• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Discussion Hebrew Roots; error or something else?

Status
Not open for further replies.

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,860
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟65,348.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
As is often noted a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. One cannot become an expert scholarly interpreter of saint Paul's letters or any other portion of the new testament by accumulating a little bit of Greek an a little bit of history. And learning a little about Midrash and a little bit about the Mishna or the Targums or the Talmud may be intriguing but it doesn't help one understand the new testament as well as a good scholarly commentary in English will.

But one can learn what the scriptures say by reading them carefully in a good quality translation. It is helpful to learn enough Greek to go through the new testament in Greek yourself even if you need to have a lexicon on the desk to help you along. then you can compare the English translation that you use with the Greek text and see why the translators made the decisions that they did.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Yes, that is a mistake many make. It isn't Hebrew to have the "a" in there. People do it because they don't understand the concept of "shem" and think that if he came in the Father's name that we must be able to SEE it.... :) But him coming in the name of the Father means he has come in the power and authority of the Father.

Blessings.
Ken
 
  • Like
Reactions: Messy
Upvote 0

Steeno7

Not I...but Christ
Jan 22, 2014
4,446
561
ONUG
✟30,049.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
The OP asked and in response to what I feel is right about the Hebrew Roots is that they believe God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Seriously, do you not understand that?

You are being deliberately evasive. We all believe that, there is nothing there unique to HRM. Lets cut to the chase. "That God has not changed, that He's the same yesterday, today, and forever", refers to His unchanging nature. God is perfect in Himself and does not change because He has no need to change. What it does not mean is that God is limited to acting as He has always acted in the past. God does not change in who He is, but He certainly can and does change His modus operandi.

The Cross changed everything. Read Hebrews. It is all about the new and better things that God has brought into being through the Cross.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
As is often noted a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. One cannot become an expert scholarly interpreter of saint Paul's letters or any other portion of the new testament by accumulating a little bit of Greek an a little bit of history. And learning a little about Midrash and a little bit about the Mishna or the Targums or the Talmud may be intriguing but it doesn't help one understand the new testament as well as a good scholarly commentary in English will.

But one can learn what the scriptures say by reading them carefully in a good quality translation. It is helpful to learn enough Greek to go through the new testament in Greek yourself even if you need to have a lexicon on the desk to help you along. then you can compare the English translation that you use with the Greek text and see why the translators made the decisions that they did.

How am I supposed to take that? That I was a KJV only advocate for the last 20 years and in the last 3 months began to dabble in Greek and Hebrew using a Strong's? :) I have been studying the languages for 20 years and teach courses on Semiotics and historical analysis. I read Hebrew but can't teach it well enough... that doesn't mean anything. The teacher is still the Spirit and whatever I have been gifted with I credit Him for.

As for a good scholarly commentary on the NT? If the commentary was written by somebody who is ignorant (not stupid, just lacking information) on first century culture, idioms and other abstract forms of speech unique to those in Judea in that day, is ignorant of the various Hebraic rules of exegesis being employed by somebody like Paul, and has not considered how Jews in that day interpreted various texts (as seen in the Targumim), then what good is the commentary? We are told to STUDY to show ourselves approved.... we are not told to parrot what others think. A good teacher does not just provide answers, he gives his student the tools to find his own answers.

Gotta run... have a blessed day!
Ken
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,860
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟65,348.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
How am I supposed to take that? That I was a KJV only advocate for the last 20 years and in the last 3 months began to dabble in Greek and Hebrew using a Strong's? :)
...
I don't quite get why you've mentioned the KJV in several posts. I use it on CF because so many people like it and some refuse to use any other. It's a decent enough translation but it is not the one I use for my own reading.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Steeno7

Not I...but Christ
Jan 22, 2014
4,446
561
ONUG
✟30,049.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
In any event... learning about the culture, language, idiom usage, and rules of exegesis unique to first century Judea is an important thing. If somebody like Paul uses a certain rule of interpretation in his writings, and that rule is DESIGNED to affect the context of what is being said... shouldn't we take the time to learn about that rule? And the thing is, Paul studied under Gamaliel, Hillel's grandson and Hillel had one of two schools of Pharisaical thought early in the first century. Hillel recognized within the Scripture (Torah and Prophets and Psalms at that time) that God through the Prophets was using certain methods to gets points across. Hillel wrote these 7 things down and they became known as "The Rules of Hillel." Paul uses them upwards to 60 times in his letters and we are not even taught those rules exist.... and they are designed to affect context.

