How Do the Mainstreams of Christianity Look MJ As?

[yonah_mishael]

Not sure what you mean by "That's just a translation". Sorry

I meant to say the same thing here. I don’t think it’s unfaithful to translate Χριστιανοί as “Christian.”

 

[yedida]

But this is probably because you have not had a historical training in the doctrines of the Church, and it probably also has something to do with why you rejected the Church in the first place. The formers of the doctrines of Christianity really did take most perspectives into account before adopting their formulas and beliefs. They wrestled with what to do with the division that exists between Jews and Gentiles, how to formulate the relationships between the various persons in the Godhead, how to understand Jesus’ nature in terms of both humanity and deity, etc. All of these things were argued and settled aeons ago, and yet so many today argue as if these questions and answers have not already been given, often because they do not understand the thought processes of the founders or the writings that came after the New Testament.

It would do you nothing but good to read through the writings of the Church Fathers all the way up to the settling of the canon and the councils that put together Church doctrine in the fourth Century. It would be good to know why Judaizing was declared heresy and why many of the arguments used today would not have held water even then. And at that point, if you want to reject Christianity – actually knowing what Christianity really is and not just how it has come to be expressed in the United States in our own days – you would be free to reject it on the basis of knowledge and not on the basis of an emotional reaction.

Best wishes,
YM

I have read most of those writings, the ECFs, that is. Only makes me angry.
On the "christianity" thing, it's more what it is today and its rather "un"holy history that I separate from, and churchianity - of which I'm sure you can remember what that is.
MJ doesn't have it all answered, nor all-together but it's closer than what I read about of the past, seen in the recent past, so I'll stick around a bit and see where all this goes. Should be interesting at least.....

 

[yonah_mishael]

I have read most of those writings, the ECFs, that is. Only makes me angry.
On the "christianity" thing, it's more what it is today and its rather "un"holy history that I separate from, and churchianity - of which I'm sure you can remember what that is.
MJ doesn't have it all answered, nor all-together but it's closer than what I read about of the past, seen in the recent past, so I'll stick around a bit and see where all this goes. Should be interesting at least.....

I certainly agree with the concept that we’re all on a journey. It would do us some good, I think, to remember that at any point on this highway we are simply at weigh stations and roadside parks. At no point can I say that I’ve got it all figured out. So, I for one would wish you well on your journey, and I hope that you make your ride memorable and enjoyable!

As far as “churchianity” is concerned, I assume that you’re referring to the political side of Christianity and the judgmentalism that goes on in so many churches. Is that what you’re talking about? I remember when my favorite pastor was essentially booted from our church when I was a teenager because some of the “elders” (in the Christian Church [Restoration Movement] the elders essentially run the show) didn’t like his propensity for proposing change and progress. He was a charismatic young man with big dreams, and all of the young people in the city – even those not associated with our congregation – really liked him and joined in anything that he was doing. He was the one who encouraged me to begin studying Greek at the age of 17, showing me that the New Testament had been written in Greek and was actually accessible to everyone. He changed my life in many ways and encouraged me to go to Bible college (which I did – because of him). Yet, the elders didn’t want him there, and I saw the struggle that he had with them and how politics overcame what I thought was supposed to be a living body of believers and tore it in half. I assume that this is what you mean about “churchianity.”

As far as Christian doctrine is concerned, though, I long ago settled in myself that the doctrines of Christianity are clearly addressed in the writings of Paul and that it is to his writings that you must go in order to correctly ascertain what is “Christian” and what is not. It is interesting to me that there are those who reject Paul’s writings, since I don’t know how they have any faith in Jesus at all without his writings. Even the gospels and Acts, in my opinion, were written as a reaction to Paul – either in support of his positions or in defiance of them. He seems to be the center of the New Testament, even when he is not in the spotlight. This is why I think it so important to make sense of what he wrote.

Best regards!

YM

 

[yedida]

I certainly agree with the concept that we’re all on a journey. It would do us some good, I think, to remember that at any point on this highway we are simply at weigh stations and roadside parks. At no point can I say that I’ve got it all figured out. So, I for one would wish you well on your journey, and I hope that you make your ride memorable and enjoyable!

As far as “churchianity” is concerned, I assume that you’re referring to the political side of Christianity and the judgmentalism that goes on in so many churches. Is that what you’re talking about? I remember when my favorite pastor was essentially booted from our church when I was a teenager because some of the “elders” (in the Christian Church [Restoration Movement] the elders essentially run the show) didn’t like his propensity for proposing change and progress. He was a charismatic young man with big dreams, and all of the young people in the city – even those not associated with our congregation – really liked him and joined in anything that he was doing. He was the one who encouraged me to begin studying Greek at the age of 17, showing me that the New Testament had been written in Greek and was actually accessible to everyone. He changed my life in many ways and encouraged me to go to Bible college (which I did – because of him). Yet, the elders didn’t want him there, and I saw the struggle that he had with them and how politics overcame what I thought was supposed to be a living body of believers and tore it in half. I assume that this is what you mean about “churchianity.”

