Nazarene Space

Nazarenes and the Oral Law
By James Trimm

There has been a great deal of discussion in the movement today over how
we as Nazarenes should view Jewish tradition, Oral Law and the Talmud.

Now it is important to understand the first century world from which
Nazarene Judaism emerged. There were three major sects of Judaism at the
time: Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes.

The first century writer Josephus writes of the Pharisees:

"...the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by
succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of
Moses;..."
(Josephus; Ant. 13:11:6)

The Pharisees became what is known as Rabbinic Judaism and eventually
wrote these traditions (known as "Oral Law") down in the Mishna and later
the Talmud. The Mishna and Talmud are not the Oral Law, but they do contain
the Oral Law as recorded by the Pharisees.

The core of the Talmud is the Mishna. The Mishna was complied around 250
CE by Rabbi Y’hudah Ha Nasi from ealier oral and/or written traditions.
It cites the opinions or Rabbis and teachers who lived in the generation
immediately following Ezra and Nehemiah, up until the time of its
composition. The Talmud was compiled around 500 CE and consists of the
Mishna written in Hebrew and the commentary to the Mishna, known as the
Gemara, surrounding it in Aramaic characters.

The Sadducees rejected these traditions, as Josephus continues:

"...for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we
are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written
word, but are not to observe what are delivered from the tradition of our
forefathers..."
(ibid)

The Sadducees HAD to reject the Oral Law. They did not believe in a resurrection or an afterlife. They had rejected the things that Judaism has always held to. It was hard enough to make their views compatible with the Written Torah, it was easier for them to simply reject the Oral Torah out of hand. In fact they HAD to reject the Oral Law if they wanted to reject any understanding of the written Torah that included a resurrection and an afterlife!

Then there were the Essenes, these are they who are believed to have
written the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Essenes did not reject the concept of
Oral Law, as the Sadducees did, but they did have an ALTERNATE set of such
traditions, many of which are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the
Scrolls is a document called MMT ("Some of the Works of teh Torah). In
this document the Essenes point out some of their differences with the
Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna. For example in the Mishna (Hullin
4:1-5) there is an Oral tradition forbidding the eating of the fetus of a
slaughtered animal, while item 12 in MMT allows the eating of such a
fetus. Many of the points addressed in MMT are addressed directly at
points of Oral Torah found in the Mishna. Essenes did not reject the Oral
Torah, they had their own understanding of it.

Now our Nazarene forefathers had roots in Pharisaic Judaism and in Essene
Judaism but not in Sadduceean Judaism.

Yeshua's teachings often echoed those of the famous Pharisaic teacher
Hillel. When Yeshu was still a child Hillel taught "Do not do to others
what you would not have them do to you" while Yeshua grew up to teach "do
onto others as you would have them do to you."

The Nazarenes also clearly had roots in Essene Judaism. There is evidence
that Yochanan the immerser ("John the Baptist") came out of the Qumran
community. Several of Yeshua's Talmidim (including Kefa) had first been
talmidim of Yochanan. Both the Essenes and the Nazarenes called
themselves "The Way" and "Sons of Light".

The Esseneic and Pharisaic origins of Nazarene Judaism are easily
documented and could fill volumes. I have reduced them here to a short
paragraph each.

The written Torah is not complete in itself. Instead it presupposes that the reader also has access to additional information. For example the observance of Torah involves the use of the Hebrew calendar. Nowhere does the written Torah tell us the inner workings of this calendar, it presupposes that this information was also passed down to us orally by our forefathers.

There are actually two types of “Oral Law” and they are very different from one another.

The first is Oral Torah from Sinai. Moshe was on Mt. Sinai for forty days. During this time her received much of the material that we know as the Written Torah as recorded in the five books of Moses. However if one to get the five books of Moses as a “books on tape” edition, it would not take anywhere near forty days to listen to them. It would not even take one day to listen to them. So is this ALL the information Moses received on Mount Sinai? Why does Leviticus 26:46 say that Moses received “Laws” (plural) on Mount Sinai? Could he have received Torah She-Bi-Khatav (The Written Torah) and Torah She-Al-Peh (The Oral Torah)?

