Posted on 12/01/2010 2:24:01 PM PST by Amerisrael
In a seemingly unprecedented move, a group of Amish Christians from the US made widespread use of modern technology - including airplanes, tour buses and even iPhones - in order to come to Israel and apologize to the Jews.
The Amish are most notable to outsiders for their shunning of the technological conveniences that have made life so fast-paced for everyone else. But they did not shy away from using whatever means necessary to accomplish what they viewed as the vitally important task of making things right between their community and Israel.
The Amish, both in the US and Europe, have a long history of anti-Semitism and have traditionally been firm proponents of Replacement Theology, which claims that God cast aside the Jews for their widespread rejection of Jesus as their messiah. Many Amish once believed the Nazi Holocaust was God’s punishment for that rejection of Jesus, and actually applauded Hitler.
“We are here to say we are sorry,” group leader Ben Girod told Israel’s Channel 2 News as the group visited the Western Wall in Jerusalem. “God reminded me that this is not who He is. We no longer want to reject you or look at you as not being God’s people. You were God’s people long before we were.”
(Excerpt) Read more at israeltoday.co.il ...
I don't mean legally. These Gentiles would not have been set up to butcher and prepare kosher food.
That's not the issue. Was he or was he not still of the sect of the Pharisees, which meant keeping their traditions and falling within the parameters of their theology?
1 Corinthians 9:19 "For whereas I was free as to all, I made myself the servant of all, that I might gain the more. 20 And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: 21 To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were without the law, as if I were without the law, (whereas I was not without the law of God, but was in the law of Christ,) that I might gain them that were without the law."
why then did you ascribe them to the Apostles by claiming that they considered keeping kosher contrary to the Gospel?
The latter-day rules of the Church were based on the teachings of the Apostles.
So, like I said, the Gentile adoptees came in and started beating up on those born in the house, saying they weren't "true" brothers unless they stopped living as Jews and started living as Gentiles.
Apostolic successors were appointed by the original Apostles and guided by the Traditions of the Apostles and the Paraclete sent by Christ.
How is that different from the Judaizers putting rules into place making Gentile converts live as Jews "to guard against those who used baptism as a veneer, but did not really become followers of Jesus"?
The Judaizers received a thumbs down from the Apostles. How about the refugees from Goshen forced to adopt the Mosaic laws? God rules His people as He sees fit.
Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven;
Christ sent the Holy Spirit to inspire the Apostles to correctly teach the true meaning of the law.
“this is nothing short of a miracle”
DITTO - You beat me to the punch.
I want to add that I have honestly thought - off and on for years - that there is so much of this world I would like to leave behind and couldn’t I really be very happy living with the Amish.
It’s not just the technologically simple, uncomplicated life, its’ the simple, straight forward moral sense of life as well and their desire to refusal to allow “better” to bring with it all the temptation to compromise their moral sense.
I often envy them.
Empirical history does not support your sectarian viewpoint.
[...] Like Joseph, Moses, David, and others before Him, He was first rejected by his brothers and went for many years among the Gentiles.
But like Joseph, Moses, David, et. al., He will return to rule over the brothers who initially rejected Him.
Oh, but THAT is very good. Thank you for that wisdom.
Good one, Buggman.
.
You have, I have, and others have, repeatedly.
It's one of those unfortunate facts, like the Scriptural doctrine of the Rapture (which has also been posted numerous times), and the indisputable Scripture which makes it more than clear that God has not abandoned His chosen people and never will, which totally nuke their false doctrines so they simply refuse to acknowledge either the Scripture or the accounts of the Christians who came before before their crutch John Darby who believed the Bible as God wrote it rather than how Origen and other fallen men decided to re-write it to make it more to their liking.
It's that simple. They can't deal with the truth because it demolishes their entire world, so they discard it.
Trust me, I'm not nearly this rough with all of my Sunday brethren. As far as I'm concerned, anyone who is truly putting their faith in and striving to follow Yeshua the Messiah, they are my brother or sister whether they are a Jew or a Gentile.
But when someone starts with the "heretic" label over a relatively minor matter, it annoys me. I'm shooting down mas only because he (or she) is pretending to an expertise in both eschatology and Judaism that he doesn't have and presuming to judge everyone else by their supposed theological purity.
For those who show grace, I like to show grace. For those who think I'm honestly mistaken on some issues but are willing to extend the right hand of fellowship, I do the same.
