Monday, June 16, 2008

Jesus was the Messiah for the Jews and Savior of the world

PhotobucketPhotobucket
Jesus Christ King Messaih/Alred Edersheim


On the comment section of my blog, to the previous post about the ancient church, there is a squabble brewing between myself and a guy who claims to follow "Yeshua." He's not a typical Messianic Jew because rejects the Gospels and believes that Jesus, although Messiah, was totally pharisee and would be utterly against any form of the Christian Gospel. I can't help but see this as an attempt to divert Jews from an interest in Jesus to a form of Orthodoxy that recasts Jesus in the shade of Tovia Singer (notorious anti-missionary). The links between Jesus and the early church are solid. Do not let any convince you that they have any sort of secret historical information that would pit Jesus against the church. We do not know this. The only valid evidence we have of Jesus from history is the New Testament documents, the scant traces of remembrance in the "Apostolic fathers" and tantalizing suggestions and speculative maybes teased out of apocryphal literature. There is no secret cache of Rabbinical docs that tell us anything of any real substance about Jesus.

There are some hints in the Talmud. There are a few passages that may talk about him. But these are not of any length and they confirm his existence and few facts about him but nothing more. They do not show us any reason to believe that he was opposed to any sort of teaching that would latter be associated with the Church.The odd thing is that most Orthodox Jews will try to deny that Jesus is in the Talmud at all. The Talmudic passages pretty much prove that Jesus existed. They don't prove much more and most of what they say is defaming propaganda. You can read more about this on my website, Doxa.


Photobucket


The real issue between me and Anders is not so much Jesus, as Paul. I'm sure he rejects Paul as a total hieratic. The Jewish Christians of Jesus day saw him as the man of lawlessness foretold in Daniel. But that doesn't mean they were right. The Jewish Christian church disappears from history in the fourth century, probably re assimilated since it was totally cut off from its gentile counterparts, and dependent upon its Jewish roots for survive. There is no secret repository of Jewish info that disproves the link between Jesus and the church. The Gospels were written by communities started by Jesus' earliest disciples. They followed the Apostles. The Apostles appointed Bishops to guard the teachings that Jesus entrusted to them. The communities produced wittings that would preserve the testimony of the earliest disciples. The Bishops, chosen by Apostles and latter handed down in sequence after their time from prior Bishops, eventually decided which of these works were to be put in special list and given primary status as "cannon."

The problem with these pseudo Orthodox Messianic groups is that They never understand that Judaism was not the same in Jesus day as it is now. It was very diverse. There were groups who absolutely opposed the Pharisees. The probability is high that the twelve Apostles represented heterodox factions that where not Pharisees. Anders tries to appeal to the dead sea scrolls to link Jesus to Pharisees. But the only quote he has that the Pharisees accepted the Tenach. That is not proof that the Qumran sect accepted the Pharisees.

Andres (see comment section):

It’s documented in 4Q MMT Qumran Dead Seascrolls that Pharisees followed Torah including Halakhah.
He would have been a false prophet according to Devarim (some translate it Deuteronomy) 13:1-6.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0513.htm


The reason the Qumran sect was in the desert was to escape the faction that stile the priesthood and murdered their guy, the teacher of righteousness who was the valid high priest. In his place the put the wicked priest, and that faction became the Pharisees. The diversity of Judaism is important because it means that the pharisees could not claim they were the true and proper Jews. The only reason the modern Talmudists claim that is because they descended from the pharisees. In AD 70 when the temple was destoryed, the heterodox factions, which were numerous, either died fighting or they had become Christians already. The only surviving faction were the pharisees so by default they got to claim Judaism as their own. But prior to that time there were facts that were messianic, claiming to have the true messiah, claiming to know who he would be when he would come. The pharisees were not doing that. the Qumran guys were doing that. That's a dead giveaway as to why the Pharisees hated Jesus. Anders tries to blame the Saducees for Jesus' execution but it was the pharisees who had the high priesthood and controlled the sandhedron and they are the wones who did Jesus' trial and who crucified him. After the Pharisees took control they began to change the expectations about Messiah. They moved away form the LXX and adopted a new Greek Translation that did not put things the way the LXX did because the LXX is what the chruch used to claim Jesus was Messiah. The Pharisees took out the bits about the Messiah being rejected and executed and returning.

The diversity of Judaism in the second temple period is well documented.

see First Century Jewish Expectations of Messiah (on my website, Doxa).