As far as Christian doctrine is concerned, though, I long ago settled in myself that the doctrines of Christianity are clearly addressed in the writings of Paul and that it is to his writings that you must go in order to correctly ascertain what is “Christian” and what is not. It is interesting to me that there are those who reject Paul’s writings, since I don’t know how they have any faith in Jesus at all without his writings. Even the gospels and Acts, in my opinion, were written as a reaction to Paul – either in support of his positions or in defiance of them. He seems to be the center of the New Testament, even when he is not in the spotlight. This is why I think it so important to make sense of what he wrote.

Best regards!

YM

yeah, pretty much so per your first questions. It's just too much, so I left it behind. Haven't found it to be a great loss.
You know that there were tens of thousands (per Luke per James) that made it to faith in Yeshua without Paul. Imagine that!! He's not that needed, unless you particularily like his teachings. I'll leave it at that.

 

[visionary]

I certainly agree with the concept that we’re all on a journey. It would do us some good, I think, to remember that at any point on this highway we are simply at weigh stations and roadside parks. At no point can I say that I’ve got it all figured out. So, I for one would wish you well on your journey, and I hope that you make your ride memorable and enjoyable!

As far as “churchianity” is concerned, I assume that you’re referring to the political side of Christianity and the judgmentalism that goes on in so many churches. Is that what you’re talking about? I remember when my favorite pastor was essentially booted from our church when I was a teenager because some of the “elders” (in the Christian Church [Restoration Movement] the elders essentially run the show) didn’t like his propensity for proposing change and progress. He was a charismatic young man with big dreams, and all of the young people in the city – even those not associated with our congregation – really liked him and joined in anything that he was doing. He was the one who encouraged me to begin studying Greek at the age of 17, showing me that the New Testament had been written in Greek and was actually accessible to everyone. He changed my life in many ways and encouraged me to go to Bible college (which I did – because of him). Yet, the elders didn’t want him there, and I saw the struggle that he had with them and how politics overcame what I thought was supposed to be a living body of believers and tore it in half. I assume that this is what you mean about “churchianity.”

As far as Christian doctrine is concerned, though, I long ago settled in myself that the doctrines of Christianity are clearly addressed in the writings of Paul and that it is to his writings that you must go in order to correctly ascertain what is “Christian” and what is not. It is interesting to me that there are those who reject Paul’s writings, since I don’t know how they have any faith in Jesus at all without his writings. Even the gospels and Acts, in my opinion, were written as a reaction to Paul – either in support of his positions or in defiance of them. He seems to be the center of the New Testament, even when he is not in the spotlight. This is why I think it so important to make sense of what he wrote.

Best regards!

YM

You are correct that Christianity is based on Paul more than Yeshua Himself.

 

[yonah_mishael]

yeah, pretty much so per your first questions. It's just too much, so I left it behind. Haven't found it to be a great loss.
You know that there were tens of thousands (per Luke per James) that made it to faith in Yeshua without Paul. Imagine that!! He's not that needed, unless you particularily like his teachings. I'll leave it at that.

But none of that has survived. Only Pauline Christianity has survived. The rest was uprooted by the persecutions of heresy that took place in the second through fourth Centuries, and if you wanted to do away with Paul’s writings, then you wouldn’t have any basis at all for your belief. What would you believe without Paul? What is left??

 

[visionary]

But none of that has survived. Only Pauline Christianity has survived. The rest was uprooted by the persecutions of heresy that took place in the second through fourth Centuries, and if you wanted to do away with Paul’s writings, then you wouldn’t have any basis at all for your belief. What would you believe without Paul? What is left??

Quite a bit actually....

 

[yonah_mishael]

Quite a bit actually....

Is that an answer? Would you mind providing something that exists apart from Paul’s views?

 

[yedida]

Is that an answer? Would you mind providing something that exists apart from Paul’s views?

All through the gospels Yeshua taught Torah......not christianity, as we know it today.

 

[visionary]

Is that an answer? Would you mind providing something that exists apart from Paul’s views?

My scholarly fellow poster of all people do not need examples.. but for you to sink to this low level of acting ignorant is low even for you.

 

[yonah_mishael]

My scholarly fellow poster of all people do not need examples.. but for you to sink to this low level of acting ignorant is low even for you.

“Low even for you.” Yep, that’s what I thought. I can’t help that you hate me and share the rotten views of those folks at the other forum. I’ve got good reasons for thinking that your views are warped.