Shalom and Happy Hanukkah to a brother in the Lord.
VERY WELL PUT.
THX.
Shalom and Happy Hanukkah!
I believe others must be accurate
when they assert that
Hagee asserted
that 2000 years ago Christ did not come to set up His earthly Kingdom as conquering King AT THAT TIME.
He said so quite plainly.
Old Testament prophecies describe the Suffering Servant Messiah and the Conquering King/Lion of Judah Messiah.
The first coming has been completed as the Suffering Servant Messiah.
The Second one is looming on the near horizon.
Take the proverb: "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." (Prov. 22:6)
Wooden literalism takes that statement as a fact, or actually an absolute promise. A LOT of parents of wayward offspring have suffered a tremendous amount of guilt from such an interpretation...thinking that if their child as an adult has chosen to walk away from the Lord, this verse is stating unequivocally it is THEIR fault.
I have heard such rationalized UnBiblical tripe all my adult life. First from many Pastors and then from many psychologist colleagues and professors.
In 63 years of watching parenting closely and the results closely, I have
AN EXCEPTION to that Scripture.
Never have.
In every case of the dozen or so cases where Pastors or professors or others asserted a given family was an exception, it only took me 3-5 minutes or less to ask a handful of questions sufficient to find out where the parenting was lacking.
Usually, in some key ways at some critical times to critical intensities, the parents had over emphasized "spare the rod and spoil the child" and
UTTERLY IGNORED "Provoke not your children to wrath."
And in many cases, the public personna of the parents was presumed to be the family personna which usually was quite different in harsh, hypocritical or worse ways.
I have NEVER found Scripture to prove untrue. Certainly not in this case either.
Interpreting Scriptrue literally where at all remotely possible is good horse sense and Holy Spirit fostered wisdom.
NOT doing so is ignorance and idiocy--usually combined horribly to the point where they stinketh.
That’s it. Horse drawn generator. :)
OK. Now lose the beards and the black coats. People think you’re Chassidic, especially when you also speak an archaic German dialect similar Yiddish. How about switching to Arabic? Nyuk. Nyuk.
Waitwaitwaitwait. Are you seriously, seriously suggesting that you, a Gentile who never walked with Yeshua, never saw Him in a vision, thousands of years removed from events, and not even speaking the same languages somehow understand the New Covenant better than those who were actually there and were entrusted by our Master with His words, teachings, and example?
Where the heck are you claiming to have come across such wisdom? It can't be the New Testament, since it was written by the very people that you are claiming didn't understand the importance of the torn veil even after three decades.
I do not profess any qualifications but I had understood that rabbinical Judaism uses the Talmud as Scripture . . .
You understand incorrectly. Whenever we study the Talmud, or any other rabbinic source, the prayer we say is, "Blessed are You O Hashem our God, King of the Universe, who has set us apart by His commandments and commanded us to engross ourselves in the words of Torah . . . Blessed are You, O Hashem, giver of the Torah." It is the Torah that we are to be engaged in and the Torah we thank God for.
While my more traditional Jewish brethren hold the Talmud in very high regard, it is as the repository of the wisdom and knowledge of the earliest sages about the Torah, not in place of it. It holds much the same position to a Jew that Calvin's Institutes do to the Calvinist. The Talmud, in fact, is the record of 600 years of debates among the rabbis. I am often annoyed at the way Christians make pronouncements that, "The Talmud says X" when if they kept reading they would find out that X was proven wrong half a page down.
So no, the Talmud does not replace the Torah. It depends on it.
. . . it considers the Trinity doctrine to be a belief in three gods instead of one.
Given how few Christians can explain the Trinity coherently, you can hardly blame the Jews for that.
You are not the reader of my soul.
No, but out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks . . . or the fingers type, as the case may be.
Yes, I try to put forth arguments that are based on Sacred Tradition, inclusive of Scripture.
And yet you are quick to condemn others for their traditions, even when they are far older than your own. For example, while Dispensationalism as such is relatively new, premillennialism and a literal interpretation of prophecy can be found in the earliest Church fathers, e.g., Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Victoraenus (sp? not bothering to pause to look it up), etc. Preterism and Historicism both came much later.
So like I said, if you want to play the "my tradition is older than yours" with the Dispys, you certainly lose against the premills, and definitely against the Jews.
