Posted on 07/01/2003 10:22:12 AM PDT by ksen
RECOVERING THE TRUTH & A COMING TO A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF JESUS
Jesus and all his followers were Jews who were faithful to Biblical Judaism and never intended to separate from or start a new religion; after their deaths the Gentile Christian church will condemn the Jewish Christians as heretics...in time fruit of the Jewish Church (Gentile Christianity) will destroy it's mother
We have a unique paradox in Biblical history; one which touches every follower of Jesus yet today and which reaches to the very core of our own culture and time. It is impossible to understand Jesus or his message until we come to a correct understanding of the events that fashioned such persecution of the Jews by the Gentile believers and which contributed to the alteration of the faith of Jesus as can be found to have existed in the first century of Second Temple Judaism. As stated earlier the first and greatest division in the early church concerned the relationship of the followers of Jesus to Judaism; it shaped everything that was to follow. One of the greatest problems facing Christianity today is how to reconcile what it has become with G-d's intended vision for the Gentile nations of the world whereby they become part of the Israel of G-d and not "replace" it with a religion of their own creation. The answers for such a problem come only when one personally acquaints himself with an unbiased presentation of the facts of the tragic events of this part of Biblical history and traces the repercussions of such events down through the corridors of history and ultimately seeing the shock waves from them that are present in our own religious beliefs systems and cultures of today.
Today many scholars tell us the truth today about the early church and courageously break from "church traditions" and "mind control" to present the facts concerning these "events" and the corruption of the early faith of the historical Jesus by the Gentile "converts" who would later steer the direction of this "faith" throughout recorded history. It is so simple today to find this information, but sadly few look or even know the need to see if "they be in the faith." That being the case, we accept the "spin" of religious leaders down through history and the real message of Jesus is never heard, or at best, is overlooked for more "orthodox teachings" espoused which have taken it's place. Keith Akers, in his The Lost Religion of Jesus, states the case as well as any. Jewish Christianity consisted of those early Christians who followed the teachings of Jesus, as they understood him, and also remained loyal to the Jewish law of Moses as they understood it. Messianic Judaism was not to replace Judaism with a new faith; it was the goal and zenith for which the prophets wrote and hoped. This simple statement is of profound importance, because the Jewish Christians were eventually rejected both by orthodox Judaism and by orthodox Gentile Christianity. The understanding of the Jewish follower of Jesus was not that of orthodox Christianity (as it came to be where Jesus is seen more like the sun-g-dmen of the Gentile nations than a human messiah). Likewise the Jewish follower of Jesus possessed an understanding of the law of Moses that was the same as orthodox Judaism, but yet this view would later be rejected under the influence of Paul and his churches. Jerome's celebrated comment in the fourth century summarizes this dual rejection: "As long as they seek to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither Jews nor Christians" [Letter 112] (Akers, The Lost Religion of Jesus, p. 7).
The Jewish Christians considered Jesus to be the "true prophet" who would lead the people back to the eternal law that commanded simple living and nonviolence. They saw in Jesus their hopes for physical redemption and the fulfillment of the prophets. It was their hope that the Law would go forth from Zion with Jesus at its head as the long awaited Messiah and King of Israel. It was their hope that the enemies of Israel would be vanquished by the word of this anointed one of the LORD as taught in the Psalms of Solomon (no not the psalms you are familiar with but a separate Jewish books that was recognized by Jews as authoritative in the first century). The law, which was cherished by all G-dfearing Jews, had been given to Moses; indeed, it had existed from the beginning of the world, and was intended to be cherished and observed by both Jew and non-Jew alike because in the Commandments one finds the unique Covenant stipulations of his Covenant before G-d. In sharp contrast with the gentile Christian movement, which emerged in the wake of Paul's teaching, Jewish Christianity strove to make the Jewish law stricter than the Jewish tradition seemed to teach ("you have heard it said but I say unto you...'much more'"). Such was the Jesus' love for G-d and His Word. But this cannot be said for the Gentile churches which strove to find ways to lay aside the law for the laxity that was taught under the disguise of "grace." In other words, the non-Jews loved the large "gray areas" that came from the teaching of Paul and others who negated the Law through their own personal "revelations" and their own personal "gospels" (Paul is found saying in Rom 2:16 16: In the day when G-d shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel and again in 2 Tim 2:8 8: Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel). It is a little early in this article to address this concept but if you study continues you will reach a point in your understanding and knowledge where you will see beyond any doubt that the "gospel of Paul" replaced the "gospel of Jesus and Judaism."
Jewish Christianity is the blind spot in virtually all accounts of Jesus. Everyone agrees that Jesus was a Jew and that his initial followers were Jews. Yet of the thousands of books written about Jesus, almost none acknowledge the central importance of Jewish Christianity; at least until the end of the previous century and the beginning of the present one. That was true up until the latter part of the last century when Jewish, as well as European scholars began to reevaluate the Jewish Jesus and contrast the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith. There are many who are eager to focus specifically on the Jewishness of Jesus, until they get to the point of examining those of his followers who, like their teacher, were also Jewish, and in doing so see for themselves that actually nothing really changed within this community of the closest followers of Jesus until the early fourth century when Rome would effectively destroy the Jewish "followers of Jesus" by declaring them official heretics. The power of Rome would propagate a Gentile understanding and not a Jewish understanding of Jesus (see Constantine's Easter letter if you have any doubts).