As for knowing what in the world the basis for faith in Jesus could be apart from Paul, I have no idea. I’m not pretending anything. The simple fact is that apart from Paul there can be no faith in Jesus – not anymore. There may have been (and certainly was) before Paul came a certain undefined faith in Jesus as the soon-coming Messiah, but when he never came back and Jerusalem was destroyed, only Pauline Christianity remained. The season in which non-Pauline faith could begin to take root was passed, since it depended on the apocalyptic visions of those who believed that the world was about to end. So, again, I’m left wondering what in the world one could believe in regarding Jesus today except if they accept the writings of Paul. Paul is the inventor of Christian doctrine and the founder of the only faith in Jesus that can truly flourish today without self-contradiction. When he said that it was by one spirit that all are baptized into one body (1 Corinthians 12:13 and Ephesians 4:4), he was not joking – and Messianics generally have done their work to create a rift within Christianity and declare themselves non-Christians, rejecting Paul, rejecting the New Testament, rejecting the one body. If you are not part of the Church, just say so and be done with it.

 

[yonah_mishael]

All through the gospels Yeshua taught Torah......not christianity, as we know it today.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe taught Torah, too. If they taught the same thing, what’s the difference? Do you believe that Jesus is divine? What do you make of the doctrine of the Trinity? What of the authorship and composition of the gospels? I’m curious about what could serve you as the base of doctrine if no Paul.

Are you claiming that since Jesus taught Torah, then you believe only in Torah?

 

[yedida]

The Lubavitcher Rebbe taught Torah, too. If they taught the same thing, what’s the difference? Do you believe that Jesus is divine? What do you make of the doctrine of the Trinity? What of the authorship and composition of the gospels? I’m curious about what could serve you as the base of doctrine if no Paul.

Are you claiming that since Jesus taught Torah, then you believe only in Torah?

What's the difference? Yeshua. I don't have a clear answer on the trinity thing, but I do believe that God is Spirit and it is available to us. Authorship and compostition of the gospels, I try not to fret over too much. I can do just fine with or without Paul.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

All through the gospels Yeshua taught Torah......not christianity, as we know it today.

Technically, Messianic Judaism isn't exactly as it was in the days of Yeshua either (including the issue of what Christ often did with Torah as it was understood)---just as it is with many camps of Christianity. Whererever it lines up with Christ, be it Christianity or Messianic Judaism, it's on point. ..and there are many parts of the body of CHristendom where things are taught/done EXACTLY as Yeshua was about.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

How Do the Mainstreams of Christianity Look MJ As?

I met the cases somewhere in China where MJ was thought as a Heresy at least 5 times. Even the names of Rock Jean(a Taiwanese M) and me(Yosef Hai) were published(in Chinese) on web to criticize MJ. Maybe the writer a leader of church thinks me as a represent of MJ Beijing even China.

So I want to know can they represent the main streams of Christianity? How many People who call themselves “Christian” all over the world do think MJ is a heresy ? .

Something that needs to be remembered is that people who often take issue with MJism as "heresy" have enough issues of their own when it comes to their acceptance ( as Michael Spencer notes) of Churchianity (i.e. the Culture Wars/Political battles between "Religious Right vs Christian Left", Fundamentalism, assuming all things Christ supported were solely begun in the Protestant Reformation, not realizing the depth of what's seen in the early Church and how much of that is lost in our times, not seeing some of the common claims made in churches are not true such as claiming the Lord's day has "always been on Sunday!!", not seeing where many things that were developed during the era of Constantine were damaging to the faith, seeing how not everything deemed "herectical" by a lot of Evangelical groups was anywhere close to being deemed an issue in the early body of believers, etc).

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I am one of administrators of a Chinese Christianity-Judaism relationship web group and the biggest Chinese Judaism web group. I have authority to delete the posts or kick off the publishers of them that condemn MJ or J or C as heresy. And now I have a Christian church to visit on Sunday, I don’t know how long I can stay there.

I think it may help to ease the tensions that people often react to MJism due to how they may see others in the camp that try to seperate themselves from being "Christian"/demonize others who are "Christian" as automatically being against what Christ taught and what was outlined in the Torah/Law. That naturally places others at odds with them and it is not necessary when seeing the history of development.

The term “Christian” originally meant “follower of the Christ” or “follower of the Messiah.” By itself “Christian” is a good term. Theologically, numerous Messianic Jews identify as Christians. But sadly, over time the term “Christian” came to be used over-broadly and inaccurately. Again, many people today have a false dichotomy in their minds, that on the one hand there are Jews and Judaism, and on the other hand there are Gentiles and Christianity, and supposedly one must choose between the two. Accordingly, when a Jew accepts Yeshua he is thought to have “switched over” from the Jew-Judaism side to the Gentile-Christianity side, and is therefore no longer regarded as a Jew, but as a Gentile-Christian. For all intents and purposes the term “Christian” has become synonymous with “non-Jew” or “Gentile.” However, the opposite is true since nothing could be more Jewish than to follow Israel's Messiah.....and consequently those who choose to call themselves Messianic Jews,” identify as Jewish people who follow Messiah Yeshua.

