What is the meaning of this?!

[Bob Moore]

Charles,

A question: The NT teaches us that the Law (Torah) is valuable for training in godliness, and that no part of it is without effect because it is the moral law of God and applies to everyone everywhere, for all time, whether or not they accept it. In your post just above you quoted, "but since they are still fettered by the Law--circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest-- they are not in accord with Christians.... they are nothing but Jews....". The writer was pointing out that the provisions of the ceremonial law were dispensed with because they were but shadows of the reality which had come. And that they were still bound by the Law that they could not keep because he who lives by the Law is responsible to keep it perfectly. It appears that the ones mentioned were Judaizers, whom Paul battled against because of their lack of understanding. What is your take on this?

 

[Jesus my Light]

i am so confused wit all these threads I am asking a question I wonder if someone cood answer me is this a chat room ? Casue I have neva seen it set up like this b4

 

[Jesus my Light]

Also is there anyway I can read the blessing thing I am unsure bout what reputation means on this health and blessings?

 

[muffler dragon]

Best thing to do, Jesus my Light, is to click on the FAQ tab at the top of your screen. You can then scroll down through tons of topics that address your concerns.

m.d.

 

[Ainesis]

You would like sites? Here are a few for starters:

Here is what the church historian, Socrates, who died in A.D. 440, wrote nearly a hundred years after Constantine's Sunday Law Decree was issued:

“Although almost all churches through the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this.” Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, Books, chapter 22.

(Charles' comment: Sacred mysteries on the Sabbath, is a reference to the practices of Judaism, as opposed to Christian traditions of Alexandria and Rome, which were based on completely new dogma, the result of the mixture of Mithraism and Jesus.)
The first believers in Y'shua were a Jewish sect known as "Nazarenes" or in Hebrew "N'tzarim" (Acts 11:19; 24:5). The "church father" Jerome (4th Cent.) described these Nazarenes as those "...who accept Messiah in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old Law." (Jerome; On. Is. 8:14). The fourth century "church father" Epiphanius gives a more detailed description:

But these sectarians... did not call themselves Christians--but "Nazarenes," ... However they are simply complete Jews. They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as well, as the Jews do... They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion-- except for their belief in Messiah, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that G-d is one, and that his son is Y'shua the Messiah. They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the entire Law, the Prophets, and the... Writings... are read in Hebrew, as they surely are by the Jews. They are different from the Jews, and different from Christians, only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith in Messiah; but since they are still fettered by the Law--circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest-- they are not in accord with Christians.... they are nothing but Jews.... They have the Goodnews according to Matthew in its entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.

(Epiphanius; Panarion 29)

Concerning Passover as opposed to Communion:

Even the historian Epiphanius (who opposed the Quartodecimens) admitted that the Quartodecimen view was the original view when the Messianic Jews were still in Jerusalem (until 132-135 CE) stating, "it was necessary at that time that the whole world follow them [the Messianic Jews] and celebrate with them so that there should be a single confession . . . celebrating one festival [of Passover]." _ Epiphanius, Pan., 70:10:2

Very interesting Charles. Thank You!!

 

[CharlesYTK]

Charles,

A question: The NT teaches us that the Law (Torah) is valuable for training in godliness, and that no part of it is without effect because it is the moral law of God and applies to everyone everywhere, for all time, whether or not they accept it. In your post just above you quoted, "but since they are still fettered by the Law--circumcision, the Sabbath, and the rest-- they are not in accord with Christians.... they are nothing but Jews....". The writer was pointing out that the provisions of the ceremonial law were dispensed with because they were but shadows of the reality which had come. And that they were still bound by the Law that they could not keep because he who lives by the Law is responsible to keep it perfectly. It appears that the ones mentioned were Judaizers, whom Paul battled against because of their lack of understanding. What is your take on this?

Hello Bob,

This quote is given to show that the Messianics, (those who keep the law and believe in Yeshua) were still there in the 3rd and 4th centurys. The writer is critical of these people and uses some derrogitory acticles like "fettered by the law" and "are nothing but Jews," and goes on to say that they do believe in Messiah. Well this is what the Apostles were Jews, who practiced Judaism and believe that Yeshua was the Jewish Messiah. None of that changed. Torah is not a burden something to be fettered with. It is Joy. See Psalm 119 to get Davids opinion on this.