2 Thes 2:15: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle"
And those traditions were taught by a practicing Pharisee. Hmmm . . .
It was clear that most of the Jews at first misunderstood the mission of the Messiah, even His own disciples
It's clear you can't understand Yeshua saying "Not yet, and don't ask when," with the implication that yes, the Kingdom will be restored to Israel. But again, that event and Peter's quote from chapter 2 (and you still refuse to understand Hagee's point--but then, that would be admitting being wrong about something) was forty days after the Resurrection. They were still taking Nazrite vows and making sacrifices in the Temple thirty years later. That means that Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, etc.--you know, the books you depend on to try to prove that the Torah is taken away--were all written by a man who took a voluntary Nazrite vow and went to Jerusalem with the express purpose of making animal sacrifices in accordance with the Torah and even Jewish Law.
If the Apostles themselves so misunderstood the Gospel, what chance in heck do you have of having it right?
I am only trying to repeat what I understand to be the Tradition passed down from the Apostles.
If that were all, I wouldn't be laying into you. But no, you went around claiming everything you disagree with to be heresy.
As I said to Karliner, I consider all who truly believe in and follow the King of Israel to be my brethren, and while I enjoy a good debate, I take a very live-and-let-live with my Sunday brethren. But when someone starts playing the "Heretic!" card, and especially when that person blatantly misrepresents both other Christians and Jews, that's a different story.
Since you have presumed to pass judgment on others based on how "perfect" their theology is in your eyes, rest assured that the Holy One will pass judgment on you based on how perfect your theology is in His. "For judgment is without mercy to him who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment" (Jas. 2:13).
I would suggest repenting, apologizing, and being a bit more careful about passing judgment based ignorance. I would also suggest that you do some reading on what Judaism actually teaches before you presume to speak for it. You might try Jewish Literacy by Rabbi Telushkin for a good primer.
Shalom.
Are you speaking as a replacement theologian? or against it? I was mostly giving you links on Darby; good in some ways but he wasn't the first with his viewpoints as those links show however the links have other subjects I wasn't all that interested in.
I just don't understand where your debate points are coming from and this is wayyyy off topic on the Amish save that they believed in replacement theology at least in part. I never studied the Amish view points but have studied replacement thrology enugh and as for dispensationalism, I think( possibly) we do agree, at least in Old/new testament views. I'll have to take your sentenses one by one though or I'll probably go on a tangent; I've written before on this site i am not a good debator and when it comes to religious views, well, we will probably walk away all believing what we believe prior to this debate, but here goes:
gads this is going to be a BIT lengthy but I'll try to reign it in a little
Okay, as the other person stated to both of us we can't speak for jews on many topics. i have only just learned of my own Jewish roots in the past 17 years and have been studying in a shul( many differing ones) regarding learning hebrew, and go to Torah stidies( and other classes0 regularly for the past six; prior to that, worked too much and went to study and classes irregularly. I love reading, arguing points and studying with my Jewish friends and learning the ways of Judaism so I generally as a rule put my Christian beliefs away unless there's something worth stating on topic and i can prove or at least see what others in say the Torah study say, how they transliterate and what may or may not be debatable. it's a rough process but they've learned to like, even love me and i them...."oi here comes the Jesus freeako" and I may retort," oy the scribes and pharisees, and myu liberal little Saducees, how's life walking around in the dark?" Now please note,we've known each other and the barbs are taken in stride with laughter, shake of the head and move on.
You said, and asked:
The temple sacrifice of Moses has ended because it was completed by Christ and because the temple was demolished by the pagan Romans as prophesied by Christ. What is the legitimate continuation of the Old Testament religion?
Well i can see why the person, got angry with me as many folks in the jewish world do not enjoy Christian arrogance and our haughty belief we have the one true vision straight from Hashem( for purposes of this debate I will refrain from using "G!D unless written so out of respect of HIS name in which I just love how my fellow Jews have taught me just how reverent HIS name is even they forgot HIS real name. And my do they WIN hands down that debate as we as Christians throw his name around like a cracked ping pong ball in comparison to the awe and wonder, fear and love HIS name is used in study, in services and in life.
