1.4.4 Approaching the Research Population

Due to their different boundary constructions, ecclesiastical and synagogal type representatives estimate its size differently. From an ecclesiastical view, the movement comprises about five thousand members in some fifty groups. From a synagogal view, the movement counts about three thousand adherents in some twenty groups. The former draws its boundary wider than the latter due to a different understanding of Jewish identity. However, this study does not account on the movement's size, but on its cultures and structures.

From Europe I contacted a few leading individuals of the movement. From them grew an organic access to others. As the study grew, I aspired a numerical balance in interviews with representatives of the non-charismatic types, ℵ (aleph), ecclesiastical, and, ℷ (gimel), synagogal, and between leaders and members.

Non-charismatic and charismatic evangelicals had „manifested” a mutual advance in 1989 at „Lausanne II in Manila” (J. D. Douglas 1990: 25-38, 100-115). Yet in Israel one can still observe tensions between charismatic and non-charismatic entities. Nevertheless, the particular issue within the movement is not one between charismatic and non-charismatic, but between ecclesiastical and synagogal. What causes this difference within the movement?

As I concentrated on this phenomenon, it struck me how parts of the movement could appear religiously so much evangelical and so little Jewish. Only late I learned of the existence of one type ℸ (daleth), charismatic synagogal, group. Two leaders I could interview, but no members. Only when I had nearly finished my study I met and spoke various type ℸ (daleth) leaders outside Israel. I could even observe them as they acted out their faith individually and collectively. I took the liberty to include those observations in the description and analysis of type ℸ (daleth).

Furthermore, I was not content to only interview official leaders of the various types, who were all males. „Ordinary” members”, thus also women's, views revealed other inherent dynamics of the movement's parts. ¹¹Appendix 2 holds a table that presents the respondents according to the fourfold typology and other criteria, while at the same time it preserves their anonymity.)

Between February 1995 and November 1997 I spent fifty-one days among Israeli Messianic Jews, in 1995 ten, in 1996 twenty-four, and in 1997 seventeen. Repeated interviews with the same individuals and participant observation among the same groups rendered also longitudinal impressions. They helped me to discern consistent from incidental occurrences. That way I could perceive an incremental Judaisation of culture, which some leaders of the ecclesiastical type insist to deny, probably because they do not want it (8/97).