jesus. Other Christian leaders, however, argued that the movement was a natural and healthy expression of Christian practice in a Jewish cultural context. Christianity had proliferated for centuries in European, Asian, and African cultural contexts, they argued, and now Christianity had at last returned to its original cultural origins. It was now thriving once again as a Jewish movement as it did in the first century. Christian publications such as Moody Monthly and Christianity Today embraced the movement, as did Christian institutions such as Fuller Theological Seminary and Moody Bible Institute.[31] In the San Francisco Bay Area, a group of Jewish young people who embraced Jesus, came together in 1972 to form Jews for Jesus. They were led by a Jewish believer from an Orthodox background named Moishe (Martin) Rosen. These young people applied their creative energies and created a Messianic Jewish culture, understanding that a person does not stop being Jewish by embracing Jesus. They wrote what they called Jewish Gospel music, formed a music group called the Liberated Wailing Wall, and published literature intended to engage a wider Jewish audience about Jesus. Their staff traveled across the country and spoke in churches, bringing presentations such as “Christ in the Passover,” whereby churches began to discover the Jewish roots of their Christian faith. The number of Jewish believers grew, as Jewish people began to hear and consider the claim that Jesus is the promised Messiah.[32] Today, there are as many as 250,000 Messianic Jews in the U.S.; 20,000 in Israel; and as many as 350,000 worldwide.[33] Second- and even third-generation Messianic Jews, who were raised in Messianic Jewish homes and have always identified as Jewish-believers in Jesus, are emerging as leaders of the movement. Most Jewish people have at least heard of Messianic Jews. They are aware that there are some Jewish people who believe in Jesus and continue to live as Jews. Others nevertheless maintain that a person cannot accept Jesus as the Messiah and still be Jewish. Even that trend, though, is changing. A 2013 Pew Research study found that a growing number of Jews believe that a Jew who embraces Jesus is still Jewish. “34% [of Jewish-Americans] say a person can be Jewish even if he or she believes Jesus was the messiah.”[34] Messianic Jewish Practices Today Messianic Jewish practices have evolved and adapted just as traditional Jewish observance has adapted within different cultures. In the first century, followers of Jesus were fully integrated within the Jewish community. The Jesus -movement was viewed as one of many first -century Jewish movements. After the parting of the ways, most Jewish believers were discouraged by the church from practicing Jewish customs. For centuries, there was scant evidence of how Messianic Jews lived. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Hebrew-Christians courageously ventured forward identifying as Jews, practicing some Jewish holidays, and building communities even though that was still being discouraged by many churches. However, when the MMJM emerged in the 1970’s, Messianic Jews proudly identified as Jews, identified with the local Jewish community, and sought to practice “Jewishly” in their congregations and homes. Today, most Messianic Congregations hold weekly services on Shabbat; observe Jewish holidays including Passover, Hanukkah, and the High Holidays; and include some amount of Jewish liturgy in their services such as the Shema and the Amidah. Within the MMJM there is a range of practices and beliefs. Ahavat Zion, in Santa Monica California, holds a traditional Torah service on Saturday mornings. Their congregational leader is called a rabbi, and worship is led by a cantor. They use a siddur (Jewish prayer book), read the parsha (prescribed weekly portion) from a Torah scroll and the haftarah, and recite traditional liturgy. Attendees wear yarmulkes and men wear the tallit. “Our services are a soulful blend of tradition and innovation. We use a traditional prayer book, with liturgy in Hebrew and English, and infuse our liturgy with music and joyous melodies.”[35] Another congregation, Beth Israel Messianic Congregation in Wayne, N.J., meets both Sunday mornings and Friday nights. Their services are a hybrid between Jewish and evangelical charismatic worship. They incorporate Messianic and evangelical Christian music. Congregational leader Jonathan Cahn goes by either pastor or rabbi. Their congregation is a diverse mixture of Jewish and non-Jewish Christians. It is multiethnic and multicultural: “Beth Israel is known for being a place of excitement, joy, love, vibrant worship, deep and powerful messages, the Spirit of God, and Jew and Gentile as one in Messiah. It is made up of people of every background, country, tribe, and tongue.”[36] The modern Messianic Jewish movement encompasses many non-congregational ministries and religious organizations. Mission agencies such as Jews for Jesus, Chosen People Ministry, and Jewish Voice Ministry, while they sometimes plant new congregations and host weekly meetings, focus on communicating the gospel individually with inquirers, teaching new Jewish believers, and coordinating public outreaches through literature distribution and media advertising. Jewish Voice Ministry operates medical and food relief work in emerging countries such as Ethiopia and Zimbabwe among newly discovered Jewish ethnic groups such as the Beta Israel. Messianic Music artists such as Marty Goetz, Paul Wilbur, and Jonathan Settel, compose Jewish music whose style unites gospel lyrics with Jewish melodies and rhythms. Their music is distributed through Messianic publishers such as Messianic Jewish Publishers & Resources, Jews for Jesus, and Chosen People Ministry. Scholars in the movement recently collaborated to produce a new translation of the Bible, called the Tree of Life Version, reflecting a Jewish understanding of the Scriptures and seeking to connect its message to contemporary readers: “We make the original language and culture of the Bible, and its salvation message, accessible through translation, art, and teaching.”