For us as Christians( me a Messianic-Jew) we believe, yes, Jesus was the final sacrificial lamb, unblemished as he rode upon an ass as Zecheriah prophecies( according to Matthew(ch 21, [weeps over Jerusalem, Mt 23:37-24:1,2, Luke 13:34,35, a prophecy of Himself, and the destruction of Jerusalem( Mt 24:1,2) 38 years later." O Jerusalem Jerusalem thou that killest the prophets. and stonest them which are sent unto thee how often would I have gathered thy children together even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you,Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, 'Blessed is He who cometh in the name of the Lord( Hashem).'"] desolate who was a follower of Jesus, and through being a publican( tax collector) knew shorthand as did all Jewish scribes, and other educated Jews of the day Zech 9:9, to the very day as prophecied in the last chapter of Daniel.I believe the day of His entry was the tenth day of Nisan, the day practising Jews received their lamb for passover and inspected the merchandise so to speak to be certain the lamb chosen was unblemished. Math to this has been verified over and again by Christians and some Jews but again, many Jews refuse to hear or see the significance of this prophecy as not many will even touch the New testament. here is a link to the math:
According to Sir Robert Anderson this edict to rebuild Jerusalem was issued on March 14, 445 BC by Artaxerxes Longimanus of Persia. Exactly 173,880 days later Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey. This was the first time Jesus allowed Himself to be publicly proclaimed as the Messiah and King. As you will recall, prior to this Jesus was always saying go and tell no one (about his miracles). He was afraid that the people would believe Him only for His signs/miracles. A week later Jesus was "cut off" or crucified. We know that this happened between 445-444 BC:
This prophesy refers to weeks of years, or 483 biblical years. Beginning with the exact day on which Persian King Artaxerxes gave the decree to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (March 14, 445), exactly 173,880 days later--Palm Sunday, April 6, 32 A.D. This is the precise number of days spanning 483 biblical years, which were then measured as 12 months of 30 days each.:
Old Testament prophecies were given in old testament years, which had 360 days.
The formula for this is converting Old Testament years into what we are on (solar years-or 365.24 days) is this:
OT prophetic years of 483 times .9857 = 476 solar years Artaxerxes' decree in 444 BC + 476 years would mean the Messiah would be "cut off" in 32 AD, but not later than 34 AD. The rest here about half way down the page
Therefore yes, I do believe in both testaments. As Augustine( I think it was him) said, The old tstament is the new testament concealed, the new testament is the Old Testament( Tanakh) revealed." Not that I believe all or much of Augustine because he was one of the first staing the Bible was allegorical and not always literal. This was a political statement in hopes not to have himself killed, and his words were not "Jewish friendly" in that he applied replacement theology and felt that the church was the new jerusalem. Jews were outdated. He was wrong, horribly wrong in this as we can see to this day and look back and attest to so many murdered Jews and other Christians that diverted from his and others beliefs.
So again your question,"The temple sacrifice of Moses has ended because it was completed by Christ and because the temple was demolished by the pagan Romans as prophesied by Christ. What is the legitimate continuation of the Old Testament religion?
To the Jew, well this was a terrible time. No more temple. I was written i believe in the Talmud the veil to the temple was torn in two but re-sewn to keep the Holy of holies shrouded(Mt 27:51, Mk15:38,Lk23:45, veil torn, by David M Levy Excerpt,"According to the Talmud, the veils were 60 feet long, and 30 feet wide, about the thickness of a man's palm (four inches_, and made of 72 squares that were sown together. The veils were so heavy that it took 300 priests to hang them, according to Jewish tradition. In the talmud:. Talmud (c. AD 70-200): Sanhedrin 43a: "On the eve of Passover they hanged [crucified] Yeshu [Jesus]." - Jewish Source
Last part of question:"What is the legitimate continuation of the Old Testament religion? The new testament, inclusion of that is the continuation of the Book of Acts to this day. There will come a time very soon in which the dispensation of the church is over, and Hashem will deal once again directly through His people and the messiah( Meleckh mesiach) will return for Christians or come for the first time for the jews. This is a serious question both for jews and Christians alike and it is debated continuously. Some rabbi's believe in two in one, there is a Lamb of Hashem, and there is the conquering King of Kings, they are one and the same. Of course most Jews true to the religion call these rabbi's nuts, not all but the majjority. Again as I said to the other poster, I am NOT versed enough to debate fully on many jewish subjects and this one creeates more division than it does find common ground but it's wothwhile to read up and use this in later debates
Another portion of your paragraph full of questions:
The New Testament teaches that Christianity is the sole continuation and that Jewish nonbelievers are cut off. Rabbinical Judaism is based on the post-Messianic Talmud scripture. It teaches that non-Christian Jews are the sole inheritors and rejects Christianity as polytheistic. For 1800 years there was never a doubt among Christians as to their own inheritance until John Darby came along to concede the argument in favor of non-Christian Jewish inheritance.