The Diversity of First century Judaism:"The Essenic movment and heterodox Judaism spread throughout the entire Jewish world. Reflecting the power of the 'splinded isolation' that gave rise to the Hasiedan movement.... Pharisaic Judaism and Christinity represent different offshoots of old Testament religion. The one emphasized the Law of Moses but in terms of oral tradition and adaptability of ancient revelation to contemporary conditions. The other places stress on prophecy and fullfillment of promises in terms of the Messianic fulfillment....It is clear that the Essenes were closer to the Jewish-Christian in terms of Messianic expectation and eschatological fulfillment, although they were at different points on the time table. Thus the people of Qumran awaited royal and preistly Messiahs, while in the New Testament the term "Messiah" is clearly of the Dividic King."

--Gallayah Cornfeld, Archaeology of The Bible Book by Book, New York: Harper and Row, 1976, p. 265.



I. Diversity of Judaism in frist century Palestine.


Most Chrsitian arguments about fulfillment of Messianch prophesies seem unbelievable to skeptics, and that's because we really don't understand the way the early chruch looked at them. We tend to look at them and say "how could so many predictions be fulfilled? The odds are agaisnt it being a natural occurrence." Yet most of these things do not look like prophecies. This is because they did not have the notion of statistical probability. They didn't look at it in that way.They excepted Jesus as Messiah because of his teachings, his miracles and his character, plus some superficial fulfillments such as his linage and place of birth.But the real rason the early church looked at prophsey was to explain his death. Jesus died a shameful death, wehreas the Messiah was expected to reign in triumph. Upon closer examination they realized that there were deeper assumptions and that Jesus fit them, more importantly, his death was in the plan of God for the Messiah. As we look at these expectations which people in Jesus day had for the Messiah,we realize that the stroy they describe is the story of Jesus, right down to his death and ressurrection.

A. Diversity of Jewish Outlook.


It is alledged by Jewish expositors today that the verses sited in the Gospels pertaining to Jesus fulfillment of Messianic prophecy are not really Messianic verses. Hence, the expositors argue, Jesus did not fulfill any propheicies because the Jews did not expect a Messiah like Jesus. They argue the Messianich expectations were never applied to the verses that Christians have sited for 2000 years.

However, ther were many groups, with a diversity of expectations, that even verses wich don't seem to apply at all can be assumed to apply.After all, why whould the Jews of the first century be so daft as to just allow someone to come and tell them what their expectations were? Wouldn't they know? The main point of this page is to argue that he actual Messianic passages and expecations of the Messiah held by the Jews of Jesus day were not only fulfilled by him, but that they actually mark out the Jesus story as it is presnted in the Gospels, with the exception of those verses that pertain to the end of times, but even where those are concenred the Jews expected a gap between the first appearance of the Messiah and his eventual Kingdom.

Rabbinical tradition of Jesus' time was diverse. Judaism today is nothing like it was in the first century."Judaism has not stood still and what may apply for the fourth century may be wholly misleading if applied to the time in which Jesus lived." (Neil, 295). After the temple was destroyed in AD70 several sub-traditions and factions were swept away. Essntially only the Pharaseical tradition survived and became the mainstream of what we know as Judaism today. The Essenic type survived, and became the Hassidem, but they are less "mainstream." The Hassiedics are more fringe, being niether Orthodox, nor conservative, nor even liberal. The groups that were swept away were the bitter rivals of the pharasees. Their opinions are not recognized, and they are forgotten. We can see the efforts of the surviving tradition to change certian facts which favored Christian views. First, the LXX (Greek Translation of the Old Testament) was the favored text for Hellenized judaism before the destruction. It was also the Bible of the early chruch because it favored the Christian views of prophecy. Don't forget, it has already been documented taht the LXX renders Pslam 22 as "peirced hands and feet," and that the LXX is closer to the Dead Sea Scroll. In the early second century Judaism produced another Greek translation, "Aquilla's translation" which replaced the LXX and was taylored to be less Messianic (Steven Neil, The Interpritation of the New Testament).