As we stated earlier, there is not sufficient information in the written Torah to allow it to be observed without some additional information.

For example the written Torah says not to go out of ones “place” on the Sabbath (Ex. 16:29) but just what does this mean? If the Sabbath starts and I am in the latrine, must I stay there until it is over? If I am in my home and the Sabbath starts, must I wait until the Sabbath end to go out to the latrine? Does it mean I cannot leave my house? my yard? my city? Surely the ancient Hebrews (our forefathers) asked Moses what this commandment meant. Did Moses shrug his shoulders and say “heck if I know”, or was this part of the information he also received on Mount Sinai? If so then our forefathers had this information. Is this what the Psalmist means when he says:

1: Give ear, O my people, to my Torah: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2: I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:
3: Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us.
4: We will not hide them from their children, showing to the generation to come the praises of YHWH, and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done.
(Ps. 78:1-4)

Another example can be found in Deut. 12:21 which tells us that if we live to far from the Temple and need to slaughter an animal to eat, YHWH says we may do so as long as we do it “as I [YHWH] have commanded you”. But there are no instructions for the ritual slaughter of an animal in the written Torah. This commandment of the written Torah must be alluding to an oral companion to the written Torah.

One can give many more examples. What does it mean not to “work” on the Shabbat? what constitutes “work”? How does one “celebrate” the Shabbat (Ex. 31:16)? What constitutes a “Bill of Divorcement” (Deut. 24:1f) what is it supposed to say?

When Ezra read the Torah to the people in Nehemiah 8:1-8, he and the Levites also “gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading” (8:7-8). They gave them an oral companion to the written text:

1: And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spoke unto Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Torah of Moses, which YHWH had commanded to Israel.
2: And Ezra the priest brought the Torah before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.
3: And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the Book of the Torah.
4: And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.
5: And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up:
6: And Ezra blessed YHWH, the great Elohim. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped YHWH with their faces to the ground.
7: Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the Torah: and the people stood in their place.
8: So they read in the Book in the Torah of Elohim distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
(Nehemiah 8:1-8)

When the old Worldwide Church of God began observing the biblical festivals, one of the problems they ran into was how to celebrate them. Only sketchy information is given in the written Torah on many of these festivals (we will revisit this issue again later in this article in relation to Yeshua’s observances of Sukkot and Passover).

When it comes to answering these questions, we can turn to the understandings our forefathers had of these things, which they passed down to us orally, or we can make something up. Short of a mutually accepted pipeline to Elohim, those are our only choices.

Another form of Oral Law are the decrees from the Elders. The Elders are said to have ha the “halachic authority”. Halachic authority is the authority to make halachic determinations interpreting the Torah forbidding and permitting activities based on these interpretations (for example if a matter came up which was not settled by the written Torah), and resolving matters between fellow believers. The word "halacha" means "the way to walk." Torah observance requires halachic authority for three reasons. First there are matters about which the written Torah is ambiguous and must be clarified. Secondly is the matter of conflicting Torah commands. For example the Torah requires the priests to circumcise on the eight day after a birth, but also requires rest from work on the Sabbath. Which commandment holds priority? Finally the Torah requires us to establish courts (Deut. 16:18).

In the Torah the Halachic authority was originally held by Moses himself (Ex. 18:13) but later a council of Elders were appointed (Ex. 18:13-26; Dt. 1:9-18) These Elders showed men "the way wherein they must walk" (i.e. Halacha) (Ex. 18:20) Their judgments were regarded as the judgment of Elohim himself (Dt. 1:17) and were even called "Torah" (Dt. 17:11) At first these men had authority only in small matters (Ex. 18:22, 26; Dt. 1:17) but later their authority was expanded (Dt. 17:8). This council was later defined as seventy Elders whom Elohim placed his Spirit upon (Num. 11:16-17; 24-25).

The decrees of these elders added to the body of what was known as the “Oral Law” in much the same was as “legal precedence” does in secular law today.

