Wednesday, March 9, 2016

The 2 Competing Histories of Ancient Messianic Judaism



Within the Messianic movement are 2 schools of thought regarding Gentile identity, the Exclusionists who teach that Gentiles are excluded from Israel/Torah, the Inclusionists who teach that Gentiles are included in Israel/Torah, and each camp has its own way of telling the story of ancient Messianic Judaism.  In effect, there are 2 competing stories about the history of ancient Messianic Judaism.

The UMJC, for example, which advocates the Exclusionist school of thought, tells the story something like this:

The first community of Believers were predominantly Jewish and they identified as members of Israel who lived according to Torah and operated within the spectrum of halacha at that time.  These Messianic Jews lived this way in the first century (Acts 21) and on into the 4th century (see note 1 below).  The Messianic Gentiles, on the other hand, were freed of the burden of a Jewish way of life (Acts 15) and eventually developed the religion of Christianity which is followed by the Gentile wing of the Ekklesia.

For a typical Inclusionist (aka One Law proponent), the story of the early Messianic Jews is the same but the story of the early Messianic Gentiles is completely different:

The first community of Believers were predominantly Jewish and they identified as members of Israel who lived according to Torah and operated within the spectrum of halacha at that time.  The Gentile Believers were also taught to identify as members of Israel who were called to live according to the Torah and operate within normative Judaism (Acts 15).  There is historical evidence that Messianic Jews continued practicing Messianic Judaism up into the 4th century (note 1).  And there is historical evidence that Messianic Gentiles also continued practicing Messianic Judaism up into the 4th century (note 2).

As you can see, the plot line regarding the early Gentile Believers changes completely based on one's exegesis of Acts 15.  And, lamentably, the Exclusionist exegesis is borrowed in its entirety from the outdated Christian exegesis of Acts 15.  For an example of Inclusionist exegesis of Acts 15 which is based on modern textual criticism and which proceeds without the typical anti-Judaic Christian bias, please see note 3 below.

Shalom,

Peter



NOTES:

(1)  “[They] did not call themselves Christians, but Nazarenes….[T]hey remained wholly Jewish and nothing else.  For they use not only the New Testament but also the Old like the Jews….[They] live according to the preaching of the Law as among the Jews…. They have a good mastery of the Hebrew language.  For the entire Law and the Prophets and what is called the Scriptures, I mention the poetical books, Kings, Chronicles and Esther and all the others are read in Hebrew by them as that is the case with the Jews of course.  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,”  Epiphanius (4th Century Church Father), as quoted in Introduction to Messianic Judaism, David Rudolph and Joel Willitts


(2)   In the following excerpts from Gager's "Origins of Anti-Semitism", we see that there were famous presyters in the 4th century ("Church Fathers") who noted, much to their own personal consternation, that there was a widespread presence of Gentile Believers who, horror of horrors, viewed the synagogue as a holy site and believed that they were supposed to keep Shabbat and other Jewish festivals and even undergo circumcision:

 "In 386, while still a presbyter at Antioch, in western Syria, Chrysostom interrupted his addresses against the Arians and began a series of eight sermons directed against Judaizing Christians in the city.  The timing of these sermons is of interest in that they are addressed not to the Christian calendar but rather to the Jewish festivals (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and Sukkoth) of the autumn season.  The reason for this unusual proceeding, as Chrysostom himself plainly reveals, is that numerous Christians in the city were accustomed to celebrate these festivals with the Jews.  John hoped to dissuade them from doing so.
 The immediate audience of the homilies, it should be noted, is neither the Christian Judaizers nor the Jews themselves but members of Chrysostom's own congregation.  His announced aim is to combat their complacency regarding the Judaizers.  With dire threats of perdition, he urges his listeners to seek them out in their homes and to dissuade them from their foolish ways.  But if loyal Christians are the audience of the sermons, the Judaizers are the targets of his wrath and the Jews its victims.  His method is to turn the tables on these Judaizers, by likening the synagogue to a theater or a brothel rather than a place of power (I. 2-3).  Better to die of illness, which he calls a martyr's death, than to make use of Jewish charms and spells (VIII. 5-8).
 Throughout the homilies, but especially in the first and last, his language is intemperate.  At one or two points in the first homily he appears to pause, as if members of the audience had expressed dismay at his words, in order to justify his choice of words.  'I know that some will condemn me for daring to say that the synagogue is no different from the theater....' (I. 2).  But he will not be deterred.  The Jews have degenerated to the level of dogs.  They are drunkards and gluttons.  They beat their servants.  They are ignorant of God.  Their festivals are worthless and were proclaimed as such by the biblical prophets.  Their synagogues are the dwelling places of demons.  'If our way is true, as it is, theirs is fraudulent.   I am not speaking of the Scriptures.  Far from it.  For they lead me to Christ.  I am speaking of their present impurity and madness' (I. 6).  And by way of summing up:  'What more can I say?  Rapacity, greed, betrayal of the poor, thefts, keeping of taverns.  The whole day would not suffice to tell of these things' (I. 7).
 What were the activities of these Judaizers that so outraged the eloquent presbyter?  They attend the Jewish festivals and join in their fasts.  They undergo circumcision.  They observe the Sabbath.  They honor the synagogue as a holy site.  They make use of Jewish charms and spells as cures for diseases.  They sleep in the synagogue at Daphne, a suburb of the city, for the purpose of receiving dream-revelations.  In Chrysostom's own words, they 'have high regard for the Jews and think that their present way of life is holy' (I. 3).  Furthermore, the 'sickness' was not limited to a few.  On numerous occasions Chrysostom speaks of them as many (polloi) and at one point warns his listeners not to announce the full number lest the reputation of the church suffer damage. ...While he does not advocate the use of force against the Jews, he is not opposed to it as a means of recovering a fellow Christian from the fellowship of 'the Christ killers' (I. 4).  At another point he admits that he has come to lust for combat against the Jews (VI. I),” John G. Gager, Origins of Anti-Semitism

"IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH...Turning from the Didascalia, dated between 200 and 250, and the sources of the Pseudo-Clementines, reaching perhaps as early as 200, to Ignatius, we arrive at Antioch in the first decade of the second century.  In our discussion of John Chrysostom we have already discovered disputes at Antioch regarding Christians and the observance of the Mosaic commandments.  With Ignatius we encounter once again a protest by an ecclesiastical leader against the observance of Jewish practices in that city by persons who regarded themselves as Christians. To be sure, the letters of Ignatius bear only indirectly on the city of Antioch.  They were written during Ignatius's forced journey toward martyrdom in Rome, and they address issues which he encountered in Christian communities along the way.  The tone of several passages suggests that Ignatius was genuinely surprised by the Judaizers whom he encountered on his journey.  In view of what we know about the previous and subsequent history of Christianity in Antioch, however, it seems unlikely that Ignatius was completely unfamiliar with the phenomenon of Christian Judaizers.  Perhaps what surprised him was the discovery that they were not limited to Antioch! Two of Ignatius's letters contain clear references to Judaizers.  In Magnesians his warning 'not to be led astray by strange doctrines or old tales which are without benefit (8.1)' is directed at those who had been living according to some form of Judaism.  The contrast between the Sabbath and the Lord's Day in 9.1 may point to Sabbath observances.  Finally in 10.3 he completes the picture, though adding no new information, by expostulating that 'it is foolish to talk of Jesus Christ and to Judaize.'
 In his letter to the Philadelphians, he says the following:
 'If anyone should undertake to interpret Judaism to you, do not listen to him.  For it is better to hear of Christianity from a man who has been circumcised than to hear of Judaism from someone who is uncircumcised.' [6.1]
 Ignatius's words are not altogether unambiguous, but the situation appears to involve an effort on the part of Gentile converts to Judaism, or perhaps Gentile Judaizers, to suggest that the two faiths be regarded as complements rather than opposites.  Unfortunately, nothing further is said about those who were 'interpreting Judaism' except that they were not born Jews
,” John G. Gager, Origins of Anti-Semitism