On the same page see my argument:
Christianity emerged from Heterodox Factions.

quoting from Robert Eisenman (Pof. of Middle East Religions and chair of Religious Studies Department at California state University Long Beach) and Michael Wise (Arimaic, University of Chicago) "So what do we have in these manuscripts? Probably nothing less than a picture of the movement from which Chrsitiantiy sprang in Palestine. But there is more--if we take into consideration the Messianic nature of these texts [Dead Sea Scrolls] we delieniate it in this book, and allied concepts such as 'righteousness,' 'piety,' 'works,' 'justification,' 'the poor, ' 'mysteries,'was we have is a picture of what Chrsitinatity actually was in Palestine....we cannot really speak of a Chrstianity per se in Palestine in the first century. The word was only coined as Acts 11;26 makes clear, to describe a situation in Antioch in Syria in the fifties of the present era. Latter it was coined to describe a large portion of the over seas world that became 'chirstian,' but this Christiaintiy was completely different form the movement..." (Rober Eisenman and Michael Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, Shaftisburry, Dorset: Element, 1992, 10)

Eisenman and Wise go on to point out that the Christiantiy of James' circle was legalistic, law oriented, and that their vocabulary was right out of the Scrolls of Qumran; their concepts, their orientation to life, while the Pauline group was its mirror opposite transforming law orieneted notions into Grace. They then go on and speak of the movement which produced the Scrolls, wheather it be called "Saducess, Essene, or Zealot, terms which they find all have some applicability but all really miss the Mark. The Qumran community was warlike, militant, but bore commonalities with all these groups including the Jewish Chrsitians. The say of the movment of which Qumran must have been a part:

"IT is for these reasons that we felt it more appropriate to refer tot he movmeent we have before us [Qurman] as a'Messianic' one, and its literature as the literature of 'the Messianic Movement' in Palestine. In so faar as this literature resembles Essenism, it can be called, Essene, Zealotism, Zealot';Sadduceeism, Sadducee; Jueish Christiantiy--whatever might be meant by that term--Jewish Chrsitian." (11)..
"In fact what one seems to have reflected in this Qumran literature is a Messianic elite retreating or 'separating' into the wilderness as per Isa. 40:3's make a straight way inth eWilderness for our God.'

Though they differ in many detalis, this conclusion has much in common with that of John Allegro who demonstrated many parallels between the Qumran community and the early Chruch, espeically in their view of the Messiah (Dead Sea Scrolls, Pelican, 1956). There is, therefore, no basis for the charge that the early chruch made up any of its Messianich claims.




Clearly there were many diverse vews and many groups: The Essens, the Theraputae, Ebionites. Elkasites, Sadducees, and many more. Jesus fullfilled totally the expectations of many of these groups, as the Elkasties and Ebionites became Christian.

A great deal of the evidence in this section comes form a priceless work of great scholarship The Life And Times of Jesus The Messiah An old 19th century work by Alfred Edersheim; an English Jew who converted to Christianity and became a Cambridge scholar. Edersheim compillied a list of 458 passages which rabbinical authority sites as Messianich. He uses theTargumim, the two Talmuds, The most ancient Midrashim but not the Zohar. Also the uses a work called Yalkut, a collection of 50 of the oldest writtings in rabbinical tradition. Most, but not all of what Edersheim quotes comes from the second century or latter. But he argues that is still an indication of the some ideas floating around in the popular quarters in Christ's time, especially ideas which show up in the NT since we can discount chrsitian influence upon Talmudic Judaism. But the evidence from Qumran and Psuedapigrapha is clearly prior to, or contemporanious with, the time of Jesus.



One of the finest soruces we can produce for Jesus Messianic credentials is the classic work Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. by Alfred Edersheim. Edersheim was trained to be a rabbi, he was a linguistic genius who became a Christian in College. He latter became a professor at both Oxford and Cambrige. I once communicated by email with his great Nephew, who told me many interesting things about his family. The most interesting is that Edersheim ran a ministry to the homeless in his hovel of a house, before he was discovered and made a professor. In the day he worked as minsiter and took in homeless and late and night eaked out his book over the years.

One can now find the text of this work on line Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah

Edersheim also wrote a history of the Jewish high preisthood, an article which explains the developments, some of which I speak of above. This can also be found on line.

here is a page about Ederhseim's life.


see all My Messiah Pages on Doxa

17 comments:

Seeker said...

"The Jewish Christians of Jesus day saw him as the man of lawlessness foretold in Daniel."

That's an interesting assertion - do you have some references I could explore along these lines?

Anders said...

You accuse us – Netzarim (Ribi Yehoshuas followers – of deceiving others. Where are your proofs? We have to differentiate between the historical Ribi Yehoshua and between the Christian “Jesus”.
The historical Ribi Yehoshua is a pro-Torah – an Pharisee – a popular Jewish leader; his Torah-teachings attracting thousand.