The difficulty Paul was having with Judaizers is a completely different issue. It is most clear actually if you understand the heart of Pauls Gospel, which is Gentile inclusion in Israel, with all its ramifications, becoming part of the faithful Torah community WITHOUT first undergoing Rabinical conversion rituals of study, circumcision and immersion. The Jewish member particulary non-believing Jews with whom the church shared the synagogues, were feeling pressed out of their Jews only exclusivity and this got Paul into a lot of trouble. The Jews mostly accepted the Gospel of Yeshua being the Messiah, but balked at Gentile inlusion without converting and becoming a Jew first. So this is what Paul was really fighting. There is a great deal more that can be said about this, but I will kep it short for now. IT should be noted that the disciples including Paul maintained Torah and Temple service including the rituals and sacrifices until the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, almost 40 years after the resurrection of Messiah.

 

[Oblio]

Concerning Passover as opposed to Communion:

Even the historian Epiphanius (who opposed the Quartodecimens) admitted that the Quartodecimen view was the original view when the Messianic Jews were still in Jerusalem (until 132-135 CE) stating, "it was necessary at that time that the whole world follow them [the Messianic Jews] and celebrate with them so that there should be a single confession . . . celebrating one festival [of Passover]." _ Epiphanius, Pan., 70:10:2

I didn't check the other cites, but I found no primary source cites but rather sources from from MJ apolgetic sites.

Added: I check the other quotes, they are all biased quotes from MJ (some even from heretical sacrednamers) apologetic sites, . Do you have any primary source quotes ?

 

[muffler dragon]

I didn't check the other cites, but I found no primary source cites but rather sources from from MJ apolgetic sites.

Added: I check the other quotes, they are all biased quotes from MJ (some even from heretical sacrednamers) apologetic sites, . Do you have any primary source quotes ?

No offense, Oblio, but your synopsis is a bit unfair. Your primary source of information that you link to (in most cases) comes from Orthodox authorship. No one here dismisses them off the hip just because the source. It would be appreciated if you would give the same regard back.

m.d.

 

[CharlesYTK]

I have the original writings (copies) here but they are difficult to reproduce. Use the provided reference numbers and you should find them.

 

[Oblio]

No offense, Oblio, but your synopsis is a bit unfair. Your primary source of information that you link to (in most cases) comes from Orthodox authorship. No one here dismisses them off the hip just because the source. It would be appreciated if you would give the same regard back.

m.d.

IIRC I asked for cites of what the Early Church Fathers believed. Usually when the topic of what the ECF's and the early Church believes comes up, Orthodox posters (myself included) cite from the primary documents. Now it just so happens that the ECF's were Orthodox, but they are the primary sources (hosted by a Protestant site BTW)

Added: This is what I requested

You of course have cites by the Early Church Fathers that substantiate this claim.

 

[Oblio]

I've searched for several of the documents and key phrase on ccel.org (the widely accepted (by EO,RC and Prots) online repository of ECF writings) and found no record of those comments by the ECFs.

 

[muffler dragon]

IIRC I asked for cites of what the Early Church Fathers believed. Usually when the topic of what the ECF's and the early Church believes comes up, Orthodox posters (myself included) cite from the primary documents. Now it just so happens that the ECF's were Orthodox, but they are the primary sources (hosted by a Protestant site BTW)

Added: This is what I requested

I was addressing this portion of your statement:

they are all biased quotes from MJ (some even from heretical sacrednamers) apologetic sites

I am saying you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Just like I have mentioned elsewhere, the majority of the ECF's were anti-semites (you say anti-Judaic, whereas I make no distinction). Even with their personal beliefs, I don't dismiss absolutely everything they have ever said and then mention that they are biased.

Furthermore, if you disagree with the citations that Charles has provided, then it is a lot more fruitful to present a position that shows why you disagree instead of defaulting to what your potentially biased opinion may be.

It's about trying to keep the situation equitable.

m.d.

 

[Ainesis]

IIRC I asked for cites of what the Early Church Fathers believed. Usually when the topic of what the ECF's and the early Church believes comes up, Orthodox posters (myself included) cite from the primary documents. Now it just so happens that the ECF's were Orthodox, but they are the primary sources (hosted by a Protestant site BTW)

Added: This is what I requested

"Primary" in what sense?

 

[CharlesYTK]

On Nazarenes from Christian Think Tank.