(3)  ACTS 15

The issue before the Jerusalem Council was: from whence does covenantal salvation come? Some unauthorized Pharisees argued it comes from circumcision (15:1), Peter argued it comes from grace and faith (15:9,11).  Peter also posited that Gentiles had joined Israel, becoming “a People for His Name”(15:14, Note:  only Israel is called by His name, Deut. 14:2; Isaiah 63:19). The council concluded that Peter’s argument was correct (15:14) because his argument agreed with the Prophets (Amos 9:11-12 (LXX); Zechariah 2:11; Isaiah 2:2-3; Isaiah 45; Isaiah 56:3; Isaiah 45:21-22 (LXX), Isaiah 56:6-7 (MT); Micah 4:1-2; Jeremiah 31:31-33 (LXX); Ezekiel 36:25-27) . Given that Peter, the Prophets, and the Council deemed Messianic Gentiles to be saved by grace (contra the Pharisees of 15:1) and "turned" from paganism to join the G-d and People of Israel, James used this newly-established jurisdictional authority over the Messianic Gentiles to order them to desist from contextually-linked, pagan practices (i.e. the Fourfold Decree) that they might now cling to a Judaic sphere of influence (15:21, “law of Moses”).  Far from being a streamlined Torah for Gentiles, the fourfold decree describes 4 things done in first-century pagan temples:  (1) the first-century Gentiles would've understood the first item on the list as setting the stage for cultic pagan rites:  alisgematon ton eidolon ("pollutions of idols" and the clarifying term eidolothuton in 15:29 which refers to foods offered to idols);(2) the first-century Gentile would have associated pniktou ("things strangled") with cultic rites in which the sacrificial animal is strangled (see Philo, Special Laws 4.122); (3) the first-century Gentile would've associated porneia, given the context of "eidolon", with temple prostitution which was embarrassingly well-known in that era; (4) last, the reference to "blood" to a first-century Gentile would bring to mind the nearly universal cultic rite of blood-drinking.  In summary:  Acts 15 teaches that Gentile Believers belong to Israel, are expected to abstain from idolatry (i.e. the fourfold decree), and are expected to transplant themselves into a Judaic sphere of influence where the Torah of Moses is taught (Acts 15:21).  Now, given that all covenantal members of Israel are bound by the precedent of "one law for the community" (Exodus 12:48,49;  Lev. 24:22; Numbers 9:14; Numbers 15:15-16), and given that the decision was issued by Ya'akov (James), it follows that James expected that Gentile Believers would be "doers of the word and not hearers only" (James 1:22).






32 comments:

  1. A quick question... what happen to the messianic who concludes that the law is not to be kept or not for him? Would he only lose reward?

    Nice explanation Peter for the difference of thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A quick question... what happen to the messianic who concludes that the law is not to be kept or not for him? Would he only lose reward?

    First of all, it is not for us to determine. Second, many Christians for example, who believe they are not required to keep the Law, are keeping the Law, in regard to the larger issues, Christianity has a large record of charity, taking care of the poor, taking care of the widows and orphans, thus good works (ie the Law). So while they are doctrinally misinformed through blind tradition, much of what they do is still inline with what is required of by God.

    Yeshua's most elaborate explanation on inheriting a place in the Kingdom of God, is found in Matthew 25, it is interesting that faith is never mentioned, instead He speaks on works, however faith without works is dead, faith is implied and that being: true faithfulness will result in good works, thus the absurd statements of "who is going to Heaven or Hell", especially regarding believing "specific doctrine" is mere ignorance on the part of those who try to over simplify the issue. The conclusion is based on what you did, not on what denominational doctrine you believed on, because true faith produces good works.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Faith without work or not? That's seems like nobody agrees...

      https://roshpinaproject.com/2016/03/11/why-some-messianic-jews-are-acting-like-posers-and-making-themselves-unhappy/#comment-149938

      One claims you are going to hell for not believing in faith alone... Other say you have to keep it.

      Well another inconsistency from the non-testament or just something that nobody understand?

      Delete
    2. This is the difference between viewing the scriptures through a Judaic lense or viewing them from a Christian lense. Rosh Pinah Project represents the traditional Christian view, which is why they would disagree, the difference then being, not an inconsistency, but a disagreement of interpretation.

      Delete
    3. Zion, it all boils down to this... Does it affects your salvation? Why also does the new covenant say that "no one will teach his brother..." when it's so unclear which one is right and both types of followers of Yeshua disagree toward the law and what purpose it has for the believer?

      Delete
    4. Does it affects your salvation?