Who was the historical Ribi Yehoshua from Nazareth? This has been hidden for Christians for centuries, but now it’s possible for Christians to read the un-redacted teachings of the historical Ribi Yehoshua. It is exciting times that we are living in!

As the earliest church historians, most eminent modern university historians, our web site (see further down in this post) and our Khavruta (Distance Learning) texts confirm, the original teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua were not only accepted by most of the Pharisaic Jewish community, he had hoards of Jewish students. Contrary to popular Christian assumptions, the standards of the Jewish community didn't cause the "break."

“Rather, as Oxford historian-scholar James Parkes indisputedly demonstrates in his book, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, it was the teachings that were perverted between the first and fourth centuries C.E. The first century teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua and his original Netzarim were acceptable in the Jewish community. Fourth century Christianity was the polar opposite to the original first century Pharisaic Torah teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua and his original Netzarim followers. Consequently, the Roman perversion of those teachings was never in the Jewish community at all! Ribi Yәhoshua's authentic teachings were never rejected by the Jews! And the perversion of those teachings by the Roman pagans, Christianity, was never in the Jewish community in the first place. There was no transition between the two!”

If you want to learn about the Historical Ribi Yehoshua, whom Orthodox Jews can live with (witness the Netzarim Jews in Raanana, Israel, members in good standing in an Orthodox synagogue), you must start with books like How Jesus Became Christian by Prof. Barrie Wilson (most bookstores) and Who Are The Netzarim? (publ. www.schuellerhouse.com) by Israeli Orthodox Jew, Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David.

The Pharisees indeed accepted Ribi Yehoshuas – Mashiakhs – followers Netzarim as legitimate in what corresponds to todays Orthodox Jewish-community

“Jamliyeil. This is the Yemenite Jewish pronunciation. Other Jews pronounce this "Gamlieil" (or Gamliel).
Nâsi of the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol ("Gamaliel, Rabban," EJ 7:295) beginning ca. 20 C.E. (Chronology of the Tan"kh from the 'Big Bang').
Filtering, as far as possible, all Christian redactions and interpretations and translating directly from the earliest extant source documents to reconstruct Hebrew Ma•avâr 5.34-40:

"And a certain man of the rabbinic-Pәrushim in the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol named Jamliyeil, a teacher of Torâh esteemed by all of the kinsmen, rose up and ordered that the [Nәtzârim] Shәlikhim be excused from [the proceedings] for a short time. Then he addressed the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol saying,

'Men, Bәnei-Yisrâ•eil, take heed to yourselves what you intend to impose upon these men; for in earlier days [Hellenist Greek] Theudas rose up claiming to be the Mâshiakh and had a following of about 400 men. He was taken up, and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed and came to nothing. After him, in the days of the census, Yәhudâh of the Gâlil rose up and incited the am to stray and follow him. But he was finally brought to an end and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed. And now I tell you, Turn aside from these men, tolerate them, because if this counsel or this work is of men it will cease. But if it be of Ëlohim, then you will not be able to make them cease and, in that case, you would also be found to be fighters against Ëlohim…'
"So the Pәrushim-dominated Beit-Din ha-Jâdol was persuaded by him but, having recalled the Shәlikhim, the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoqim whipped them and conveyed instructions to them that they should not speak in the name of Ribi Yәhoshua, and released them."
Until ca. 20 C.E., the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol had been predominated by the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoqim. It wasn't Pәrushim (predecessors of today's Orthodox rabbis) who defied the explicit instruction of their first, and very own, Pәrushim Nâsi, Jamliyeil, and the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol to whip the Nәtzârim or order them to cease.”

Quote from: www.netzarim.co.il ; for example in ”Glossaries”

From Anders Branderud
www.netzarim.co.il – click at “Christians” (in our first page).

J.L. Hinman said...

"The Jewish Christians of Jesus day saw him as the man of lawlessness foretold in Daniel."

That's an interesting assertion - do you have some references I could explore along these lines?

the "him" in that sentence refers to Paul not Jesus. They saw Paul as the man of lawlessness. I am talking about groups like the Ebionites and The Elkasites.

sources: a book called Anti-Pauline Polemic in Early Christian Judaism. Author's name escapes me I'll try to look it up. Also see the quotes in the post or the page linked on early Jewish Messianic expectations.