So that is one area where studying the roots of the faith is a good thing.

Peace to you all.
Ken

Yes, studying and learning about those things can be helpful, but adopting them is not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoreCoffee
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't quite get why you've mentioned the KJV in several posts. I use in on CF because so many people like it and some refuse to use any other. It's a decent enough translation but it is not the one I use for my own reading.

I use it too... I learned with it so I have to find things using it. I put a smiley up there when I made the comment to try to keep it light.... I wasn't trying to cause strife but you seemed to be minimizing what I have been blessed to understand. So, I was joking.... "Have I been only reading the KJV for the last 20 years and in the last 3 months became in expert in Greek?" No... I have been studying the languages for 20 years now.

Anyway... gotta run.
Blessings!
Ken
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, studying and learning about those things can be helpful, but adopting them is not.

Not really sure what that is supposed to mean, forgive me. If Messiah used the Rule of Hillel known as "light and heavy" as he did in Luke 11:13 as one example of many... am I then not allowed to mimic my master by speaking as he spoke? My goal is simply to walk as Messiah walked. I know I will fall short, but the goal is Christ, he was the model to follow. So if he did certain things we do not do today, and he is the model to follow... then do I continue to walk after the tradition that exists today or do I break free of that and do what HE DID? I chose the latter, what you do is between you and him. :)

Blessings.
Ken
 
Upvote 0

Steeno7

Not I...but Christ
Jan 22, 2014
4,446
561
ONUG
✟30,049.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Not really sure what that is supposed to mean, forgive me. If Messiah used the Rule of Hillel known as "light and heavy" as he did in Luke 11:13 as one example of many... am I then not allowed to mimic my master by speaking as he spoke? My goal is simply to walk as Messiah walked. I know I will fall short, but the goal is Christ, he was the model to follow. So if he did certain things we do not do today, and he is the model to follow... then do I continue to walk after the tradition that exists today or do I break free of that and do what HE DID? I chose the latter, what you do is between you and him. :)

Blessings.
Ken

Christianity is not the religion of Judaism.
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,818
✟368,235.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Anyway, I think that's what is right about Hebrew Roots teaching is that God has not changed. He's the same yesterday, today, and forever. The NT is an extension of the Old and in reading through it, it can be found to be a very high percentage of quoting of the Old. A lot of people just don't know the Old well enough to catch it when it's quoted in the New. The only thing Paul talks about as New in the book of Hebrews is a New High Priest who neither sleeps nor slumbers and is at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us around the clock.

There is a MAJOR difference between the New Testament and the Old Testament. That is the Old Covenant vs. the New Covenant. God has not changed, per se, but the New Covenant is what puts the Old Testament into perspective.

The Old Testament was not under grace, nor saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. BIG DIFFERENCE.
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,860
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟65,348.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Well if some folk want to know about first century culture in Judea then okay; that may be a useful thing to learn about but the teachers chosen to learn from might be significant. Personally I'd avoid Jim Staley and the main advocates of Hebrew Roots and the Jewish Names movements.

I don't quite see how scholarly commentaries are going to be written by people who do not know anything about first century Judean culture.
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,818
✟368,235.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Paul teaches in Hebrews that the old cov is abolished, and he talks about the new Cov.

Exactly. It is with understanding of the New Covenant that we are under, which is grace through the blood of Jesus that one must see the Old Testament. Being under the blood of Jesus makes all the difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frogster
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,818
✟368,235.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
This is a good summation. Those that say, "I live only in the NT" are ignorant of the fact that of the 7967 NT verses, the OT is at least "referenced" 2606 times. I realize some websites claim only 250+ OT quotes in the NT, but that does not take into account partial quotes and inferences whose context is clearly drawing from an OT passage. So the "NT Christian" is really walking in the OT, unknowingly, 32.7% of the time. Numbers aside, the bottom line is simply that messiah was Hebraic as was the face of the faith until after the Bar Khokba revolt of 134AD. After that, when the remaining Jewish Christians who didn't leave when the Temple was destroyed, left, the faith quickly developed a Greek face and by 150, Sunday was the majority rule and decrees began to be passed to make the faith appear less "Jewish." Hebrew Roots is Christians looking to find their way back to that pre-Greek face... to consider the Scripture through the paradigm that the first century Christian might have used. And when you do that... the context does change. Yeshua is still messiah and salvation is still by grace... but a funny thing happens.... you learn to appreciate more deeply the things he did for us.