      Remi, I thought I just explained that, it absolutely does. This is exaclty what we read in Matthew 25, we also read in Matthew 7:21-23, however it is not for us to determine who is and who is not going to heaven or to hell, this is purely in God's hands. And men who try to be the gate keepers are acting in ignorance. There is a difference between the Christian creed based religion developed by gentiles and the sect of Judaism of the Apostles. But there is a large phenomena happening in Christianity towards the Torah, the Jewish people, the roots, and a turn away from anti-semitism and bogus traditional interpretations, everyone may not be on board yet, but the transition is taking place, even if it takes another 200 years.

      Concerning your question about the New Covenant, it hasn't happened yet, that is a future fulfillment.

      The growth of Christians turning towards the law in a positive way is a phenomena in our time. Just 50 years ago, this movement did not exist, granted there have been throughout time sects and small groups of Jews and gentiles seeking to observe the law while holding to the testimony of Yeshua, nothing on the scale we are seeing today.

      You seem anxious about it, relax, all good things come in time.

      Delete
    5. For the last 2000 years, no Christian kept the law... I know you are not the judge, but if what you say is true, then Jesus did not save a soul for the last 1500 years...

      Delete
    6. For the last 2000 years, no Christian kept the law...

      Remi, it is hard to have a conversation with you, because it seems you just say whatever you like, despite what has already been said. If you would actually pay attention to what others write, we could have a much better debate.

      That being said, I already have shown you how Christians have and do keep the Law (in part), so you should have never come to that conclusion, I never said they observe it in its entirety, without a doubt, the law is completely cherry picked in Christianity.

      Christians for the most part keep what is considered the weightier matters of the Law. Such as taking care of the widows and orphans, taking care of the needy, thus good works. So to say, "that no Christian kept the Law", is absurd, something I never stated and is a misunderstanding of the law itself.

      I know you are not the judge, but if what you say is true, then Jesus did not save a soul for the last 1500 years...

      This completely ignores what I said, again this is the problem with debating with you. I never said someone is saved by keeping the Law, you made this up in your mind, a predetermined disposition. Go back and read what I wrote, you obviously missed the details.

      Delete
    7. "That being said, I already have shown you how Christians have and do keep the Law (in part), so you should have never come to that conclusion, I never said they observe it in its entirety, without a doubt, the law is completely cherry picked in Christianity."

      There's a reason why Jewish authorities do not see Christians as "Noahides" - it's because by worshiping a creature, a man as their god, they break the most fundamental of Torah laws - prohibition of idolatry.

      "Christians for the most part keep what is considered the weightier matters of the Law. Such as taking care of the widows and orphans, taking care of the needy, thus good works. So to say, "that no Christian kept the Law", is absurd, something I never stated and is a misunderstanding of the law itself. "

      You should read the history of the Roman Empire. Many Christians are surprised to find out that long before Christianity came along there were many charities supporting the orphans, the poor, etc, many philanthropies supplying free food and medical care to the needy. In the Christian mind that should qualify the Romans as keeping the "weightier matters of the Law", shouldn't it?

      But I suspect that all that charity probably would not absolve the Romans in the minds of Christians - without Christ they were idolaters all the same, violating the weightiest matter of the Law of them all, all their good works done in the name of some false god are no more than "dirty rags". Looks in the mirror, Jesus-worshiper.

      Delete
    8. You should read the history of the Roman Empire. Many Christians are surprised to find out that long before Christianity came along there were many charities supporting the orphans, the poor, etc, many philanthropies supplying free food and medical care to the needy. In the Christian mind that should qualify the Romans as keeping the "weightier matters of the Law", shouldn't it?

      But I suspect that all that charity probably would not absolve the Romans in the minds of Christians - without Christ they were idolaters all the same, violating the weightiest matter of the Law of them all, all their good works done in the name of some false god are no more than "dirty rags". Looks in the mirror, Jesus-worshiper.


      I don't see why it would come to anyone as a surprise, good works are good works, no matter who does them.

      In Romans 2:6-11 it says, He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.

      In Romans 2:14 it says, For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.

      Gene is playing the gate keeper, good thing you are not God. As for what you said though, I worship the God of Israel, not whatever your imagination can conjure.

      Delete
    9. "He will render to each one according to his works"

      Remember, according to your new testament doctrines, none of our good work count. One in Yeshua, we can have good works.

