Big Question #2

[Mordechai18]

First off, I'd like to thank everyone who has kindly responded to my questions so far.

Here's my second big question (this is one that REALLY puzzles me):

If Messianic Jews tend to believe that the Jewish roots of the faith of Yeshua have been lost by Christianity, and that much doctrinal error has been promulgated by the Christian churches of the last two millennia,

why do Messianics accept the canon of scripture defined by these churches?

1.) Do Messianics agree with the changes to Tanach canon at the council of Yavneh? (An aside: why would we keep Chanukah, but discard the books of Maccabees?)

2.) Why do Messianics accept the canon detremined by the catholic church? Has any messianic group ever undertaken to examine the variant texts produced at the time, the various narratives, gospels, etc. in order to examine, in a more Jewish light, what may be valid texts which have been overlooked by those with an anti-Torah agenda?

 

[simchat_torah]

why do Messianics accept the canon of scripture defined by these churches?

Mordechai... as you get to know each and every one of us, you'll find that (excuse my redundancy) we are as varied as the colors in the rainbow.

I, for example, don't accept the cannon of 'scripture' as defined by the churches... at least as compared to the Torah and Tenach.

1.) Do Messianics agree with the changes to Tanach canon at the council of Yavneh? (An aside: why would we keep Chanukah, but discard the books of Maccabees?)

Ahh... I think I'll share my view of 'inspiration'....

The Rabbinical view of "inspiration" is taught as "levels". In other words, the Torah is the highest level of inspiration as it was directly spoken by the mouth of G-d. Everything else falls on lower planes of inspiration.

In the first century c.e., every sect of Judaism viewed various cannons as inspired. For example, the Saducees viewed the Torah as the only 'isnpired' work. The Pharisees viewed the Torah, Tenach, and what is now labelled as the "apocrypha" as inspired. The Essenes had the largest of the cannons openly embracing much much more as 'inspired'. However, within each sect, the books fell into various levels of inspiration. The Torah was always given the highest level.

In christianity, something is either inspired or it isn't.

The Jewish mind has more of an open view of inspiration. HaShem could speak to me today and when I communicate this message to His people, it may be inspired. Obviously, this level of inspiration is far from that of the Torah and Tenach.

I see value and even inspiration in the Apocrypha (collection of books which I & II Maccabees is contained within). Does it equal that of the Tenach? To be quite truthful, I do'nt know.
While I have studied these works at great length, I am by no means a scholar on the subject.

2.) Why do Messianics accept the canon detremined by the catholic church? Has any messianic group ever undertaken to examine the variant texts produced at the time, the various narratives, gospels, etc. in order to examine, in a more Jewish light, what may be valid texts which have been overlooked by those with an anti-Torah agenda?

Some messianic groups don't accept the writings of Sha'ul (paul).... at least not as 'inspired'. Others accept everything in the "New Testament". Yet others, such as myself, think there is inspiration that can be found in all of it, however, it has been tainted by the hands of man more than nearly any other historical document known to man.

shalom,
yafet

 

[Christy4Christ]

Simchat, what do you use to read about the life of Christ if not the bible?

 

[simchat_torah]

Christy, please re-read my post...

speaking of the 'new testament' I stated:

Yet others, such as myself, think there is inspiration that can be found in all of it, however, it has been tainted by the hands of man more than nearly any other historical document known to man.

 

[Mordechai18]

Simchat Torah, thank you for your patience and your helpful reply.

Mordechai... as you get to know each and every one of us, you'll find that (excuse my redundancy) we are as varied as the colors in the rainbow.

I am starting to see that, and guess I really didn't think it possible. But it's also a bit refreshing to see that those with faith are examining scriptures critically.

The Rabbinical view of "inspiration" is taught as "levels". In other words, the Torah is the highest level of inspiration as it was directly spoken by the mouth of G-d. Everything else falls on lower planes of inspiration.

This makes sense to me, the Torah being elevated above the Nach...