Blessings.
Ken

Of course the New Testament references the Old Testament. The Old Testament is part of the journey of where God's people have been. However, Mosaic Law was ONLY until Jesus Christ came to fulfill all of the Law through His blood. Mosaic Law was NOT God with us in the sense that they did NOT have the Holy Spirit and they did NOT have the Law written on their hearts in the sense that Jesus Christ gave that to us, His Children.

The PRIZE is Jesus Christ, the entire Old Testament fortells of this event. The Old Testament is of course the Word of God also, but it is within the confines of the Old Covenant which is much different from the New Covenant.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Christianity is not the religion of Judaism.

Agreed, but it was a sect of Judaism in the first century. Here is some history I put together that you might find interesting. Peace!

This note is a section taken from a larger article that I wrote entitled, The Roots of Western anti-Judaism, linked at the bottom. I am sharing this in order to shed light on the soil in which the early church, if you will, grew and was nurtured.

I would like to share a progression of history that is not taught in many churches today. In fact, there are teachers and leaders in many churches that have never learned of this history; yet this history sheds light on the soil in which the early church grew and was nurtured. Yeshua, or as most of us in the West know him, Jesus, is believed by many to be Messiah and is Jewish. His message was about repentance (turning/returning) and was directed toward a particular people.[3] What he was not doing was attempting to steer people toward another god, nor was he attempting to install a new religious system or set of practices. Those who believed Yeshua was Messiah simply saw him fulfilling prophesies and expectations that were taught and understood within an existing religion. So, until the time of the destruction of the second Temple, and perhaps for a short while longer, Christianity by and large was seen as a sect of Judaism.[4] And not only was the leader of this sect Jewish, his 12 apostles were all Jewish, and his message, for the most part, went forward in and around Judea. On top of this, the Book of Acts contains examples where the disciples retained access to synagogues despite their theological differences with other Jews at that time, and we even see Paul going into synagogues week after week reasoning with both Jews and Greeks.[5] It is actually difficult to ignore the fact that the face of early Christianity was Jewish. So what happened?

There are 3 events that began to reshape the face of what we now call Christianity. Two of them happened so close in time that it is hard to differentiate the effect that each of these events had on the body. The first is the death of James, the brother of Yeshua. There are some early historical references and hints within the NT that James was the head of the Church of Jerusalem.[6] One might consider this congregation to be the first mega-church as it appears to have had over 20,000 members out of a population of 80,000 that lived in Jerusalem at that time[7]; so much for the teaching that all Jews rejected Yeshua![8]

James is said to have died before the destruction of the second Temple. Early Christian tradition states that James was invited to speak at Passover before many Jews who did not believe Yeshua was Messiah. When James began to speak of the Passover and its relation to the work of Yeshua, he was killed. Shortly thereafter, the Temple was destroyed and many Christians (read: Jews and non-Jews who followed Yeshua) saw this as an abomination, and thus used the warning in Matthew 24:16 to flee to the mountains. It is estimated that about half of the Jews who believed that Yeshua was Messiah left and did not return.[9] The remaining half stayed and began to expand in numbers again until the Bar Kokhba Revolt of 132-135AD. Simon Bar Kosiba was a Jewish military leader who led the final revolt against Roman occupation, which ultimately failed. A Rabbi by the name of Akiva, in an attempt to rally support behind the effort, gave him the name Bar Kokhba (a Messianic title) and the remaining Jewish believers in Yeshua would not fight for the sovereignty of Jerusalem under the banner of one whom they believed to be a false Messiah. They too left and did not return to the area.[10]

