What do Messianics consider themselves a sect of?

[ContraMundum]

I don't hate the body. How dare you even suggest that!!! I have disdain for the institution that teaches falsehood. There are MANY believer's that attend "churches" that are spiritually dead churches. Those believer's, many of them, have vibrant deep walks with Gd. That does not mean that the instution they attend is not full of gross error. The two couldn't be more exclusively distinct in nature.

But please don't forget- and this is the whole point: it is merely declared "error" by your own personal, private estimation. That doesn't amount to anything at all in the big picture. What's worse is that you show constantly that you have no genuine grasp of what is being taught. Hence, your estimation is even lessened.

You keep trying to sell this silliness that Gd has 2 different laws... one for the Jews and another far less restrictive set for gentiles all while you completely ignore what scripture declares.

Nope. Just said otherwise. You're not listening.

Here is what is truly insane with your line of thought. Messiah never, ever, not once even suggested that the Torah was done away with... Nor did he ever make even the most remote suggestion that the Torah was done away with for ANYONE because of his coming to earth.

Yep.

You attempt to argue that basically, gentiles are not subject to Torah well, because they aren't Jews. Yet Messiah never once even made the remotest of all suggestion that even remotely suggest such a wild assertion. The claim "Gentiles are not bound by Torah" is by its very nature an extraordinary claim.

Nope. Again, you're not listening. I teach that everyone is bound to the laws in the whole of scripture that they are bound to. It's really uncomplicated.

What I have been saying and you REPEATEDLY and you seem to intentionally twist, distort and misrepresent, is that the gentile church does NOT teach that we are to observe the feasts of Gd as they are recorded in scripture.

Gentiles are not bound to keep the historic and agricultural feasts of ancient Israel. Not one verse says that anywhere. The feasts are instituted for reasons, like agriculture and history pertaining exclusively to the Jews.

Can you show me one verse that clearly, unambiguously teaches that Gentiles are commanded to keep the Feasts according to the NT?

Can you explain to me why the Rabbis who handed down the Torah to us all never taught that the Gentiles would be compelled by God to keep the Feasts? Can you explain why the Church under the leadership of the Jewish Apostles adopted that position as well?

Can you then explain to me why you are trying to reverse the clear teaching of the Rabbis since Moses and the Church who is their heritage?

I'm saying that the gentile church has replaced Passover with Easter.

That is a lie. I've already shown you in plain logic why that is impossible. They don't celebrate the same event. Are you listening to yourself? Are you engaging in confirmation bias? Do you desperately need to believe in a corrupt, Godless church so you can do as you please (Jdg 21:25) or is these some deep rooted hatred in you from something that happened?

I'm saying that the "church" has replaced Sukkot with Pentecost and the vast majority of people in church have NO IDEA what Sukkot is.

Are you even listening to yourself? You don't believe God gave us Pentecost? Do you even understand how a Church calendar works? You know that all things, including Pentecost, are connected in date to the Sunday resurrection, right? This is hilarious!

I'm saying the "church" doesn't observe ANY of the feast days as dictated in scripture in the manor or on the dates found in SCRIPTURE! Heck its almost never discussed, taught on or preached about and is certainly NOT observed.

Two points. No, the Gentiles in the Church don't keep the Feasts because they don't have to if they are not Jews- according to the Jews who gave you the Torah (apparently to misuse!). The Church agrees with the Jews, and has done so since the first Jerusalem Council. This is your problem, not mine.

Secondly, you are making a really embarrassing comment regarding the Biblical knowledge of millions of people. Sweeping, rash generalizations will get you no where. Keep in mind that it was more than likely a Christian from a Church that gave you the Bible you now use to beat everyone up with. Christians certainly translated, preserved and printed it for you. From that Bible you gleaned the information you now attack everyone with. So really, to claim that the Church doesn't know its own faith is a little crackpot. They gave all you know about God to you in the first place. Think.

Just who do you think Gd is talking about when he says in Rev COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE....

Pagan Rome. You can apply it today but I think it's insane to apply that to (for example) your local Salvation Army congregation because they are not "Jewish enough" for you.

Get back to me when you can cite a single example where mainstream denominational churches at the institutional level are telling all if its priests and pastors that we are going to observe Passover meal on 14 Nissan and that it is the kick off (if you will) for the week of unleavened bread.

Why would they?

Instead we have Lent... which is to be found NO WHERE in scripture... the practice of not eating meat on "Good Friday" under the grossly mistaken idea that Messiah was crucified on a Friday which is IMPOSSIBLE.

Again, you really don't know what you're talking about. There's nothing wrong with a season to remember one's sins and repent of them- that's called Lent. If you think repentance is not found in scripture then you're in bad shape. Secondly, Lent is not observed universally. Thirdly, the fasting from fish on Friday (not just Good Friday, ok?) is not universally held and there's nothing wrong with it (ever read Romans 14?)

You have some pretty weird ideas about Churches.