J.L. Hinman said...

on those sourcs read the works of Heggesipius. I'm not sure if he was second, third, or foruth century, but he was a Jewish Christian and talked about their groups.

J.L. Hinman said...

You accuse us – Netzarim (Ribi Yehoshuas followers – of deceiving others. Where are your proofs?


did you read the post?




We have to differentiate between the historical Ribi Yehoshua and between the Christian “Jesus”.
The historical Ribi Yehoshua is a pro-Torah – an Pharisee – a popular Jewish leader; his Torah-teachings attracting thousand.


no, that's your version of the historical Jesus. It is no more accurate than the church's version. We don't know anything about the Historical Jesus. We can't go back in time and observe him and we don't have the materials existing today to document everything we need to know. All we have is our own reconstructions of what we want Jesus to be.

Who was the historical Ribi Yehoshua from Nazareth? This has been hidden for Christians for centuries, but now it’s possible for Christians to read the un-redacted teachings of the historical Ribi Yehoshua. It is exciting times that we are living in!


No is it not! that is clearly a deceptive statement. anyone making such a vast claim is clearly cought up in an ideological propaganda pep rally.

As the earliest church historians, most eminent modern university historians, our web site (see further down in this post) and our Khavruta (Distance Learning) texts confirm, the original teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua were not only accepted by most of the Pharisaic Jewish community, he had hoards of Jewish students. Contrary to popular Christian assumptions, the standards of the Jewish community didn't cause the "break."


that's a total exaggeration. Yes of course he had a hoard of Jewish followers. that does not mean that your cult is heir or privy to their thinking. You do not have the materials and you do not know them and you are not the heir.

bull about "leading scholars." you don't know any leading scholars. tell me their names! All the leading scholars are still looking for the historical Jesus because they know the most valid sources are still in the Gospels.


“Rather, as Oxford historian-scholar James Parkes indisputedly demonstrates in his book, The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, it was the teachings that were perverted between the first and fourth centuries C.E.


that has nothing to do with the issues. here. Of course they were. that has is not an argument in your favor. Because that doesn't mean that you are not further distorting them by trying to pattern them after modern day Orthodox Judaism which is different form Judaism o Jesus' day. Nor does it mean that the church in the first century distorted them or in the second.

I said "the church" not your cult. the church. The one that became the catholic/Orthodox split.




The first century teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua and his original Netzarim were acceptable in the Jewish community. Fourth century Christianity was the polar opposite to the original first century Pharisaic Torah teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua and his original Netzarim followers. Consequently, the Roman perversion of those teachings was never in the Jewish community at all!


you have no knowledge of that. where are your sources?

what are you turning to for proof?





Ribi Yәhoshua's authentic teachings were never rejected by the Jews!

what about they crucified him? why did the Sanhedrin let him be crucified?


And the perversion of those teachings by the Roman pagans, Christianity, was never in the Jewish community in the first place. There was no transition between the two!”


No, they were in the mind of Paul. that's why Paul was drafted by Jesus, becasue he was the most brilliant Rabbi. He was a natural born theologian. he did what every good theologian does. He systematized the faith.

can you be specific about these issues of which you speak?


If you want to learn about the Historical Ribi Yehoshua, whom Orthodox Jews can live with (witness the Netzarim Jews in Raanana, Israel, members in good standing in an Orthodox synagogue)

tell me they are not laughed at. they sure are. Jesus is mocked by Israelis and the Messianic are mocked mercilessly. I know Israelis.

, you must start with books like How Jesus Became Christian by Prof. Barrie Wilson (most bookstores) and Who Are The Netzarim? (publ. www.schuellerhouse.com) by Israeli Orthodox Jew, Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David.

Yes but those books do not connect him to your cult. Youa re using those books as a valid bassi to spring into your own group that then departs form it by modeling it after Orthodox Judaism.

The Pharisees indeed accepted Ribi Yehoshuas – Mashiakhs – followers Netzarim as legitimate in what corresponds to todays Orthodox Jewish-community


they crucified him. they changed the Greek Trnaslation to destroy the connection, they cursed his followers. lied about mother and said she was a whore. they really followed him so closely. Haven't you read the Talmud?

“Jamliyeil. This is the Yemenite Jewish pronunciation. Other Jews pronounce this "Gamlieil" (or Gamliel).

I know how he is. that doesn't mean that your group is doing everything of which he would aprove.