As this sect of Judaism began to spread geographically, and as those from areas outside of Judea became part of this movement, animosity beyond what already existed between the two groups began to grow. It wouldn’t be long before both sides, but perhaps mainly the Christians, began to pass decrees to make themselves appear less Jewish in appearance. For example, at the Council of Elvira[11] decrees were passed that tried to keep Jews and Christians apart by ordering the latter never to share a meal with Jews, never to marry Jews, never to use Jews to bless their fields, and that Christians were never to observe the Jewish Sabbath (of course, these decrees also serve to substantiate that Christians had been doing these things up until this point).[12] Slowly, over time, more decrees and similar teachings began to come together in such a way that there would eventually be no mistaking Judaism and Christianity. What was once a sect of Judaism became, at least in outward form, a new religion. And within that religion, the view that the Jews were “Christ Killers” was already gaining momentum. For example, in the homily Peri Pascha, Melito of Sardis (circa middle of the second century) wrote “The God has been murdered; the king of Israel has been put to death by an Israelite right hand.”[13] Another example, Justin Martyr (also circa middle of the second century), in his Dialogue with Trypho, A Jew, explains why the Jews have suffered exile and the destruction of the Temple, saying to his Jewish interlocutor “tribulations were justly imposed on you since you have murdered the Just One [Jesus].”[14]

I do want to state, however, that this is not the view of many or even most Christians today. I am simply stating that over the course of history, there have been times where Jews were wholly blamed for Yeshua’s death. For the purposes of this article, I am looking at the general view of early Christians which informed the views of many who would come later.[15]

[3] See Matthew 4:17, Luke 5:32, and Matthew 15:24
[4] See Acts 24:1-6, also verse 14, and Acts 28:22
[5] Acts 18:4
[6] Fragment X of Papias, Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 2:1:2, 3:5:2, Acts 15:13, etc.
[7] Estimating the Population of Ancient Jerusalem, Magen Broshi, BAR 4:02, Jun 1978
[8] See Acts 21:20 and look at the underlying word for “many thousands.”
[9] Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3, de Mens. et Pond., 15, Haer 29:7, etc.
[10] Justin, “Apologia”, ii.71, Eusebius 4:6:2-3, Orosius “Hist.” vii.13
[11] Generally accepted to be 306AD
[12] The Council of Elvira. CUA.EDU. Text of 81 Canons in English. Web. Accessed 22 Aug 2014. http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon Law/ElviraCanons.htm
[13] On the Pascha, 68; Melito of Sardis. On Pascha and fragments, ed. S.G. Hall (1979), p. 55.
[14] Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 16
[15] For a more in-depth historical treatment of this topic, see Jeremy Cohen’s Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007).

http://messianicpublications.com/ken-rank/the-roots-of-western-anti-semitism/
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Of course the New Testament references the Old Testament. The Old Testament is part of the journey of where God's people have been. However, Mosaic Law was ONLY until Jesus Christ came to fulfill all of the Law through His blood. Mosaic Law was NOT God with us in the sense that they did NOT have the Holy Spirit and they did NOT have the Law written on their hearts in the sense that Jesus Christ gave that to us, His Children.

The PRIZE is Jesus Christ, the entire Old Testament fortells of this event. The Old Testament is of course the Word of God also, but it is within the confines of the Old Covenant which is much different from the New Covenant.

I disagree, but you don't need to agree with me. :) The law on STONE is what ended with Messiah, from there it is moved to the heart! See Jer. 31:31-34, Heb. 8:8-11, Ezekiel 11:19, Deut. 30:1-6, etc.
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,818
✟368,235.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Agreed, but it was a sect of Judaism in the first century. Here is some history I put together that you might find interesting. Peace!

This note is a section taken from a larger article that I wrote entitled, The Roots of Western anti-Judaism, linked at the bottom. I am sharing this in order to shed light on the soil in which the early church, if you will, grew and was nurtured.

I would like to share a progression of history that is not taught in many churches today. In fact, there are teachers and leaders in many churches that have never learned of this history; yet this history sheds light on the soil in which the early church grew and was nurtured. Yeshua, or as most of us in the West know him, Jesus, is believed by many to be Messiah and is Jewish. His message was about repentance (turning/returning) and was directed toward a particular people.[3] What he was not doing was attempting to steer people toward another god, nor was he attempting to install a new religious system or set of practices. Those who believed Yeshua was Messiah simply saw him fulfilling prophesies and expectations that were taught and understood within an existing religion. So, until the time of the destruction of the second Temple, and perhaps for a short while longer, Christianity by and large was seen as a sect of Judaism.[4] And not only was the leader of this sect Jewish, his 12 apostles were all Jewish, and his message, for the most part, went forward in and around Judea. On top of this, the Book of Acts contains examples where the disciples retained access to synagogues despite their theological differences with other Jews at that time, and we even see Paul going into synagogues week after week reasoning with both Jews and Greeks.[5] It is actually difficult to ignore the fact that the face of early Christianity was Jewish. So what happened?