Whoa there cowboy. Martin Luther also had words about replacement theology as did many. many popes and the revisionist protestant churches that went around using the same false doctrines which again ( i repeat) killed many Jews according to this nasty belief system that is contrary to all either the new old or combined testamnts state. Remember sir, it was maily ALL jews that gave us all scripture except for the chapter nebuchanezzar wrote in Daniel, and Luke's books. We as Christians owe Jews throughout history a debt of gratitude and an apology as the Amish humbly did, May G!G bless them for that.
Dissecting
The New Testament teaches that Christianity is the sole continuation and that Jewish nonbelievers are cut off.
Why? I ask you are not all peoples, Jews also, heathen and pagan cut off as per the new testament? Remember, all Jews followed what was called simply,"The way" and the New testament testifies of these great BOLD Jews that spread the new "mystery" of jesus birn, jesus, died, jesus resurrected. Jesus being the Lamb of Hashem, He being Hashem and He giving the gift of His Spirit( ruach) to all who believe, jew and Gentile alike. True but your sentence is harsh. "All have sinned and come short of the glory of G!D,being justified freely by HIS grace through the redemption that is in Christ jesus: whom Hasem has set forth to be a proptiation through faith in HIS blood to declare HIS righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of Hashem(G!D); to declare I say,at this time HIS righteousness: that he( all of us, Jew and Gentile)might be just and the justifier of him( Jew and gentile alike)which believeth in Jesus( Rom 3:23-26)."
So, yes, but we must al admit the law is just not attainable, all 600 plus laws, and jesus died to roll away, no, rip the veil in two that we might enter in and be partakers of Hasem's glory through the amazing sacrifice of the Son Jesus and His spilt blood for all. ALL And that right there sir is the reason i refute replacement theology and satans division in which he's destroyed any fellowship and most friendships between jew and gentile which was not what Jesus died for. he died to bring all together. One need only read the book of hebrews, tough book that is is to say Jews are NOT obsolete. In fact that was the big meting of jerusalem in which the apostles spelled it out and wrote about it. it was only later with heretics and others that tried bringing back circumcision, the law in parts and thus, throughout history the division became more and more bloody. This was never jesus' words, never G!d's words, but mans words to justify and rationalize the killing and murdering of Jews for one reason or another or no reason at all. The history of the church berating and killing Jews instead of lovingly upholding and helping all through the diaspor makes me want to puke and if it would do any good I too would travel back to eretz israel and apologize for others but I can't they have their own salvation to work out just as you and I do.
Another question from you to me or was this a statement?Rabbinical Judaism is based on the post-Messianic Talmud scripture. It teaches that non-Christian Jews are the sole inheritors and rejects Christianity as polytheistic. For 1800 years there was never a doubt among Christians as to their own inheritance until John Darby came along to concede the argument in favor of non-Christian Jewish inheritance
To an extent yes. BUT I've met a feww rabbi's that do not adhere to the talmud. I will step aside on this as you are stating somethnig and I think the other poster somehow lumped in with you but I never wrote this nor would I ever. I haven't read the Talmud enough. There are not a lot of differences between one form of Judaissm than another but there are significant differences but again, I'm sidestepping this. Another more intelligent person, hopefully a more qualified Jewish believer can explain this more so. In a nutshell, your style of writing is only pissing off Jews. That is not my way. The Talmud has a lot of cool wisdom, stories and such as does the mishnah in which the other poster asked a loaded question, as he asked me if I ever READ the mishnah. Certainly some is written but it has always beeen known by Jew as the oral law, in the Talmud just as is the Gemara. So yes it's written, but be careful how you answer this one. The mishnah has put me to sleep more than once What is the Misnah
Another partial staement from you
For 1800 years there was never a doubt among Christians as to their own inheritance until John Darby came along to concede the argument in favor of non-Christian Jewish inheritance.
Lastly you wrote below:
The term "replacement theology" is an artifice used to disguise the real issues at stake. If Jesus was not the Christ according to prophesy and His own words, that would make Him an impostor and Christianity a misnomer.