He was Pauls teacher. Paul's ideas of Christianity are just based upon his teachings. you need to read Paul



Nâsi of the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol ("Gamaliel, Rabban," EJ 7:295) beginning ca. 20 C.E. (Chronology of the Tan"kh from the 'Big Bang').
Filtering, as far as possible, all Christian redactions and interpretations and translating directly from the earliest extant source documents to reconstruct Hebrew Ma•avâr 5.34-40:

"And a certain man of the rabbinic-Pәrushim in the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol named Jamliyeil, a teacher of Torâh esteemed by all of the kinsmen, rose up and ordered that the [Nәtzârim] Shәlikhim be excused from [the proceedings] for a short time. Then he addressed the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol saying,

'Men, Bәnei-Yisrâ•eil, take heed to yourselves what you intend to impose upon these men; for in earlier days [Hellenist Greek] Theudas rose up claiming to be the Mâshiakh and had a following of about 400 men. He was taken up, and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed and came to nothing. After him, in the days of the census, Yәhudâh of the Gâlil rose up and incited the am to stray and follow him. But he was finally brought to an end and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed. And now I tell you, Turn aside from these men, tolerate them, because if this counsel or this work is of men it will cease. But if it be of Ëlohim, then you will not be able to make them cease and, in that case, you would also be found to be fighters against Ëlohim…'

that jibes harmoniously with what he says in ACTS


"So the Pәrushim-dominated Beit-Din ha-Jâdol was persuaded by him but, having recalled the Shәlikhim, the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoqim whipped them and conveyed instructions to them that they should not speak in the name of Ribi Yәhoshua, and released them."
Until ca. 20 C.E., the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol had been predominated by the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoqim. It wasn't Pәrushim (predecessors of today's Orthodox rabbis) who defied the explicit instruction of their first, and very own, Pәrushim Nâsi, Jamliyeil, and the Beit-Din ha-Jâdol to whip the Nәtzârim or order them to cease.”


Is that in the TAlmud? where i sit published? I would like to point out to Jesus mythers this proves Jesus existed in hisotry and that's he's in the Talmud.

for that reason I need you to tell me where this is found. be clear about the source. can you show me how to get it? is it on line?


Quote from: www.netzarim.co.il ; for example in ”Glossaries”

From Anders Branderud
www.netzarim.co.il – click at “Christians” (in our first page).


you need to deal with Paul. none of that indicates that the group you are in today is really carrying on for Jesus. I agree with you that the church became corrupted. that doesn't prove your group is right.

Eliyahu said...

From what I have read, Anders apparently has done his homework and done it well.

J.L. Hinman said...

From what I have read, Anders apparently has done his homework and done it well.

3:35 PM

Hey Silverstein still around hu? Anders believes Jesus is the messiah. that's a total contradiction to your world view.

I'm still waiting for him to show me some kind of source on Jesus teachings? why would think he he's done his homework when he doesn't know that the Qumran guys opposed the pharisees?

A Hermit said...

"We don't know anything about the Historical Jesus...All we have is our own reconstructions of what we want Jesus to be."

Interesting admission there, Joe...

Why do you get so upset with atheists and agnostics when they make the same point?

J.L. Hinman said...

Why do you get so upset with atheists and agnostics when they make the same point
I don't. I get upset with them for saying Jesus didn't exist. There's a huge difference in saying we have mych info on Jesus in history and saying he didn't exist at all.

obviously I spoke hyperbolically I didn't mean "we don't ANYTHING" we know some times. not as much as one might think.

I notice that guy has not come back and is not showing me where these alleged teachings are found.

Anders said...

You have not read the books I referred to.
Oxford Historian-Scholar James Parkes - "The conflict of the church and Synagouge" is a book you need to read.

You will find the answers in our website. If you check our glossaries for example at: "Perushim" and "Tzedoqim".
You will find a lot of references to Scholars in our website - I don't have time to retype all information here just because you are lazy.

I will focus on the central point. :

Devarim 13:1-6 has always been interpreted in the way I interpret it and if you read it in Hebrew it is the only way to interpret it. The verse is crystal clear!!!

You follow a false prophet according to Devarim 13:1-6 and you are trying to evade it.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua - Mashiakh (some translate it Mashiakh) - in Orthodox Judaism
If you want to learn more about my life and religion; then click at our website www.netzarim.co.il -- than click at the link "Christians" – then click at my photo.