Lastly, don't forget that it is only your estimation that the crucifixion was "impossible" to have occurred on a Friday. So it's just an opinion. And opinions are like backsides- everyone has one. I don't have a problem with a Friday crucifixion, never have, and yes, I have agonized over it just like you probably still do.

While it also never talks about the root of good Friday which is taken from the pagan holiday Blood Friday. Or that the roots of Easter go all the way back to Babylon.

Myth. Dis-proven years ago. Get with the program. Hislop was wrong. Those who followed him (eg your sources no doubt) were wrong and duped. Read this little book for a primer on why.

Easter has replaced what ACTUALLY happened and why Yeshua was found in a "garden" doing the wave offering of First Fruits.

Scripture doesn't say that. That's your commentary only. And if it was a) true and certain and b) important to know then I'm astounded the Apostles under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit didn't spell that out for everyone.

I bet that less than 1 in 10 people who go to a mainstream denominational church even know this.

Probably because no one thinks it's got the warranty of scripture and thus would be true and binding. Certainly sounds to me like wishful eisegesis.

Gd dearly loves the people (as do I ) But to suggest that everything is fine????? SHEER FOLLY

A good friend of mine once said "I leave the worrying about the Church to God- it's His Church to rule and I can't fix it"

Good advice for stressed out fundamentalists I think.

 

[ContraMundum]

Only 2 counting this one. The other was the Babylonian captivity, which was very short. Even if you count the captivity in Egypt, there was only a short time when they were actually oppressed. Before the tabernacle and then the temple, they had sacrifices, just not in a particular spot.

Good enough. The Philistines had it for a while but who's interested in nit-picking here?

 

[Hoshiyya]

Each Messianic is his/her own sect.

But naively, many assume themselves not the product of their environments, when in fact they largely are. So most of them have similarities with Protestantism and Christianity in general, and/or reflecting what nation and culture they come from.

 

[Meowzltov]

Each Messianic is his/her own sect.

You may feel that way for yourself, and I'm sure that there are those who feel likewise. But there are also those who feel that MJ is part of Christianity or part of Judaism. I think that most messianics feel they are part of Judaism. That's why it's called messianic JUDAISM.

 

[Hoshiyya]

You may feel that way for yourself, and I'm sure that there are those who feel likewise. But there are also those who feel that MJ is part of Christianity or part of Judaism. I think that most messianics feel they are part of Judaism. That's why it's called messianic JUDAISM.

You completely misinterpreted me.

"You may feel that way for yourself"

I am not talking about feelings, nor talking theoretically, nor talking about "what should be".

I am observing on the actual reality as it applies to many people. Not saying it is good or bad.

It is like saying there was a communist uprising in Angola.
To simply say it happened is not the same as saying it is good - or bad.

"But there are also those who feel that MJ is part of Christianity or part of Judaism."

Yeah I agree. I explicitly said that most of them have similarities with Protestantism and Christianity in general.

 

[yonah_mishael]

Each Messianic is his/her own sect.

This is, in my opinion, quite insightful. I'm happy you made this statement.

I find it difficult to deal with the fact that so many people in this movement think that they are the spiritual successors of the original Church, as if the last 2,000 years could somehow be wiped away and have no real influence on their personal interpretation of the Bible.

One excellent example is how almost all MJs and MGs understand the Trinity and the person of Jesus. It is completely in-line with what has been handed down in the Protestant and Catholic traditions. Do they really imagine that this was the faith of the earliest Christians? While it makes you feel good to imagine that your brand of beliefs most readily reflects the positions of the founders of your religion, how can this be proven? 1 Corinthians 15 mentions "people who are being baptized for the dead" (οἱ βαπτιζόμενοι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν). Is this something that modern MJs understand and practice?

It seems to me impossible to get back to the beliefs of original Christians, given the distinct possibility that the movement was started as a mystery religion. In mystery religions, you give "truth" to people as they are initiated and rise through the ranks — and the chances are that the "deeper mysteries" of this faith were hidden completely from the common person, and what we find written in the letters of the NT probably represent the very easiest of teachings that they passed on. The more profound teachings will ever remain a mystery, since we do not have them passed on in any textual tradition.

 

[pat34lee]

It seems to me impossible to get back to the beliefs of original Christians,

My bible is full of impossible things that happened anyway.

 

[Meowzltov]

I find it difficult to deal with the fact that so many people in this movement think that they are the spiritual successors of the original Church,

No, you KNOW who THAT is.

 

[yonah_mishael]

No, you KNOW who THAT is.

If you think that I would agree that the Catholics are the natural successors of the first Christians, you’d be very far afield from the truth. I would not agree with that in the slightest. Catholicism is the result of a long chain of adaptations whereby it changed the faith time and again through the adoption of foreign elements at every turn. It is nothing like original Christianity. That said, this is only an issue if you think that achieving of the original form of the faith is desirable or even possible.

 

[Meowzltov]

If you think that I would agree that the Catholics are the natural successors of the first Christians, you’d be very far afield from the truth. I would not agree with that in the slightest. Catholicism is the result of a long chain of adaptations whereby it changed the faith time and again through the adoption of foreign elements at every turn. It is nothing like original Christianity. That said, this is only an issue if you think that achieving of the original form of the faith is desirable or even possible.