Jesus DID tell the truth about Himself and His Gospel is the legitimate continuation of OT religion, not a replacement. The Jewish Apostles clearly lived and died for the belief that Jesus DID come for them. Darby's Dispensationalism trades in this inheritance for a mess of pottage.
I've lost you or maybe I'm tired. there is no inheritance of land for Christian's. We're less than the jew in the diaspora. We are not of this world as jesus said he was not of this world. The only promise of land hashem wrote in HIS WORD are the verses i gave you above. There are more of the same but Jesus never promised Christians a worldly inheritance, except to take up the cross and to follow Him. if we are to truly do that, then we must lovingly conquer, not with swords( save when in war) the hearts of man through HIS WORD via HIS SPIRIT. So, I guess if you mean anything more or less than that then i don't understand you nore the continuous inferences of john darby. I laughingly look at all I've written trying to be honest with you but we have strayed so far from the incredible belessing the Amish did by shunning their way of life, flying to Israel and apologizing to the main rabbbi at the Wall. may hashem bless them for Hashem has said He will bless those who stand by Abraham and his seed, and that's what they've done. if only more churches, more of the body of Christ could show by the Amish incredible humbling example of love to Jews we just might have the stranght and power here on earth to conquer Islam and all the lies of this world. But alas, I fear only Hashem in His return will be able to fix this broken world. Until that time we have been given out marching orders.Mt 28:17-20
*whew* I'm done. Thus endeth the diatribe
And where does it say in the Torah that a Gentile cannot be taught how to properly butcher and prepare kosher food?
Look, as a Messianic synagogue with both Jews and Gentiles as members, we deal with this on a regular basis. It's really not that incredibly hard to have a mixed group sharing food that is kosher. Granted that there are proscriptions in Orthodox Judaism against letting Gentiles prepare food, but those are matters of tradition, and not of Torah per se.
1 Corinthians 9:19
So then, it is your claim that Paul was a hypocrite, pretending to be observant only around Jews but hanging out with the prostitutes when he hung out with the Gentiles. Because really, that's what you're accusing him of.
Here, let me help by fixing the mistranslations you're a victim to:
For whereas I was free as to all, I made myself the servant of all, that I might gain the more. 20 And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: 21 To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were lawless/wicked (anomos, which everywhere else in the NT is translated thus), as if I were lawless/wicked, (whereas I was not without the law of God, but was in the law of Christ,) that I might gain them that were without the law."What Paul is really saying is that he put himself in everyone else's shoes in order to communicate with them the Gospel. How does one who is already a Jew "become" a Jew to the Jews? To the Jews, he spoke in Jewish terms. To the rabbis, in rabbinic terms. To the lawless--the Gentiles--he spoke in Gentile terms, quoting Greek philosophers and using Greek rhetorical styles, for example (as in Athens). But in all this, he insists that he was not lawless himself, but was in the Law of Messiah--that is, practicing the Torah as taught and practiced by Yeshua.
Nor was Paul the first Jew to learn to speak in Gentile terms without compromising the Torah. Rabbi Hillel, Philo, and Rabban Gamaliel--Paul's own teacher--were all known for using the same techniques. The difference was that Paul was supernaturally empowered by the Spirit in his work and was able to reap a great harvest accordingly by God's grace.
The latter-day rules of the Church were based on the teachings of the Apostles.
No, they really weren't. Seriously, go read the article on Acts 21 that I've already linked you to. The Apostles were all Torah-observant Jews and expected Jewish believers in Yeshua to be more zealous for the Torah, not less.
Apostolic successors were appointed by the original Apostles . . .
And priestly successors were appointed by Aaron. When was the last time you put yourself under the authority of a Cohen? For that matter, God Himself appointed a king over the northern kingdom--and when that kingly line grew corrupt, He removed them. God allowed the Herodians and Sadducees to rule over Judea, but nevertheless repudiated them through Yeshua and ultimately took their reign away. What makes you think that the corrupt successors of the Apostles would keep their offices in God's eyes for one minute more?
And before you try to quote Matthew 16 to me, I'll remind you that in Numbers 25:13, the Eternal One who does not change His mind (Num. 23:19) gave to Phinehas and his seed the covenant of an eternal priesthood. Not until the Messiah came--Eternal. This promise is reiterated in Jer. 33:18-22. When was the last time you honored a Cohen? Indeed, you have claimed that there is no eternal Levitial priesthood and called heretics those that trust the Word of God.