There are 3 events that began to reshape the face of what we now call Christianity. Two of them happened so close in time that it is hard to differentiate the effect that each of these events had on the body. The first is the death of James, the brother of Yeshua. There are some early historical references and hints within the NT that James was the head of the Church of Jerusalem.[6] One might consider this congregation to be the first mega-church as it appears to have had over 20,000 members out of a population of 80,000 that lived in Jerusalem at that time[7]; so much for the teaching that all Jews rejected Yeshua![8]

James is said to have died before the destruction of the second Temple. Early Christian tradition states that James was invited to speak at Passover before many Jews who did not believe Yeshua was Messiah. When James began to speak of the Passover and its relation to the work of Yeshua, he was killed. Shortly thereafter, the Temple was destroyed and many Christians (read: Jews and non-Jews who followed Yeshua) saw this as an abomination, and thus used the warning in Matthew 24:16 to flee to the mountains. It is estimated that about half of the Jews who believed that Yeshua was Messiah left and did not return.[9] The remaining half stayed and began to expand in numbers again until the Bar Kokhba Revolt of 132-135AD. Simon Bar Kosiba was a Jewish military leader who led the final revolt against Roman occupation, which ultimately failed. A Rabbi by the name of Akiva, in an attempt to rally support behind the effort, gave him the name Bar Kokhba (a Messianic title) and the remaining Jewish believers in Yeshua would not fight for the sovereignty of Jerusalem under the banner of one whom they believed to be a false Messiah. They too left and did not return to the area.[10]

As this sect of Judaism began to spread geographically, and as those from areas outside of Judea became part of this movement, animosity beyond what already existed between the two groups began to grow. It wouldn’t be long before both sides, but perhaps mainly the Christians, began to pass decrees to make themselves appear less Jewish in appearance. For example, at the Council of Elvira[11] decrees were passed that tried to keep Jews and Christians apart by ordering the latter never to share a meal with Jews, never to marry Jews, never to use Jews to bless their fields, and that Christians were never to observe the Jewish Sabbath (of course, these decrees also serve to substantiate that Christians had been doing these things up until this point).[12] Slowly, over time, more decrees and similar teachings began to come together in such a way that there would eventually be no mistaking Judaism and Christianity. What was once a sect of Judaism became, at least in outward form, a new religion. And within that religion, the view that the Jews were “Christ Killers” was already gaining momentum. For example, in the homily Peri Pascha, Melito of Sardis (circa middle of the second century) wrote “The God has been murdered; the king of Israel has been put to death by an Israelite right hand.”[13] Another example, Justin Martyr (also circa middle of the second century), in his Dialogue with Trypho, A Jew, explains why the Jews have suffered exile and the destruction of the Temple, saying to his Jewish interlocutor “tribulations were justly imposed on you since you have murdered the Just One [Jesus].”[14]

I do want to state, however, that this is not the view of many or even most Christians today. I am simply stating that over the course of history, there have been times where Jews were wholly blamed for Yeshua’s death. For the purposes of this article, I am looking at the general view of early Christians which informed the views of many who would come later.[15]

[3] See Matthew 4:17, Luke 5:32, and Matthew 15:24
[4] See Acts 24:1-6, also verse 14, and Acts 28:22
[5] Acts 18:4
[6] Fragment X of Papias, Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 2:1:2, 3:5:2, Acts 15:13, etc.
[7] Estimating the Population of Ancient Jerusalem, Magen Broshi, BAR 4:02, Jun 1978
[8] See Acts 21:20 and look at the underlying word for “many thousands.”
[9] Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3, de Mens. et Pond., 15, Haer 29:7, etc.
[10] Justin, “Apologia”, ii.71, Eusebius 4:6:2-3, Orosius “Hist.” vii.13
[11] Generally accepted to be 306AD
[12] The Council of Elvira. CUA.EDU. Text of 81 Canons in English. Web. Accessed 22 Aug 2014. http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon Law/ElviraCanons.htm
[13] On the Pascha, 68; Melito of Sardis. On Pascha and fragments, ed. S.G. Hall (1979), p. 55.
[14] Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 16
[15] For a more in-depth historical treatment of this topic, see Jeremy Cohen’s Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007).

http://messianicpublications.com/ken-rank/the-roots-of-western-anti-semitism/

One of the major problems with Hebrew Roots and Messianic Judaism is that they rely on books outside of the bible as part of their theology. This alone adds a layer to their beliefs that is non Christian.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frogster
Upvote 0

Steeno7

Not I...but Christ
Jan 22, 2014
4,446
561
ONUG
✟30,049.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Agreed, but it was a sect of Judaism in the first century. Here is some history I put together that you might find interesting. Peace!