4. Epiphanius.

When we come to Epiphanius (born and raised in Palestine), we finally get a by-name mention of the Nazarenes. His Panarion (generally known as the Refutation of All Heresies) was written during the period 374-376. Panarion 29 is a rather extensive treatment of his sources and data on the Nazarenes, and the salient facts about them are listed below:

a. The use both the Old and New Testaments, without excluding any books known to Epiphanius (7,2):

"For they use not only the New Testament but also the Old, like the Jews. For the Legislation and the Prophets and the Scriptures, which are called the Bible by the Jews, are not rejected by them as they are by those mentioned above [Manicheans, Marcionites, Gnostics]. "

b. They have a good knowledge of Hebrew and read the OT and at least one gospel in that language (7,4; 9,4):

"They a good mastery of the Hebrew language. For the entire Law and the Prophets and what is called the Scriptures, I mention the poetical books, Kings, Chronicles and Ester and all the others, are read by them in Hebrew as in the case with the Jews, of course."

"They have the entire Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. It is carefully preserved by them in Hebrew letters."

c. They believe in the resurrection of the dead (7,3):

"For they also accept the resurrection of the dead "

d. They believe that God is the creator of all things (7,3):

"...and that everything has its origin in God"

e. They believe in One God and His Son Jesus Christ (remember the patristic defn. of divine Son!) (7,3; 7,5):

"They proclaim one God and his Son Jesus Christ."

"Only in this respect they differ from the Jews and Christians: with the Jews they do not agree because of their belief in Christ, with the Christians because they are trained in the Law, in circumcision, the Sabbath, and the other things." (Note how significant this is--they did NOT differ from Christians in Christology! This demonstrates a High Christology on their part!).

f. They observe the Law of Moses (7,5; 5,4; 8,1ff)

"Only in this respect they differ from the Jews and Christians: with the Jews they do not agree because of their belief in Christ, with the Christians because they are trained in the Law, in circumcision, the Sabbath, and the other things."

"By birth they are Jews and they dedicate themselves to the Law and submit to circumcision."

g. They are hated by the Jews and are officially ostracized in the synagogue prayer--probably the birkat ha-minim (9,2-3):

"However, they are very much hated by the Jews. For not only the Jewish children cherish hate against them but the people also stand up in the morning, at noon, and in the evening, three times a day and they pronounce curses and maledictions over them when they say their prayers in the synagogues. Three times a day they say: 'May God curse the Nazarenes.' For they are more hostile against them because they proclaim as Jews that Jesus is the Christ."

Pritz summarizes the data from the most important section of Epiphanius (Panarion 29,7) [NT:NJC:44]:

"The data in this section present us with a body in every way 'orthodox' except for its adherence to the Law of Moses. If we remember that the Jewish Church of Jerusalem also kept the Law through the period covered by the books of Acts, then we have a picture of the earliest Jewish Christian community...The picture is not full, certainly, but what we are given in very way confirms the identity of the Nazarenes as the heirs of the earliest Jerusalem congregation."

Thus, Epiphanius is our first source on the Nazarenes, and he describes them as decidedly orthodox in all matters (including the deity of Christ), except that of observance of Jewish customs.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnazonly.html

 

[Oblio]

"Primary" in what sense?

Transcriptions of the writings of the Church Fathers.

www.ccel.org/fathers2 has a reasonably complete set and is accepted by most scholars, though some of the footnote hyperlinks are buggy and I personally don't care for the translation.

www.earlychristianwritings.com also is a good source for 'primary' sources.

 

[CharlesYTK]

Transcriptions of the writings of the Church Fathers.

www.ccel.org/fathers2 has a reasonably complete set and is accepted by most scholars, though some of the footnote hyperlinks are buggy and I personally don't care for the translation.

www.earlychristianwritings.com also is a good source for 'primary' sources.

Well I've givn you a mainline Chistian source and the Messianic.

How about the scriptures themselves? The apostles never teach anyone to depart from Torah or the Sabbath or the feast days. We see Paul going up to the temple to pray a 3 PM, why, because that is the time of the evening sacrifice. He is anxious to be in Jerusalem to celebrate Shavuot with the church there. He circumcises Timothy, a Gentile. And above this Messiah himself told us to keep the commandments and that anyone who broke the least of the comandments and taught others to do the same would be called least in the kingdom.

 

[Oblio]

Well I've givn you a mainline Chistian source and the Messianic

OK, I was looking for writings from the early Church Fathers though.

