Posted on 07/01/2003 10:22:12 AM PDT by ksen
RECOVERING THE TRUTH & A COMING TO A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF JESUS
Jesus and all his followers were Jews who were faithful to Biblical Judaism and never intended to separate from or start a new religion; after their deaths the Gentile Christian church will condemn the Jewish Christians as heretics...in time fruit of the Jewish Church (Gentile Christianity) will destroy it's mother
We have a unique paradox in Biblical history; one which touches every follower of Jesus yet today and which reaches to the very core of our own culture and time. It is impossible to understand Jesus or his message until we come to a correct understanding of the events that fashioned such persecution of the Jews by the Gentile believers and which contributed to the alteration of the faith of Jesus as can be found to have existed in the first century of Second Temple Judaism. As stated earlier the first and greatest division in the early church concerned the relationship of the followers of Jesus to Judaism; it shaped everything that was to follow. One of the greatest problems facing Christianity today is how to reconcile what it has become with G-d's intended vision for the Gentile nations of the world whereby they become part of the Israel of G-d and not "replace" it with a religion of their own creation. The answers for such a problem come only when one personally acquaints himself with an unbiased presentation of the facts of the tragic events of this part of Biblical history and traces the repercussions of such events down through the corridors of history and ultimately seeing the shock waves from them that are present in our own religious beliefs systems and cultures of today.
Today many scholars tell us the truth today about the early church and courageously break from "church traditions" and "mind control" to present the facts concerning these "events" and the corruption of the early faith of the historical Jesus by the Gentile "converts" who would later steer the direction of this "faith" throughout recorded history. It is so simple today to find this information, but sadly few look or even know the need to see if "they be in the faith." That being the case, we accept the "spin" of religious leaders down through history and the real message of Jesus is never heard, or at best, is overlooked for more "orthodox teachings" espoused which have taken it's place. Keith Akers, in his The Lost Religion of Jesus, states the case as well as any. Jewish Christianity consisted of those early Christians who followed the teachings of Jesus, as they understood him, and also remained loyal to the Jewish law of Moses as they understood it. Messianic Judaism was not to replace Judaism with a new faith; it was the goal and zenith for which the prophets wrote and hoped. This simple statement is of profound importance, because the Jewish Christians were eventually rejected both by orthodox Judaism and by orthodox Gentile Christianity. The understanding of the Jewish follower of Jesus was not that of orthodox Christianity (as it came to be where Jesus is seen more like the sun-g-dmen of the Gentile nations than a human messiah). Likewise the Jewish follower of Jesus possessed an understanding of the law of Moses that was the same as orthodox Judaism, but yet this view would later be rejected under the influence of Paul and his churches. Jerome's celebrated comment in the fourth century summarizes this dual rejection: "As long as they seek to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither Jews nor Christians" [Letter 112] (Akers, The Lost Religion of Jesus, p. 7).
The Jewish Christians considered Jesus to be the "true prophet" who would lead the people back to the eternal law that commanded simple living and nonviolence. They saw in Jesus their hopes for physical redemption and the fulfillment of the prophets. It was their hope that the Law would go forth from Zion with Jesus at its head as the long awaited Messiah and King of Israel. It was their hope that the enemies of Israel would be vanquished by the word of this anointed one of the LORD as taught in the Psalms of Solomon (no not the psalms you are familiar with but a separate Jewish books that was recognized by Jews as authoritative in the first century). The law, which was cherished by all G-dfearing Jews, had been given to Moses; indeed, it had existed from the beginning of the world, and was intended to be cherished and observed by both Jew and non-Jew alike because in the Commandments one finds the unique Covenant stipulations of his Covenant before G-d. In sharp contrast with the gentile Christian movement, which emerged in the wake of Paul's teaching, Jewish Christianity strove to make the Jewish law stricter than the Jewish tradition seemed to teach ("you have heard it said but I say unto you...'much more'"). Such was the Jesus' love for G-d and His Word. But this cannot be said for the Gentile churches which strove to find ways to lay aside the law for the laxity that was taught under the disguise of "grace." In other words, the non-Jews loved the large "gray areas" that came from the teaching of Paul and others who negated the Law through their own personal "revelations" and their own personal "gospels" (Paul is found saying in Rom 2:16 16: In the day when G-d shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel and again in 2 Tim 2:8 8: Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel). It is a little early in this article to address this concept but if you study continues you will reach a point in your understanding and knowledge where you will see beyond any doubt that the "gospel of Paul" replaced the "gospel of Jesus and Judaism."
Jewish Christianity is the blind spot in virtually all accounts of Jesus. Everyone agrees that Jesus was a Jew and that his initial followers were Jews. Yet of the thousands of books written about Jesus, almost none acknowledge the central importance of Jewish Christianity; at least until the end of the previous century and the beginning of the present one. That was true up until the latter part of the last century when Jewish, as well as European scholars began to reevaluate the Jewish Jesus and contrast the Historical Jesus with the Christ of Faith. There are many who are eager to focus specifically on the Jewishness of Jesus, until they get to the point of examining those of his followers who, like their teacher, were also Jewish, and in doing so see for themselves that actually nothing really changed within this community of the closest followers of Jesus until the early fourth century when Rome would effectively destroy the Jewish "followers of Jesus" by declaring them official heretics. The power of Rome would propagate a Gentile understanding and not a Jewish understanding of Jesus (see Constantine's Easter letter if you have any doubts).