This note is a section taken from a larger article that I wrote entitled, The Roots of Western anti-Judaism, linked at the bottom. I am sharing this in order to shed light on the soil in which the early church, if you will, grew and was nurtured.

I would like to share a progression of history that is not taught in many churches today. In fact, there are teachers and leaders in many churches that have never learned of this history; yet this history sheds light on the soil in which the early church grew and was nurtured. Yeshua, or as most of us in the West know him, Jesus, is believed by many to be Messiah and is Jewish. His message was about repentance (turning/returning) and was directed toward a particular people.[3] What he was not doing was attempting to steer people toward another god, nor was he attempting to install a new religious system or set of practices. Those who believed Yeshua was Messiah simply saw him fulfilling prophesies and expectations that were taught and understood within an existing religion. So, until the time of the destruction of the second Temple, and perhaps for a short while longer, Christianity by and large was seen as a sect of Judaism.[4] And not only was the leader of this sect Jewish, his 12 apostles were all Jewish, and his message, for the most part, went forward in and around Judea. On top of this, the Book of Acts contains examples where the disciples retained access to synagogues despite their theological differences with other Jews at that time, and we even see Paul going into synagogues week after week reasoning with both Jews and Greeks.[5] It is actually difficult to ignore the fact that the face of early Christianity was Jewish. So what happened?

There are 3 events that began to reshape the face of what we now call Christianity. Two of them happened so close in time that it is hard to differentiate the effect that each of these events had on the body. The first is the death of James, the brother of Yeshua. There are some early historical references and hints within the NT that James was the head of the Church of Jerusalem.[6] One might consider this congregation to be the first mega-church as it appears to have had over 20,000 members out of a population of 80,000 that lived in Jerusalem at that time[7]; so much for the teaching that all Jews rejected Yeshua![8]

James is said to have died before the destruction of the second Temple. Early Christian tradition states that James was invited to speak at Passover before many Jews who did not believe Yeshua was Messiah. When James began to speak of the Passover and its relation to the work of Yeshua, he was killed. Shortly thereafter, the Temple was destroyed and many Christians (read: Jews and non-Jews who followed Yeshua) saw this as an abomination, and thus used the warning in Matthew 24:16 to flee to the mountains. It is estimated that about half of the Jews who believed that Yeshua was Messiah left and did not return.[9] The remaining half stayed and began to expand in numbers again until the Bar Kokhba Revolt of 132-135AD. Simon Bar Kosiba was a Jewish military leader who led the final revolt against Roman occupation, which ultimately failed. A Rabbi by the name of Akiva, in an attempt to rally support behind the effort, gave him the name Bar Kokhba (a Messianic title) and the remaining Jewish believers in Yeshua would not fight for the sovereignty of Jerusalem under the banner of one whom they believed to be a false Messiah. They too left and did not return to the area.[10]

As this sect of Judaism began to spread geographically, and as those from areas outside of Judea became part of this movement, animosity beyond what already existed between the two groups began to grow. It wouldn’t be long before both sides, but perhaps mainly the Christians, began to pass decrees to make themselves appear less Jewish in appearance. For example, at the Council of Elvira[11] decrees were passed that tried to keep Jews and Christians apart by ordering the latter never to share a meal with Jews, never to marry Jews, never to use Jews to bless their fields, and that Christians were never to observe the Jewish Sabbath (of course, these decrees also serve to substantiate that Christians had been doing these things up until this point).[12] Slowly, over time, more decrees and similar teachings began to come together in such a way that there would eventually be no mistaking Judaism and Christianity. What was once a sect of Judaism became, at least in outward form, a new religion. And within that religion, the view that the Jews were “Christ Killers” was already gaining momentum. For example, in the homily Peri Pascha, Melito of Sardis (circa middle of the second century) wrote “The God has been murdered; the king of Israel has been put to death by an Israelite right hand.”[13] Another example, Justin Martyr (also circa middle of the second century), in his Dialogue with Trypho, A Jew, explains why the Jews have suffered exile and the destruction of the Temple, saying to his Jewish interlocutor “tribulations were justly imposed on you since you have murdered the Just One [Jesus].”[14]