[37] Today, the MMJM has gained recognition within the Church, visibility in Western society, and some growing acceptance within the Jewish community. Even if the movement has gained some acceptance or at least tolerance, popular opinion does not establish spiritual truth. The Messiahship of Jesus is not determined by surveys, a popular election, or a decision by a board of rabbis. The credentials for the Messiah were established in the Hebrew Scriptures over two thousand years ago. If Jesus did not meet the job requirements for the Messiah, then neither Jews nor Gentiles should embrace Him. If he fulfilled the job requirements and was clearly described by the Hebrew prophets according to the Jewish Bible, then everyone should embrace him–especially his own Jewish people. Yeshua said to his first -century Jewish followers, “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me” (John 5:39). END NOTES [1] “Defining Messianic Judaism,” UMJC, July 20, 2005, para. The Basic Statement, https://web.archive.org/web/20170629163812/https://www.umjc.org/core-values/defining-messianic-judaism/ [2] “The Messianic Movement,” MJAA, 2017, para. Introduction, http://mjaa.org/messianic-movement/. [3] In 2012 archaeologists with the Israel Antiquities Authority, excavating ancient Nazareth, may have discovered the very synagogue described by Luke. Solani, who sponsored the excavation says, “We cannot doubt that Jesus would have been there sometime. The first Christian communities used to gather in the synagogues. They were observant Jews.” “Archaeologists in Israel Discover Synagogue Dating from Time of Jesus,” The World (Washington DC: Public Radio International, January 7, 2013), https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-01-07/archaeologists-israel-discover-synagogue-dating-time-jesus. [4] D Turner, Matthew, vol. 1, Baker Exegetical Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 15. [5] Hugh Schonfield, The History of Jewish Christianity (London, UK: Duckworth, 1936), 40, http://archive.org/stream/TheHistoryOfJewishChristianity/HistoryOfJewishChristianity_djvu.txt [6] Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History, 3:20. [7] Schonfield, The History of Jewish Christianity, 75. [8] Philip Alexander, “The Early Centuries: Jewish Believers in Early Rabbinic Literature,” in Jewish Believers in Jesus, ed. Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007), 686. [9] David J. Rudolph and Joel Willitts, eds., Introduction to Messianic Judaism: Its Ecclesial Context and Biblical Foundations (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013), Kindle Loc. 367. [10] D. Instone-Brewer, “The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim Before 70 CE,” Journal of Theological Studies 54, no. 1 (2003): 25–24. [11] John Chrysostom, Adversus Judaeos Oratio 2, ed. Paul Halsall, trans. Roger Pearse, Online, vol. 98, Adversus Judaeos, Patrologia Graeca (New York, NY: Fordham University, 2002), 43. [12] Rudolph and Willitts, Introduction to Messianic Judaism, Kindle Loc. 379. [13] “St. Jerome,” Encyclopedia Britannica (Chicago, IL: Encyclopedia Britannica, February 2, 2017), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Jerome. [14] Schonfield. p. 70. [15] Ibid. p. 81. [16] Ibid. p. 84. [17] D. Wilmshurst, ed., Bar Hebraeus, the Ecclesiastical Chronicle: An English Translation. (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2016), ix–xvii. [18] The term “Hebrew-Christian” became preferred by many Jewish believers in the 19th  and 20th centuries. As with “Hebrew Home for the Aged” or “Hebrew National” hot dogs, the term “Hebrew” emphasized Jewish nationality. [19] Stanley Weintraub, Disraeli: A Biography (New York, NY: Truman Talley Books, 1993). [20] See note 16. [21] Joseph Samuel Christian Frederick Frey, Narrative of the Rev. Joseph Samuel C. F. Frey, 11th Ed. (New York, NY: D. Fanshaw Printers, 1834), https://books.google.com/books?id=SFAUAAAAYAAJ. [22] Kai Kjaer-Hansen, Joseph Rabinowitz and the Messianic Movement: The Herzl of Jewish Christianity, trans. Birger Petterson (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Pub Co, 1994). [23]  Leopold Cohn, To an Ancient People: The Autobiography of Dr. Leopold Cohn (New York, NY: Chosen People Ministries, 1996), 6. [24] Ibid. [25] Ibid. 7. [26] Ibid. 12. [27] What One Rabbi Discovered. (2017). ISSUES: A Messianic Jewish Publication, 5(1). Retrieved from https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v05-n01/what-one-rabbi-discovered/ [28] Yaakov Ariel, Evangelizing the Chosen People: Missions to the Jews in America, 1880–2000 (Durham, NC: Univ of North Carolina Press, 2000). [29] Ibid. p. 198. [30] Ibid. p. 197. [31] Ibid. p. 238. [32] Ruth Tucker, Not Ashamed: The Story of Jews for Jesus (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Books, 2000). [33] Sarah Posner, “Israel’s Best Friends or Jews’ Mortal Enemies?,” Moment Magazine – The Next 5,000 Years of Conversation Begin Here, July 2, 2013, https://www.momentmag.com/sarah-posner-israels-best-friends-or-jews-mortal-enemies/. [34] “A Portrait of Jewish Americans,” Demographic, Religion and Public Life Project (Washington DC: Pew Research Center, October 1, 2013), 58, http://pewrsr.ch/16IN5U4t. [35] “Ahavat Zion,” Ahavat Zion, 2017, para. Services, http://www.ahavatzion.org/visit/. [36] “Beth Israel Worship Center,” 2017, http://www.bethisraelworshipcenter.org//aboutus.htm [37] “Tree of Life Bible Society,” Tree of Life Bible Society, 2017, para. About Us, https://www.tlvbiblesociety.org. 2 JEWISH RESOURCES PRESS SUBSCRIBE STORE MAKE MY GIFT Jews for Jesus 60 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94102 Contact Phone: 415-864-2600 Email: jfj@jewsforjesus.org Privacy Terms and Conditions Copyright © 2018 AboutOur OrganizationOur StoriesFAQExploreFeatured ArticlesJewish ResourcesFor BelieversConnectDonateGet InvolvedSubscribeContact