The "Jewishness" of these early Christians does not refer to their ethnic group or nationality, but rather to their beliefs. Paul was a convert to Judaism (H. Maccoby, The Mythmaker, Paul And The Invention Of Christianity) and only later converted to Judaism; first a Sadducee, and after rejection by the Chief Priest he turned to the Pharisees, again only to be rejected by them for his prior cruelty to them as an agent of the Temple police who routed them out and killed them (the Messianic believing strict branch of the Pharisees called Nazarenes/Essenes). Paul also preaches freedom from the law and therefore explicitly rejects Jewish beliefs. Paul, and some of the other Jews who became Christians, renounced the law of Moses and, therefore, were not part of Jewish Christianity. The churches of Paul today (vast majority of Christianity as it exists today) lay outside the true faith of Jesus and will continue to do so unless they encounter the truth about this man of Galilee and the truth about their own religious history.
Without understanding Jewish Messianic Judaism or "intended Christianity", we cannot understand the historical Jesus let alone the earliest church nor the corruption of it within the New Testament correctly. Lacking this knowledge we are doomed to misinterpret most of what we read in the New Testament and our worship let alone our conduct will be in error...much of which is defined as sin in the Torah.
No? How can you be sure?
So what God did you ask to forgive you? What Jesus did you ask into your life?
OK. Let's look.How do we know that all 27 books and no more and no less are the inerrant word of God and the scores of other writings bearing Apostolic names are not?
What was "the word" they received? From whom? What did they do with it, once they'd searched the scriptures (and found it was "so", or "no so")?
The contents of the New Testament, more specifically the Gospels and some (all?) of the successive letters would have been that "word". They survive, in so many accurately transmitted manuscripts, because the Bereans - and those like them - did as the Scriptures say. They searched the scriptures. I believe this is what Ignorant refers to (badly mispelled) as the Tenhak (it should be spelled Tanakh).
They found them so. The texts survived, were copied faithfully, and only later assembled into a single canon. But they were held as scripture, since they came from first-hand witnesses to the Resurrection and were in agreement with the Written Law, long before then.
I'm afraid I don't see how that actually addresses the question. What you say is true, of course. But you fail to address how we know, as you say "the texts...were ehld as Scripture," "came from first-hand witnesses," or were "in agreement with the Written Law."
There's a very simple answer to this that doesn't require the reader to become an expert in archeology or literary manuscripts or history or anythign like that. Blessed are they who do pursue those things, but for most believers the inspiration and authenticity of the canon is transmitted by God's Church.
SD
Easy. I explained before but I guess you weren't paying attention. Orthodox scribal corruptions exist mostly when their efforts to sweep an adoptionist viewpoint under the table is obvious.
Who was Jesus talking to?
Jerome's opinion aside, he obeyed those in the Church with the authority to make such decisions.
But that is another discussion
It sure is.
SD
Speaking as but a single bee within that swarm, I can understand that. I happen to think the movies Shane and The Natural are inspired, too. The Natural is wholly infidelic in it's original text, however. And I'm convinced the Holy Spirit must have been at work in that movie, because there's no way Robert Redford could have turned in such a magnificent work on his own, given his political bent.
The Messiah YHWH sent. The man whom Adonai Echad (YHWH) rose from the dead.
So whether a passage supports "adoptionism" or not is your touchstone, your lodestar, your guiding principle?
SD
People like you that teach for doctrine the traditions of men.
Do you believe that Yeshua is God's only begotten son ?
Pages of answers in some else's words have a habit of putting me to sleep, yes. When you stop regurgitating verbatim what you read on another message board - and start putting into your own words (indicating that you fully understand and have internalized the concepts), let me know.
Yes. I also believe the "this day I have begotten thee" happened at the baptism of John.
Gee. If it bothered you that much I'd expect not to see my name in "ping" format. The material in question however is my own. So thank you for confirming you're too busy responding in your little world of non-negotiable theologies to pay much attention. Lol. Wake me up when you actually have anything worthwhile to contribute.
In the case of The Natural, she's right :) In Bernard Malamud's original book, Roy Hobbes is an undisciplined, whoring lout. He gets at least two women pregnant, and abandons both of them. In the end, he finally gets the moral fiber to turn down the Judge's offer (to through the final game) - breaks his bat like in the movie - and then strikes out anyway on the last pitch. The pieces of his bat are buried under home base, and Roy goes home a completley broken (and broke) man.
Do you believe that Yeshua is God's only begotten son ?
Yes. I also believe the "this day I have begotten thee" happened at the baptism of John.
Two questions ...1. What does it mean (to you) that Yeshua is God's only begotten son?
2. Why do you believe that the begetting of Yeshua occurred at his baptism (i.e. what supports this belief for you) ?
Before I answer these and since I've already answered a couple of your previous questions. What are your views concerning pre-existeance of Messiah?
Isaiah 48:17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way thou shouldest go.
Three distinct people are mentioned in this passage. Who are they?
I submit that they are:
1. The LORD, thy Redeemer - Jesus, God the Son
2. The Lord GOD - God the Father
3. His Spirit - God, the Holy Spirit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.