      The G-d of Israel is not a man...

      Delete
    10. Zion, as is normative for all Christians, your primary focus in life by definition is Jesus, who is suppose to be your "first love", and not the G-d of Israel. It's foolish to dedicate one's whole life to a creature, an idol, serving and worshiping that thing, while claiming that the idol is somehow the "G-d of Israel".

      The G-d of Israel is not some Jewish guy born and diseased two thousand years ago. The gate keeper is G-d's Word, which condemns such idolatry.

      Delete
    11. Remember, according to your new testament doctrines, none of our good work count. One in Yeshua, we can have good works.

      Remi, I need context to this statement, what are you referring to? The dirty rags reference? If so that is in Isaiah.

      The G-d of Israel is not a man...

      Agreed.

      Even in the Apostolic Writings, Yeshua is understood to be a manifestation of God, no where is it taught that God is a man.

      Delete
    12. It's foolish to dedicate one's whole life to a creature, an idol, serving and worshiping that thing, while claiming that the idol is somehow the "G-d of Israel".

      That is like saying, it is absurd to listen and to follow a man, that supposedly is appointed by God, ie Moses. If God instructs sends a prophet or the Messiah, and instructs us on how and what, then we should do exactly as God has said.

      As for you information, my life is dedicated to God, and my service to His servant the Messiah. I do not put the cart before the Horse. Even Yeshua Himself, tells us to pray to the Father. Again your portrayal our beliefs are either intended to be antagonistic or ignorant, and probably a little of both.

      Delete
    13. Quote: "The G-d of Israel is not a man...

      Agreed.

      Even in the Apostolic Writings, Yeshua is understood to be a manifestation of God, no where is it taught that God is a man."
      *********************

      I Timothy 2:5; John 8:58; Mt. 1:23 to cite just a few.

      Would you care to elaborate on this quote... or have I misunderstood it?!

      Delete
    14. I Timothy 2:5; John 8:58; Mt. 1:23 to cite just a few.

      Would you care to elaborate on this quote... or have I misunderstood it?!


      Anonymous, sure, quite possibly you have misunderstood it, it's all in the details.

      The claim is that God is not a man, true, how could God be a man, God is above space and time. The Creator of the Universe is not a man, instead He is a 'being' far above all of His creation and above our understanding. However, since God can do anything, He can manifest as a man. Even the verses you cited, only show this to be true, that Yeshua is a manifestation of God in the flesh.

      1 Tim 3:16, seems to be the most clear on this understanding:

      And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

      Zion

      **Is the comment system down, I have been having issues?

      Delete
  3. Zion, there are good people in all the religions. I think it's clear that the law has specific sets of rules that should be follow. We are not talking only about charity, because even atheist can be nice, and I know a few! But what about Kosher, day of worship, etc. Nobody in 1500 years kept them!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zion, there are good people in all the religions. I think it's clear that the law has specific sets of rules that should be follow. We are not talking only about charity, because even atheist can be nice, and I know a few! But what about Kosher, day of worship, etc. Nobody in 1500 years kept them!

      Agreed, see my response to Gene above, good works are good works, no matter who you are. However trying to pin down the details of someones good works, for example kosher, Shabbat, feast, etc, is an exercise in futility, this is only up to God. Read the verses I posted to Gene, second it does not account for ignorance, much like it would be error to claim that Jews who do not believe in Yeshua are destined for hell (wrath), again ignorance, it would be playing the gate keeper. It is oversimplistic and playing God, as I said before, it is not for us to determine.

      Delete
    2. And those good people as what Yeshua said are in hell...

      Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them.

      Delete
    3. Remi... you are reading it too literary. Jesus didn't really mean it. In fact, he didn't mean anything that may sound bad and embarrassing to a more liberal Christian.

      Delete
    4. And those good people as what Yeshua said are in hell...

      Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them.


      You can't take one statement of Yeshua's, ignore all others that He made and come to a proper understanding, you are again being over simplistic.

      Yeshua also said, But Jesus said to him, "Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you."

      It is interesting to note the details here, as they clearly do matter.

      For example, rejecting Yeshua is different than not believing in Yeshua. Second, rejecting a false doctrine or teaching, concerning the Messiah is not rejecting the Messiah, instead it is only rejecting the false teaching or doctrine.