Anders said...

Surely I don't read to need Paul.

I studied him extensively when I was a Christian.

"The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius also documented that the Nәtzarim excised Saul, thereafter referred to exclusively as Paul, judging him an apostate (EH III.xxvii.4; see also NT corroboration in Ma·avar 15.41 with note 15.41.0 of Appendix V in Atonement In the Biblical 'New Covenant' (ABNC)."

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua - Mashiakh (some translate it Mashiakh) - in Orthodox Judaism
If you want to learn more about my life and religion; then click at our website www.netzarim.co.il -- than click at the link "Christians" – then click at my photo.

J.L. Hinman said...

You have not read the books I referred to.
Oxford Historian-Scholar James Parkes - "The conflict of the church and Synagouge" is a book you need to read.


You are distroting the evidence. that guy will not agree that your cult is the true chruch. will he? No. you know better than that.

Certainly Eusebius would take Paul's side over yours. Your cult knows of the existence of the Ebionites and other such groups and identifies with them so assume sthey are the true followers becasue they want them to be. it has nothing to with facts, it is purely a matter of prejudice.


You will find the answers in our website. If you check our glossaries for example at: "Perushim" and "Tzedoqim".
You will find a lot of references to Scholars in our website - I don't have time to retype all information here just because you are lazy.

anyone can quote scholars and misuse them. you aer misusing them because you don't agree with you. You don't accept as authorities except int he matters that you want to use them for,. you know this. you don't accept Eusebius notions becasue he was Orthodox Christian. he would say you are the liar, you know he would.

there's a good chance I've more of those guys than you have. I went to seminary I have a Masters degree in theology I read Greek.


I will focus on the central point. :

Devarim 13:1-6 has always been interpreted in the way I interpret it and if you read it in Hebrew it is the only way to interpret it. The verse is crystal clear!!!


again that' just playing a little game. I use Hebrew words, that' means I'm Heberw so I know mor tahn you so I can claim secret knoweldge and you have to believe me. No I don't have to believe you. Quote the Egnlish tranlstino. is that a talmudic source? where do I find it?

It's not evidential if it is available only to you and I can't check it out.


You follow a false prophet according to Devarim 13:1-6 and you are trying to evade it.

So why should I value that?why is that an authority?

moreover I don't beileve you even give a rat's ass about "YESHUA" or Jesus or whomever, because you don't seem to care about fighting those who deny he eixisted.

I think you are confused. lonely, some kind of anti-missionaries befriended you and you are trying to please them by spouting a line you really don't understand.




11:55 AM

J.L. Hinman said...

Surely I don't read to need Paul.

I studied him extensively when I was a Christian.

You didn't understand him. you are not spouting the line of someone who understands Paul. you are spouting the line of the aniti-missionaries whose only aim is to screw Christianity.

"The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius also documented that the Nәtzarim excised Saul, thereafter referred to exclusively as Paul, judging him an apostate (EH III.xxvii.4; see also NT corroboration in Ma·avar 15.41 with note 15.41.0 of Appendix V in Atonement In the Biblical 'New Covenant' (ABNC)."

what? are you saying that these archine Talmudic sources are NT? what? what are you saying?

why should I care what the Judaisers of Paul's day who did not understand his teaching had to say about him?

J.L. Hinman said...

Paul warns of those who will come who confrom to an image of godliness but dney the power thereof.

I have yet to hear you speak of the power of God. have you ever had an experience of God's presence?

what about your belief Yeshua. do you not know him as savior? you only him on paper? you don't actually "know him" as one who has experienced the power of God in his life does!

David V.S. said...

Thanks for writing this long rebuttal to Anders. I'll link to it where I have a rebuttal to him on my blog, here.

David V.S. said...

You wrote:

"The Jewish Christians of Jesus day saw him [Paul] as the man of lawlessness foretold in Daniel."

This is new to me. Would you please do me a favor and discuss this more?

Thank you!

J.L. Hinman said...

"The Jewish Christians of Jesus day saw him [Paul] as the man of lawlessness foretold in Daniel."

This is new to me. Would you please do me a favor and discuss this more?

"Jewish Christians" as used by Corfeld are distinct from just any Jew who happened to be a Christian. They were a certain set of groups with some tangential links to the Jerusalem church. Not necessarily synonymous with the Jerusalem church of James. they include extremists groups such as the Elkasites and the Ebionites. Epephanius writes about them.