Why? Because all too well you annul the Word of God for your (relatively young and novel) tradition.
The Judaizers received a thumbs down from the Apostles
And Gentilizing Jews is the exact same sin played the other way. Out of your own mouth you condemn yourself.
How about the refugees from Goshen forced to adopt the Mosaic laws?
How about them?
Christ sent the Holy Spirit to inspire the Apostles to correctly teach the true meaning of the law.
And yet it is your claim that as of Acts 21, the Apostles still were not correctly teaching the Law.
But the authority to correctly teach and to make binding rulings (to bind and loose) does not give one the authority to change the Torah. Nor do miracles give one such authority. In fact, nothing does:
Whatever thing I command you, that you shall observe to do: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it. If there arise in the midst of you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he give you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, “Let us go after other gods” (which you have not known) “and let us serve them”; you shall not listen to the words of that prophet, or to that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proves you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cling to him. That prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he has spoken rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which the LORD your God commanded you to walk in. So you shall put away the evil from the midst of you. (Deu. 12:32-13:5 [13:1-6 in Jewish Bibles]).To claim that the Eternal One, who is not a man that He might change His mind, has changed His mind is the same as calling people to worship a God other than He. To claim authority as a prophet to change the Torah is worthy of death. God told the Jewish people to keep Sabbath, Passover, Yom Kippur, the other Feasts, kosher, and pretty much every other commandment that you have been telling us not to forever.
And that is why so few Jews believe in Yeshua--because you have misrepresented Him.
It wasn't enough for you to say, "I don't think that X, Y, and Z apply to me as a Gentile." That might be acceptable. I can make the case, for example, from the Torah that kosher is not incumbent on Gentiles. But the moment that you claimed the authority to interpret the Apostles in such a way as to draw aside Jews out of the way that the Eternal God commanded us to walk, you sinned against the Word and against the Jews.
If there is a heretic here, it is the one who claims that Yeshua is not enough for the salvation of the Jews, but that it takes Yeshua plus ceasing to be a Jew and becoming a Gentile. That is another "gospel," and let any who preach it, even an angel from Heaven, be anathema.
It meant that they could return to Judea and rebuild the Temple with the full backing of the Persian empire. See Isaiah 45:1 ("Thus said the Lord to his Messiah (Maschichu = his Messiah), to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden to subdue nations.")
Mashiach just means an individual anointed by God to fulfill a particular purpose. It had no connotations of divinity before Pauline Christianity.
Amen ! Brother.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
*chuckle* No, not quite. Belief in a Kingly Messiah ben David in the 1st Century is well attested in the Talmud, Apocrypha, and Essene literature. Though I like your attention to Isaiah's prophecy.
Mashiach just means an individual anointed by God to fulfill a particular purpose. It had no connotations of divinity before Pauline Christianity
Not entirely true. You might want to read this article from the Jewish Encyclopedia to get a broader view on the topic and then, if you have the resources, dive into the Talmudic and Midrashic material cited. The idea that the Messiah would be just a man, albeit one endowed with wisdom from Hashem, is actually relatively recent, and developed largely in response to Christian claims.
It's true that you don't find Deity directly ascribed to the Messiah in the Judaica, but there are plenty of references to a quasi-divine Messiah to go on.
In any case, it has never been the belief of either Messianic Judaism or orthodox (not Orthodox, if you know the difference) Christianity that Yeshua is the entirety of Hashem incarnate. That would be ridiculous, of course. As Messianics, we find that the easiest way to explain the relationship is to postulate that in Yeshua, the Holy One placed His Sh'khinah into a Man to undertake His ultimate plan of redemption. Another way to look at it is that Yeshua is the living incarnation of the pre-existent Torah (the Word of God, to use John's terminology). I've got an article exploring this idea in brief here if you are interested.
For the record, I want no Jew to become a Christian. I will not take part in the assimilation of any Jew, whether to Christianity or secular American society. I do look forward to the day when all Israel is reconciled with Yeshua the Messiah just as the brothers of Joseph were reconciled to him, but I want any Jew who professes belief in Yeshua to become more zealous for the Torah, the traditions, and our people, not less. My children, for example, are Jews, and will be raised to be Jews. My nine-year-old daughter lit the second light of Hanukkah tonight, saying the traditional prayers.
Shalom and Hag Hanukkah Sameach!
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.