      However, there are those who will reject Yeshua for who He truly is (not the gentile version), and this is also a rejection of God, because God sent Him. It is like when Korah rejected Moses, Korah was not actually rejecting Moses, he was rejecting God, because God sent Moses, and Korah faced the wrath of God as a result, this should not be a shock.

      Delete
    5. I am the way, the truth and the life. All those who don't worship your Yeshua will go in hell, regardless of their good works. Also, Moses was not worshipped as a god. We are going in circle here...

      Delete
    6. I am the way, the truth and the life. All those who don't worship your Yeshua will go in hell, regardless of their good works.

      Again you are being overly simplistic. In light of all of Yeshua's words concerning His authority and eternal life, it is only those who reject Him, the details are important here, considering what He said elsewhere, this is not a blanket statement as you are rendering it. There are other categories that would not apply here, for example, non-believers and those who were taught falsely about Him, or forced through violence to accept Him, they would not meet this criteria.

      Let's be honest though, if God truly did send Yeshua, and all that is written is true about Him, if faced with the truth, and one rejects Him, what other options are there? I think we can both agree there are no other options, so it should not come as a shock that complete rejection will result in wrath.

      Also, Moses was not worshipped as a god. We are going in circle here...

      I don't understand how this is relevant to my analogy.

      Delete
    7. Well, if he did send Yeshua, then you would be still wrong for 99% of christians that think it's by faith alone. You are actually denying that it is apart from work. I am not oversimplifying. There is clear discrepancies at least in the non testament writing.

      Delete
    8. Well, if he did send Yeshua, then you would be still wrong for 99% of christians that think it's by faith alone. You are actually denying that it is apart from work. I am not oversimplifying.

      Remi, I never claimed to be a Christian, (however I do love my Christian brothers and Sisters, just like I love my Jewish brothers and sisters), and you are also wrong about the 99%, it is only Protestant Christianity that believes ‘Sola Fide’, Catholicism which makes up majority of Christianity, and add in Orthodox Christianity, do not hold to this interpretation. But this is all besides the point.

      I do not believe someone can EARN their salvation through works or keeping some laws, which is what Paul is referring to in Ephesians (context is key). However, we must have a “genuine” faith, in order to to receive God’s grace, which of course means, you can’t just make a confession of faith and do whatever you like. James said it best, paraphrasing "Faith without works is dead.”

      James 2:21-22
      Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;

      There is no false dichotomy of faith vs works, however understanding the context of certain verses can be difficult.

      There is clear discrepancies at least in the non testament writing.

      You are most definitely being over simplistic in your interpretation, even many Christian Scholars would destroy your simplistic arguments. You simply do not understand, and that is okay, but stating things like I am not being overly simplistic or stating there are discrepancies, is not proof in itself, in fact you have not proved anything, other than your predisposition towards the Apostolic Writings.

      Delete
    9. "Agreed, see my response to Gene above, good works are good works, no matter who you are."

      So, are they really good work if you don't believe in Yeshua?

      "Remi, I need context to this statement, what are you referring to? The dirty rags reference? If so that is in Isaiah."

      No, that's Isaiah's verse taken out of context by Christians/Messianic. G-d removed the righteous in the previous verse... Read Isaiah

      You removed (PAGA) him who rejoiced and worked righteousness, those who mentioned You in Your ways; behold, when You became wroth for we had sinned; through them, of old, we would be saved.
      And we all have become like one unclean, and like a discarded garment are all our righteous deeds, and we all have withered like a leaf, and our iniquities carry us away like the wind.

      https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H6293&t=KJV

      Delete
    10. James 2:24
      You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only

      Delete
    11. remi wrote:
      "And those good people as what Yeshua said are in hell...

      Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them."

      "Hell" is actually not mentioned, certainly not eternal hell.

      John‬ ‭3:36‬ ‭NKJV
      “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

      Everlasting/eternal in John 3:36 is the Greek word αἰώνιον or aiōnion.

      αἰώνιον means age-lasting (e.g. Millennial Kingdom), not eternal. Aidios is the word for endless duration.