We see Paul going up to the temple to pray a 3 PM,

Orthodox monastics do this to this day.

He circumcises Timothy, a Gentile.

So not call attention to him, not because it was something to be done as a Christian.

He is anxious to be in Jerusalem to celebrate Shavuot with the church there.

Paul is anxious to go the the Jews to convert them to Christianity. He does so at risk of imprisonment and martydom.

And above this Messiah himself told us to keep the commandments

And what did Christ tell us about the Commandments that we should keep ?

 

[muffler dragon]

Paul is anxious to go the the Jews to convert them to Christianity. He does so at risk of imprisonment and martydom.

Dear Oblio:

Would you mind clarifying this, because I don't know of any where in Scripture where Sha'ul set out to convert anyone to anything, let alone the Way. As a subset question, how do you define conversion? What are the steps and so on? Conversion means different things to different people and I would like to see what you mean by it.

m.d.

 

[CharlesYTK]

OK, I was looking for writings from the early Church Fathers though.

The Quotes I gave you were from the church fathers.

Orthodox monastics do this to this day.

The Monastics do not do so in the temple in Jerusalem, where at this time of day the evening sacrifice and prayers are taking place. In other scriptures we see the disciples leaving the temple together after the morning sacrifices. We se them "Worshipping in te temple daily" in act. This worship includes sacrifices and offerings.

So not call attention to him, not because it was something to be done as a Christian.

Noe entirely corect. Paul and the other disciples agre that rabbinical conversion of Gentiles is not required as a part of salvation. Timothy is not converting here but desires to be fully conected with his Jewish brothers and to have access unrestricted to the Holy place, which under the Rabbinical form of Judaism he being Gentile was restricted.

Paul is anxious to go the the Jews to convert them to Christianity. He does so at risk of imprisonment and martydom.

No, Paul is anxious to be in Jerusalem to take part in Shavuot with those who were believers already. Just as the disciples were gathered together at the temple on the shavuot that the spirit was poured out. Do you understand what Shavuot is? It is the time when we reaffirm our committment to Gods Covenants and Torah. It was on this day that the Torah was Given at Sinai.

Paul took four men and enterd into a Nazzarite vow with them, something that requires many sacrifices over a period of time.

The Lord and the disiple kep Kosher diet, and the new Gentile believers are given specific instructions that include three Kosher laws, and instructions to attend the synagogues in their own towns and to study the Torah. Acts 15

And what did Christ tell us about the Commandments that we should keep?

He said not one Jot nor tiddle shall in any way pass away from the law. He said that we are not to break the tiniest commandment. The apostle John also says that if we say that we love Him (Yeshua) and keep not his commandments then we are a liar and there is no truth in us. The true saints of the last days we are told are those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Yeshua the Messiah.

When the rich young ruler asks Yeshua "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Yeshua begins quoting the ten comandments to him, which is the short index to Torah and implies all of Torah, for the rest of Torah tells us how to keep those ten.

Here is the thing that many in the chrch must eventually face: Christianity is based not on the scriptures themselves but on the interpretation of the scriptures by the church fathers of the 3-4th centurys. Christainity has no resemblence whatsoever to the believers of the scriptures who practiced Apostolic Judaism, to the teachings of the Lord or the disciples and the church that existed after them for several hundred years. This is an undisputable fact. One needs only to compare Church doctrine with the scriptures to see the glaring contradictions.

One of the founding documents of the Church is the creeds of the council of Nicea, and in that document the veneration of idols and prayers to the dead saints, and burning of incense to them and more is all approved in direct violation of the Torah of God and the teachings of the Apostles. They justified these additions on the premis that the church had apostolic authority through sucession and by the spirit. And yet the apostles told us to test all things by the scriptures:II Tim 3: [16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17] That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

There was not such thing as a NEw Testament at that time. There was only the Hebrew scriptures. This is our standard. And the later writings of the disciples and the Gospels do in act meet this of agreement with the Hebrew scriptures. But the church doctrines do not.

 

[Ainesis]

Transcriptions of the writings of the Church Fathers.

www.ccel.org/fathers2 has a reasonably complete set and is accepted by most scholars, though some of the footnote hyperlinks are buggy and I personally don't care for the translation.

www.earlychristianwritings.com also is a good source for 'primary' sources.

Ohhh. I don't necessarily agree that these are primary, but thank you very much for the explanation!