One classic example of a matter settled by a Decree of the Elders was the issue of circumcision on the Sabbath. Circumcision is commanded to be done on the eighth day (Gen. 17:11) yet on every seventh day no work is allowed (Ex. 20:10). The Elders decreed that the commandment to circumcise on the eighth day held priority over the commandment to rest on the Sabbath (as recorded in the Mishna m.Shabbat 18:3-19:2 and in the Talmud b.Shabbat 128a). Yeshua alluded to and agreed with this Decree of the Elders when he said:

If a man is circumcised on the day of the Sabbath
that the Torah of Moshe be not loosed,
do you murmur against me because
I have healed a whole man on the Sabbath day?
(Jn. 7:23)

Similarly we read in the Talmud:

Rabbi Eleazar answered and said: If circumcision
which attaches to one only of the two hundred and
forty eight members of the human body, suspends
the Sabbath, how much more shall [the saving of]
the whole body suspend the Sabbath!
b.Yoma 85b

Yeshua clearly advocated and recognized the authority of these Elders when he said such things as “…whoever shall say to his brother, RAKA, shall be liable to the Sanhedrin…” (Mt. 5:22) and “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat…” (Mt. 23:1).

At the same time Yeshua also took issue with the Decrees of the Elders when they conflicted with Scripture (Mt. 15; Mt. 23)

The Torah also allowed for the Halachic authority to be held by a King (Dt. 17:8-12; 14-20). Eventually the Elders decided to establish such a monarchy (1Sam. 8:1-7). The throne of these Kings was sees as being "the throne of Elohim" (1Chron. 29:23) Their Halachic authority became termed "the key of the House of David" (Is. 22:21-22).

The Pharisees once held the Keys of the House of David. Mt. 23:13 is key to understanding Yeshua's attitude to the Halachic authority of the Pharisees. Here Yeshua says:

But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
For you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men;
for you neither go in,
nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.

A parallel passage appears in Lk. 11:52:

Woe to you scribes!
For you have taken away the key of knowledge.
you did not enter in yourselves,
and those who were entering in you hindered.

Now when we look at these two passages together it becomes clear that
the "key" in Luke 11:52 had the potential to open up or shut up the
Kingdom of Heaven. This "key" is clearly then "the key of the house of
David" in Is. 22:22:

The key of the House of David I will lay on his shoulder;
so he shall open, and no one shall shut;
and he shall shut and no one shall open.

The Pharisees took away the key (authority) thus shutting up the
Kingdom. They lost the authority, it was taken from them and given to
Yeshua's Talmidim:

In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give "the keys of the Kingdom" to
Kefa and his other talmidim:

And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

The Pharisees lost this authority because of hypocrisy. Yeshua describes their hypocrisy in Mt. 23 as follows:

On Moshe's seat sit the scribes and P'rushim.
And all that he (Moshe) says to you observe and do.
But not according to their works,
for they say, but do not.
(Mt. 23:2-3)

Yeshua repeatedly charges the Pharisees with Hypocrisy (Mt. 6; 15:7
and Matt. 23 for examples). Yeshua often charged Pharisees with
"hypocrisy" even the Talmud itself makes the same association:

King Jannai said to his wife', `Fear not the Pharisees and the
non-Pharisees but the hypocrites who are the Pharisees; because their
deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Phineas'
(b.Sotah 22b)

Job 13:16 says "a hypocrite shall not come before him."

Based on this verse the Talmud itself correctly lists Hypocrites as one of
four classes who will not receive the presence of the Shekhinah:

R. Hisda also said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba: Four classes
will not receive presence of the Shechinah, — the class of scoffers,
the class of liars, the class of hypocrites, and the class of
slanderers. `The class of scoffers' — as it is written, He withdrew
His hand from the scoffers.(Hosea 7:5) `The class of liars' — as it is
written, He that telleth lies, shall not tarry in my sight.(Ps. 101:7)
`The class of hypocrites' — as it is written, For a hypocrite shall
not come before him.(Job 13:16) `The class of slanderers — as it is
written, For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness:
neither shall evil dwell with thee,'(Ps. 5:5) [which means] Thou art
righteous, and hence there will not be evil in thy abode.
(b.San. 103a)

We know from Numbers 11:16-17 that the Elders must have the Spirit of Elohim upon them, but since hypocrites cannot receive the presence of the Shekhinah, they cannot serve as valid Elders.