      According to:
      http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Eternal-Life

      John Wesley Hanson conclusively demonstrates:
      ". . . Ezra S. Goodwin patiently and candidly traced this word through the Classics, finding the noun frequently in nearly all the writers, but not meeting the adjective until Plato, its inventor, used it. He states, as the result of his protracted and exhaustive examination from the beginning down to Plato, "We have the whole evidence of seven Greek writers, extending through about six centuries, down to the age of Plato, who make use of Aion, in common with other words; and no one of them EVER employs it in the sense of eternity."

      Delete
  4. No, that's Isaiah's verse taken out of context by Christians/Messianic. G-d removed the righteous in the previous verse... Read Isaiah

    Remi,

    That is why I asked you what you were referring to, Gene was the one who quoted Isaiah, not me, also I have yet to see you answer to the question.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sorry, what was the question again? I must have missed it...

    ReplyDelete
  6. No one living today is “under the law” of Moses. The old covenant was between Israel and God. Israel was twice judged, had their Temple destroyed, and their nation sent into slavery and exile for their failures that included murdering their Messiah (thou shalt not murder), gross idolatry, and child sacrifice (causing their children to pass through the fire), etc.. The old covenant of Moses was a constitution for the Theocratic kingdom of Judah and Israel. Israel's failure was punished just as Moses taught (see Deuteronomy, the last part that lays out the cycles of national discipline that included exile! The old covenant pertains to the theocratic kingdom. NO ONE kept, or keeps that covenant. Israel today is a secular state that is not under the law of Moses! If a Jew breaks the Sabbath, do his neighbors pick up stones to stone him to death? (Exodus 31, 35).

    So, as an uncircumcised Gentile, I'm supposed to keep the Passover? Many Gentiles claim to keep that event, but are they circumcised? Does anyone even care? They actually keep the Talmud and the Mishnah, not the law of Moses. The law of Moses limits Passover observance to circumcised Jews and the circumcised foreigners inside the borders of Israel. Do any of you law-keepers keep the 3 times a year REQUIRED pilgrimage to Jerusalem? Do you sacrifice at the Dome of the Rock on the temple mount?

    What a bunch of hypocritical nonsense at this blog. The Gentiles get damned by you “law-keepers” for not keeping the law of Moses that you continually break “in thought, word, and deed!”

    You also confuse interpretation with application. The “one-law” passages in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers dealt with how ancient Israel was to treat foreigners WITHIN their borders. I have never been to Israel, nor have I ever been tele-ported back to ancient Israel. I have never been subject to the law of Moses. AND neither have you! What a delusion you all are under. Within the borders of the US, we have one law for the citizen and the alien. Each are subject to our “thou shalt not murder” laws. And we do not have “cities of refuge” for those that commit manslaughter.

    And you slander the ancient Church because they were not a part of Judaism. Judaism does not keep the Torah, it keeps the Talmud and the Mishnah. The early Church did not want their members to have divided loyalty by hanging out with those in Christ rejecting Judaism. I agree! I feel the same about the Mormons and the Jws. If you attend my Church on Sunday and the Jws on Saturday, I will definitely oppose you.

    Another thing you folks seem to ignore is that God created nationalism. At Babel's tower, God confused the languages and nations were born. Paul recognized that nations are an instrument in God's quiver to bring justice and protect the innocent from law-breakers. Thus the state does not “bear the sword in vain.” In Romans, Paul counseled that we should obey the laws of the land we reside in. In the Church, we do not stone the immoral, we excommunicate them. This is the office of the keys that we exercise within our community. I am subject to the laws of my state and nation, not to the Mosaic covenant that I was never a part of nor ever subject to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FYI you ignorant one:

      Christians live in a Jewish world. Upon becoming believers, their biblical heritage become Hebraic. The Bible was written by Jewish authors in a Jewish culture and, for the most part, was written to Jews in their own language.

      in accepting the Bible, the believer enters a Jewish world. It is a world inhabited by Jews, centered around Jews and their lives and narrated by Jews. It is a world whose central event was the incarnation of God as a Jew for the purpose of dying in Jerusalem the capital of the Jews for the sake of redemption of all mankind.

      GOD CHOSE TO BRING HIS REVELATION TO THE WORLD THROUGH THE JEWISH PEOPLE. It was His prerogative, His choice, and you can dance twist in the air until you are blue in the face and it will not change these facts.

      You need an attitude adjustment...

      Delete