Many in the 1st century who were Jewish believers noted that often when it came to clarifying rather forcefully that it was not an issue of misapplication to call Jewish believers who loved Torah/followed the Jewish customs "Christians".....for it was no more an issue for them than it was for Paul and others in His day to be called such. They did not see themselves as "converting" to another faith....but they did not call what they did "Judaism" either......for they were simply Jewish followers of the Messiah who loved the Law. When the term "Christian" was given to describe what they were about, they rolled with it. ..and saw themselves as part of the fulfillment of the Jewish faith. And the same dynamic occurred for Gentiles brought into the faith.

If distinction was to be made (As it was), the focus was upon how Gentiles have differing traditions/customs within Christianity while the Jews have a differing emphasis as well. The proper distinction would be Gentile Christianity and Jewish Christianity/Nazarene Jewish Christianity . And within that, other scholars have often brought up the often ignored dynamic of how there were forms of Christianity that were in competition with one another. Pauline Christianity (as well as Johannine Christianity and the ways Jewish believers in their views) in competition with other camps claiming the name of Christ (including various aspects of Ebionite Christianity....more discussed here and here in #91 ,#156 and #157 ) and that eventually died out after losing prominence. Some of the same things occurring then are still occurring today. More discussed at Jewish Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts -Kesher - A Journal of Messianic Judaism... and Johannine Perspectives on the Death of Jesus....as well as here in #16 .

Many Messianic Jews have long noted THAT being called "Christian" was a term reserved for Gentiles alone rather than being a term to describe the early body of believers

There is a tendency amongst many to try to say "Well...yeah, you can be Jewish as a Christian--but that doesn't mean you're truly like those in the Bible...for only those who follow the Torah (as we do) are truly of the Judaic mindset as the Jews of scripture." This is done in the attempt to claim that being within Messianic Judaism means one follows more of Torah (fully) than those who are proud to be called "Christians"...but again, that is all based on a prior assumption that has not been proven (i.e. that it is always the case that to be "Christians" is intrisically linked to not walking a life in line with what the Lord commanded of believers according to His Torah/Law). Many people do not realize (As other Messianic Jews have noted) that not all aspects of the Mosaic Law were ever said to remain forever as instructions for believers, be it Jews or Gentiles, in Christ....nor was it the case that Gentiles were ever called to follow all aspects of the Mosaic Law to begin with.​

Historically, it is important to not try bringing things in division that were NEVER there.​

 

[someguy14]

I’m not pretending anything. The simple fact is that apart from Paul there can be no faith in Jesus – not anymore.

Christian faith is of Jesus and Jesus does as the Father, God, commands, only. As many slipped away, Jesus gives a chance to return unto God, to know God. Who can be against that, except those against God.

 

[someguy14]

I can do just fine with or without Paul.

The Holy Spirit of God is all wisdom, all truth.

 

[pat34lee]

He admitted outright that while having fellowship with non-Jews, Peter was living in a Gentile way (ἐθνικῶς... ζῇ&#962, and in Paul’s estimation this was the only way to avoid hypocrisy – to break down the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile and to live like Gentiles without Torah. Anyone who attaches Torah keeping to their faith has made their faith vain and have cut themselves off from Christ. Paul makes that clear.

I don't think so. Peter was not living as a gentile. He disregarded the traditions that kept Jews from fraternizing with gentiles. And Paul was the same. Tradition (now, the talmud) kept the two apart, not Torah. One problem is that when the English translations say "law", they could be talking about Torah, the oral traditions, ceremonial laws or civil law.

 

[pat34lee]

Yet, his reasoning would take him the other direction – not that Gentiles should do as the Jews, but that Jews should do as the Gentiles (those who come to faith). Gentiles before faith were chained in service to elemental forces and primitive beliefs and ways of thinking. Faith releases them from such servitude, freeing them to live a life of love and devotion to their fellows (“love your neighbor as yourself”), and love itself becomes the prime law. Jews who are slaves to Torah observance, once they become believers in Jesus, are freed from their slavery just as the Gentiles are freed from their slavery.

Slavery is not the issue, as he states that we belong to YHWH. We are not our own, for we were bought with a price. Paul never called for Jews to stop obeying Torah, only for gentiles to learn Torah BEFORE they were expected to obey all of it. They did not have to become circumcised and convert to Judaism in order to attend the synagogue to learn. As they learned, however, they were expected to put into practice what they learned.