It depends on what you mean by original Christianity. An adult tree doesn't look anything like its seed, or even its sapling, but you can trace its growth over time and understand that it is the same tree. All the basic elements of Catholicism (i.e. the sacraments) were there in the Early Church, albeit in "proto form." But this is perhaps a deviation from the topic, so I won't go into more detail.

It's okay with me if we disagree

 

[visionary]

It depends on what you mean by original Christianity. An adult tree doesn't look anything like its seed, or even its sapling, but you can trace its growth over time and understand that it is the same tree. All the basic elements of Catholicism (i.e. the sacraments) were there in the Early Church, albeit in "proto form." But this is perhaps a deviation from the topic, so I won't go into more detail.

It's okay with me if we disagree

If one is to mentally cut the Catholicism branch from the root and allow the root to grow, this is what I picture MJ transforming from. Catholicism should have never happened, it is a wild branch with bad fruit that should not be eaten because it causes delusional madness.

 

[Sammy-San]

Syncretic? Wow. How greek a term can you get? We tend to use Hebraic terminology as much as possible. Greek terminology seems very jarring.

Yes - Jewish and "christian" at the same time. But we (for the most part) do not use "Christ" or any derivative of that word as it has a LOT of baggage in the Jewish community.

What baggage are you referring to? Are you referring to some Jews having a negative view of Christians because of historical persecution?

 

[visionary]

What baggage are you referring to? Are you referring to some Jews having a negative view of Christians because of historical persecution?

I do not have any Jewish blood and find that the history RCC provided us during the dark ages makes the their term "christian" have a bitter taste in my mouth as all protestants were thrown on the burn pile.

 

[Dave-W]

What baggage are you referring to? Are you referring to some Jews having a negative view of Christians because of historical persecution?

Yes - including the WW2 holocaust. Most German soldiers were good Lutherans and repeated over and over to the Jews they were killing they were doing it because they were all "Christ killers."

 

[BukiRob]

What baggage are you referring to? Are you referring to some Jews having a negative view of Christians because of historical persecution?

To the Jew who is observant, Christians and their bible is a book about how to persecute and kill Jews. Holocaust ring a bell? That's the most recent example... but since the destruction of the temple the last ~2000 years has a long history that is littered with gentile nations directly and indirectly through the "church" persecuting and killing Jews.

So, yeah there is a LOT of baggage. Many Jews have NO IDEA that the NT is a book written by Jews, in a Jewish setting, in a jewish culture talking about and giving an account of the life of the JEWISH MESSIAH

 

[ContraMundum]

So much hyperbole people!

 

[Sammy-San]

To the Jew who is observant, Christians and their bible is a book about how to persecute and kill Jews. Holocaust ring a bell? That's the most recent example... but since the destruction of the temple the last ~2000 years has a long history that is littered with gentile nations directly and indirectly through the "church" persecuting and killing Jews.

So, yeah there is a LOT of baggage. Many Jews have NO IDEA that the NT is a book written by Jews, in a Jewish setting, in a jewish culture talking about and giving an account of the life of the JEWISH MESSIAH

Why do people blame Christianity for the Holocaust? Hitler persecuted many Catholics, and his own quotes show he was against Christianity. Saying Hitler was a Christian is saying that a Jew-hater worshiped a man who was Jew, which contradicts itself.

 

[ContraMundum]

Why do people blame Christianity for the Holocaust? Hitler persecuted many Catholics, and his own quotes show he was against Christianity. Saying Hitler was a Christian is saying that a Jew-hater worshiped a man who was Jew, which contradicts itself.

BukiRob was making a bit of a rash generalization about observant Jews, so we have to look past the hype and get to what he meant.

Lots of people look for a scapegoat other than Hitler himself for the Holocaust. Some Jews and secularists think Hitler was influenced by alleged anti-semitic verses in the Bible, or perhaps by latent German anti-semitism attributed to Luther or whatever. The reality is that Hitler, being a politician lusting for power, used any tool he could find to bring validation and approval for his radical views. Borrowing from the Church is just another political tool (happens today as well- esp in the USA) but Hitler was in no way a Christian with actual, true faith in Jesus. We know that. Smarter, well read Jews also understand that as well. Still, the view prevails as its a convenient excuse to overlook the facts about Jesus.

 

[Meowzltov]

The reality is that Hitler, being a politician lusting for power, used any tool he could find to bring validation and approval for his radical views. Borrowing from the Church is just another political tool

Now there is the truth.

 

[Dave-W]

Why do people blame Christianity for the Holocaust? Hitler persecuted many Catholics, and his own quotes show he was against Christianity. Saying Hitler was a Christian is saying that a Jew-hater worshiped a man who was Jew, which contradicts itself.

Because Hitler tapped into a growing antisemetism in the German christian community. He was clearly a pagan (loved his seances) but most of his military men who actually carried out his orders to kill Jews were christians; and in many cases told their victims they were doing it in the name of the church and christ.