The "Jewishness" of these early Christians does not refer to their ethnic group or nationality, but rather to their beliefs. Paul was a convert to Judaism (H. Maccoby, The Mythmaker, Paul And The Invention Of Christianity) and only later converted to Judaism; first a Sadducee, and after rejection by the Chief Priest he turned to the Pharisees, again only to be rejected by them for his prior cruelty to them as an agent of the Temple police who routed them out and killed them (the Messianic believing strict branch of the Pharisees called Nazarenes/Essenes). Paul also preaches freedom from the law and therefore explicitly rejects Jewish beliefs. Paul, and some of the other Jews who became Christians, renounced the law of Moses and, therefore, were not part of Jewish Christianity. The churches of Paul today (vast majority of Christianity as it exists today) lay outside the true faith of Jesus and will continue to do so unless they encounter the truth about this man of Galilee and the truth about their own religious history.
Without understanding Jewish Messianic Judaism or "intended Christianity", we cannot understand the historical Jesus let alone the earliest church nor the corruption of it within the New Testament correctly. Lacking this knowledge we are doomed to misinterpret most of what we read in the New Testament and our worship let alone our conduct will be in error...much of which is defined as sin in the Torah.
You're giving me something my father never gave me. A talk about the "birds and the bees". :-)
Do you have any idea what "demi" and "semi" mean?
How do you acheive this conclusion from my statement that Yeshua is 100 percent fully God?
SD
"Jesus is God. He has a divine nature and a human nature."
Right?
Is there more than one human nature?
Malakhi gave a good example earlier.
Right.
Is there more than one human nature?
I'll say no.
SD
I said 100 percent and 100 percent. Where do you get "half" from. Jesus is 100 percent God and 100 percent man. Fully human fully divine. Not half man half god.
I know it's easier when you just think what you want, but it doesn't make you effective.
Why aren't all the prophets included in your polytheistic god?
Why would they be? None of the prophets were God incarnate.
Oh, and God is one, not polytheistic. Just cause He has Three persons within does not make him "poly."
SD
Where you been?
Binding and loosing, forgiving sins, etc.
So you are saying only the Apostles can save a soul and/or be the instrument for the forgivness of sin?
IOW the prayers of the "faithful" cannot have the same "power/authority" with God?
I'll say no.
OK, so there is only one human nature. Which was united with the divine nature in the person of Jesus. We all also share in this one human nature. Which was united with the divine nature in the person of Jesus. So our human nature is united with the divine nature. If Jesus was fully God and fully man, partaking of a divine united with a human nature, then we are also fully man and fully God, partaking of a human nature united with a divine nature.
Pantheistic multiple-ego solipsism.
Thou art God.
Grok?
"Polypersonal" if not "polyontological".
Also, by this standard, Hinduism is not polytheistic.
http://hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_polytheism.htm
According to the tenets of Hinduism, God is one as well as many...
Therefore for a Hindu the worship of gods and goddesses is not a mere superstitious idolatry but an act of faith and a form of communication, a way of placing our cares and concerns in the hands of God, the One Supreme Universal Self, of infinite dimensions, who envelops the worlds, the planets and the whole universe and is also hidden in them. The gods and goddesses are His different forms, the many hands, feet and faces of the one Supreme Purusha, the universal Self
1 Chronicles 22:9 Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.Another son! Imagine that!
10 He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.
But not begotten
Oh dear. I was afraid you might do something like that.
I am not you, and neither one of us is Steven. There is a shared human nature we have, but we are not the same being.
With God, there is both unity of nature and unity of being.
So your above falls apart as soon as you take our sharing a human nature to mean that we are the same being.
You are correct, however, in understanding that if we do unite our own personal nature to that of Jesus that we do become united with the divinity. Jesus did come to allow us all to raise our human nature up so that we may participate in the divine life. So, yes, what you say is true, but not automatically by being human. It is by being human and attached to Christ.
SD
SD
I don't know if I ever said it was or wasn't. It is incorrect. If the various "gods and goddesses" are truly different "faces" and various other body parts of the one "Supreme Purusha," then I guess it isn't polytheistic either.
All depends on whether it's true or not.
Though it has certain error, thinking of Father, Son and Spirit as Three different faces or ways of interacting with us can help to understand why three can be one.
SD
Where have I heard that 'different forms' business before? LOL
#1564
Re=read that post, it explains why Yeshua's death was NOT a blood atonement. He didn't meet several criteria. In addition to those, a blood atonement was the death of the sacrifice from loss of blood. There is nothing in the scriptures that suggest that Yeshua died by bleeding to death.
Jesus was not an animal (biblically).
The rules for animal sacrifice do not apply to him.
Moi? ;o)
I am not you, and neither one of us is Steven.
Right. We are different persons partaking of one human nature.
but we are not the same being.
It depends upon how you define "being". None of us is completely discrete and independent of our environment. Our "personal" being is contingent.
You are correct, however, in understanding that if we do unite our own personal nature to that of Jesus that we do become united with the divinity. Jesus did come to allow us all to raise our human nature up so that we may participate in the divine life. So, yes, what you say is true, but not automatically by being human. It is by being human and attached to Christ.
There is no "personal nature". There is "person" and there is "human nature". Human nature is already (and substantially) united with the divine nature, according to the doctrine of hypostatic union. The only alternative I can see is to assert that those who do not partake of this theosis do not have a human nature.
Where in scripture, then, can one find the rules for human sacrifice?
100% + 100% = 200% Or 1 + 1 = 2Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Why look at that!
God says 1 + 1 = 1
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.