In the first century c.e., every sect of Judaism viewed various cannons as inspired. For example, the Saducees viewed the Torah as the only 'isnpired' work. The Pharisees viewed the Torah, Tenach, and what is now labelled as the "apocrypha" as inspired. The Essenes had the largest of the cannons openly embracing much much more as 'inspired'. However, within each sect, the books fell into various levels of inspiration. The Torah was always given the highest level.

Do you know what comprised the Essene canon?

While I have studied these works at great length, I am by no means a scholar on the subject.

Your modesty is betrayed by your the content of your posts.

Some messianic groups don't accept the writings of Sha'ul (paul).... at least not as 'inspired'. Others accept everything in the "New Testament". Yet others, such as myself, think there is inspiration that can be found in all of it, however, it has been tainted by the hands of man more than nearly any other historical document known to man.

I agree. But I am left to wonder what we can know with any certainty of Yeshua if we the accept that the source material isn't completely reliable. That is part of my dilemma....

b'shalom

BTW: other Messianics should feel free to jump in here or pm me if you are more comfortable... thsi is very helpful...

 

[Christy4Christ]

Christy, please re-read my post...

speaking of the 'new testament' I stated:

Oh I didn't see that, what do you mean by "tainted" ? Like people deliberatly changed it? Is there another more reliable reference?

 

[Mordechai18]

Oh I didn't see that, what do you mean by "tainted" ? Like people deliberatly changed it? Is there another more reliable reference?

Perhaps your question would best be addressed by being given its own thread instead of this one?


(No offense intended)

 

[simchat_torah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by: simchat_torah

Mordechai... as you get to know each and every one of us, you'll find that (excuse my redundancy) we are as varied as the colors in the rainbow.

I am starting to see that, and guess I really didn't think it possible. But it's also a bit refreshing to see that those with faith are examining scriptures critically.

I guess if you really think about it... Judaism itself is quite varied. You have everything from Reconstructionist Judaism to Karaite Judaism to UltraOrthodox Chassidic Breslov Judaism! (not to mention all the poka dots in between )

Do you know what comprised the Essene canon?

The Essenes were quite fed up with the corruption in the Temple. They had formed their own rituals which were comprised by their Beit Din in the wilderness. It was this Beit Din that continously composed their cannon. Actually, there were many pocket communities of Essenic groups throughout the Diaspora, and not just limited to Israel. However, the central leadership was founded near where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered.

Your modesty is betrayed by your the content of your posts.

Oh dear me no... I'm not modest, merely truthful! I have soooo much more to learn.
I do appreciate the kind words though.

I agree. But I am left to wonder what we can know with any certainty of Yeshua if we the accept that the source material isn't completely reliable. That is part of my dilemma....

Absolutely achi! I faced the same challenges myself. We actually are very lucky to have our humble forums graced by a scholar of the 3rd kind His nickname is Thadman. While I may not agree with many of his theological conclusions (*wink*) he is quite the Aramaic scholar.

He, myself, and several others on this forum firmly believe that the majority of NT manuscripts were originally penned in Aramaic. I have a plethera of proofs, some of which can be found here: http://www.christianforums.com/t63859

I highly reccomend you to visit Thadman's website at: www.aramiacnt.org
It's very simple to navigate and there's a ton of info to be found.

Essentially, we feel that the Greek manuscripts are somewhat misleading as they are translations of translations... not to mention the textual criticism that has been done through the ages!!!

Anywho... I'll let this thread return to its normal programming...

resume in 3.... 2.... 1....

 

[simchat_torah]

Dearest Christy,

Mordechai is probably right... this topic should merit its own thread in order to respect the OP. However, I'll give a real quick and brief answer to your question so you're not left hanging:

Oh I didn't see that, what do you mean by "tainted" ? Like people deliberatly changed it? Is there another more reliable reference?