I do want to state, however, that this is not the view of many or even most Christians today. I am simply stating that over the course of history, there have been times where Jews were wholly blamed for Yeshua’s death. For the purposes of this article, I am looking at the general view of early Christians which informed the views of many who would come later.[15]

[3] See Matthew 4:17, Luke 5:32, and Matthew 15:24
[4] See Acts 24:1-6, also verse 14, and Acts 28:22
[5] Acts 18:4
[6] Fragment X of Papias, Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 2:1:2, 3:5:2, Acts 15:13, etc.
[7] Estimating the Population of Ancient Jerusalem, Magen Broshi, BAR 4:02, Jun 1978
[8] See Acts 21:20 and look at the underlying word for “many thousands.”
[9] Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3:5:3, de Mens. et Pond., 15, Haer 29:7, etc.
[10] Justin, “Apologia”, ii.71, Eusebius 4:6:2-3, Orosius “Hist.” vii.13
[11] Generally accepted to be 306AD
[12] The Council of Elvira. CUA.EDU. Text of 81 Canons in English. Web. Accessed 22 Aug 2014. http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon Law/ElviraCanons.htm
[13] On the Pascha, 68; Melito of Sardis. On Pascha and fragments, ed. S.G. Hall (1979), p. 55.
[14] Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 16
[15] For a more in-depth historical treatment of this topic, see Jeremy Cohen’s Christ Killers: The Jews and the Passion from the Bible to the Big Screen (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007).

http://messianicpublications.com/ken-rank/the-roots-of-western-anti-semitism/

No. It was "considered" a sect of Judaism, for a while, by some....which was useful in protecting those early Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Steeno7

Not I...but Christ
Jan 22, 2014
4,446
561
ONUG
✟30,049.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
I disagree, but you don't need to agree with me. :) The law on STONE is what ended with Messiah, from there it is moved to the heart! See Jer. 31:31-34, Heb. 8:8-11, Ezekiel 11:19, Deut. 30:1-6, etc.

Then why do you still advocate for adherence to the law on stone?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,222
5,564
Winchester, KENtucky
✟331,515.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Well if some folk want to know about first century culture in Judea then okay; that may be a useful thing to learn about but the teachers chosen to learn from might be significant. Personally I'd avoid Jim Staley and the main advocates of Hebrew Roots and the Jewish Names movements.

I don't quite see how scholarly commentaries are going to be written by people who do not know anything about first century Judean culture.

This is twice you brought up Staley.... there is no one person who speaks for this movement. Over the last 20-30 years there has been a movement wherein people are beginning to view the Law through a different paradigm and who are identifying with Israel in ways they never have before. I do believe this is prophesied, perhaps Acts 3:21? In any event, like I said... just do as you are convicted. But... let God lead. :) If He lays something in your path don't ignore it because Jim Staley might have said something you didn't like, and that thing laid in your path sounds like something he said.

As for the commentaries... most modern commentaries are written by dispensational Christians who are "born into" a Western way of thinking (as opposed to a Hebraic way) who are raised with said dispensational paradigm and thus interpret from that line of thinking. I don't need Matthew Henry though I might weigh a thought in from time to time, prayerfully. There are other ways in which to learn... I lean toward the other ways. Again, you do what blesses you.

Peace.
Ken
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,818
✟368,235.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I disagree, but you don't need to agree with me. :) The law on STONE is what ended with Messiah, from there it is moved to the heart! See Jer. 31:31-34, Heb. 8:8-11, Ezekiel 11:19, Deut. 30:1-6, etc.

Jesus made the clarification when HE said that He gives us a 'New Coventant'. Mosaic Law is the 'Old Covenant'. So, following Jesus teaching put's Mosaic Law and the Old Covenant into perspective, which is EXACTLY what I said.

Mosaic Law was good and needed during the Old Testament, but Jesus makes it clear that the New Covenant was needed because NO ONE COULD KEEP THE OLD COVENANT. We see time and time again how the Israelite's FAILED in keeping the Old Covenant. That is one of the many reasons why making too much of Mosaic Law is a PROBLEM. They could not keep it then, and no one can keep it now.

That is a fact!
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.