Well, if you look at the NT manuscripts as time goes forward, you see dramatic changes from one to the next. Very little care was given to preserving the original writings in their pure form. Not to mention, many of the modern English translations today are relying upon the Greek manuscripts which are but a translation themselves of the original Aramaic (didn't you see the Passion? )

Well, I'll let the topic return, but feel free to start a seperate thread.

shalom,
yafet

 

[Christy4Christ]

Perhaps your question would best be addressed by being given its own thread instead of this one?


(No offense intended)

Sorry

 

[Mordechai18]

Sorry

No problem! I am just being so careful myself not to debate in this forum, and just want the thread to stay on the one topic.

Thank you!

 

[simchat_torah]

Which reminds me Morddy....

if you find a topic you want to have a friendly debate over, feel free to start a formal debate w/ me in the Jewish debates section... (just offering my services )

 

[Mordechai18]

Hmm, I'll consider that.
Except I'd hope that people wouldn't judge the Jewish point of view based on my extremely limited knowledge and perspective...

 

[simchat_torah]

Well, just pick a topic you feel comfortable with

 

[The Thadman]

Absolutely achi! I faced the same challenges myself. We actually are very lucky to have our humble forums graced by a scholar of the 3rd kind His nickname is Thadman. While I may not agree with many of his theological conclusions (*wink*) he is quite the Aramaic scholar.

You flatter me, akhi. I'm merely a layman with a passion for the language, and could not consider myself anything more.

No matter how much Messianics on this forum agree or disagree on doctrine or details, dispite that diversity we all are united under a single cause. If God liked uniformity, then we'd all be automatons, and with no need for a Messiah, or a God to work through us through our lives.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

 

[The Thadman]

Let me give my 2 cents

1.) Do Messianics agree with the changes to Tanach canon at the council of Yavneh? (An aside: why would we keep Chanukah, but discard the books of Maccabees?)

I see Torah as the most important part of the Tanakh, first and foremost and tend to keep what is in most modern Bibles. I, personally (as of now) don't strive to keep Chanukah as I see it as an ethno-cultural holiday to celebrate one of God's miracles, although I will celebrate it with Jewish friends.

2.) Why do Messianics accept the canon detremined by the catholic church? Has any messianic group ever undertaken to examine the variant texts produced at the time, the various narratives, gospels, etc. in order to examine, in a more Jewish light, what may be valid texts which have been overlooked by those with an anti-Torah agenda?

~Nods~ I've done extensive study of the various other "Lost" Gospels, and regularly include much from the Gospel of Thomas. Actually researching into what Jesus said and taught is my main objective, and I will use whatever texts are necessary to arrive at the closest God-approved conclusion I can get. My Aramaic study furthers this procedure as my attempt to look back on his words in their original language

Hope this sheds some light!

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

 

[Hix]

It should be noted that it is HIGHLY possible that there are other gospels which are equally as inspired if not more so than the ones currently accepted. A christian would call it heresy but I have a hard time accepting that a council of men set up by a pagan with not a Jew in sight should have authority on what is considered inspired scripture.

BUT for that matter I do believe the ones they chose are definetly inspired. The Torah is the most important part of the Bible, heck, the most important part of the world. Unless what we have is consistant with the Torah it cannot be scripture, and it of cource is 100% consistant.

Josephous records, that there were actually many HUNDREDs of gospels submitted to the council, many claimed to be written by Yeshua himself or his brothers. Its just a guess but if that councill had been Jewish I would say there would be many many more gospels as canon today.

Shalom and G-d bless
~Hix~

 

[YatzivPatgam]

I guess if you really think about it... Judaism itself is quite varied. You have everything from Reconstructionist Judaism to Karaite Judaism to UltraOrthodox Chassidic Breslov Judaism! (not to mention all the poka dots in between )

 

[YatzivPatgam]

My Aramaic study furthers this procedure as my attempt to look back on his words in their original language

Hope this sheds some light!

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

I hope your studies are a bit more researched then a certian "Doctor" that use to visit these forums

 

[simchat_torah]

hahah, no need to worry about that achi....

I think Thadman has seperated himself FAR from Trimm as possible. Ole Steve-o here actually works out at Rutgers University studying the Aramaic texts.