Job says: "the congregation of the hypocrites shall be desolate" (Job. 15:34)

Thus Yeshua took the Keys from the Pharisees and gave these keys to Kefa and his Talmidim:

This key is the halachic authority. Yeshua recognized that the Pharisees held that halachic authority but he also tells us that they had squandered it by rejecting the Kingdom offer (see article "The Kingdom Offer") and refusing to use the key to help Messiah open up the Messianic Kingdom.

The Messiah himself also had the Key of David (Rev. 3:7). In Mt. 16:18-19 Yeshua says he would give "the keys of the Kingdom" to Kefa and his students:

And I also say to you that you are Kefa,
And upon this rock I will build my assembly,
and the gates of Sheol shall not prevail against it.
And I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,
and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven
and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

This passage is best understood when compared to Mt. 18:15-20 This passage deals with the law of witnesses (Mt. 18:16 = Dt. 19:15) and refers to an "assembly" (Mt. 18:17) which has the power to "bind" and "loose" (Mt. 18:18) just as does Mt. 16:18-19. Since Mt. 18:16 quotes Dt. 19:15 it is clear that the "assembly" in Mt. 18:17 (and also Mt. 16:18) is the "priests and judges who serve in those days" in Dt. 19:17. This is also clear because this "assembly" has the power to "bind" and "loose." These are two Semitic idioms used in Rabbinic literature as technical terms referring to Halachic authority. To "bind" means to "forbid" an activity and to "loose" means to permit an activity (as in j.Ber. 5b; 6c; j.San. 28a; b.Ab. Zar. 37a; b.Ned. 62a; b.Yeb. 106a; b.Bets. 2b; 22a; b.Ber. 35a; b.Hag. 3b). Thus in Mt. 16:18-19 & 18:18 Yeshua gave his students the Halachic authority which we see them using in Acts 15.

Today we as restored Nazarenes must also have our own unique halachic authority apart from that of Rabbinic Judaism. As "sons of light" we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers. While we cannot be halachicly yoked with unbelievers (Rabbinic Judaism) we must "come out from among them and be separate" (2Cor. 6:14-18 & Is. 52:11) for we must ourselves establish courts (Dt. 16:18).

We cannot turn to the "wisdom" of the "Pharisaic Rabbinical" Rabbis and sages of the last two thousand years and simply "accept all the Rabbinical Halakhah, except where Mashiach and His Talmidim clearly and definitely offer another position of Halakhah" for the Tenach warns us:

How can you say, "We are wise, and the Torah of YHWH is with us"?
Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.
The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken.
Behold they have rejected the Word of YHWH;
So what wisdom do they have?
(Jer. 8:8-9)

The unbelieving sages and Rabbis of "Pharisaic Rabbinical" Judaism claim they "are wise" and that "the Torah of the LORD is with us." But they have "rejected the Word of YHWH" (i.e. Yeshua the Messiah; see Jn. 1:1, 14; Rev. 19:13) "So what wisdom do they have?"

There are preserved for us five fragments from an ancient Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah in which the fourth century Nazarene writer makes it clear that Nazarenes of the fourth century were not "following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah." The following is taken from the Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:14:

"And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel¦"
The Nazarenes explain the two houses as the two houses of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees… [they Pharisees] scattered and defiled the precepts of the Torah by traditions and mishna. And these two houses
did not accept the Savior

The Nazarene commentary on Isaiah 8:20-21 has:

The Scribes and the Pharisees tell you to listen to them
answer them like this:
"It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe
consults its own idols. We must not, therefore, consult your
dead [sages] about the living one."

So it is clear that the original Nazarenes were not "following Pharisaic Rabbinical Halakhah."

Let us return to the subject of the Oral Law in general. Now in Acts 23:6 Paul states “I am a Pharisee”. The Pharisees maintained a belief in the traditions handed down by their forefathers. As Josephus writes:

…the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great
many observances by succession from their fathers,
which are not written in the law of Moses; …
(Josephus; Ant. 13:10:6)

Concerning his Pharisee background Paul says:

And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my
contemporaries in my own nation, being more
exceedingly zealous for the tradition of my fathers.
(Gal. 1:14)

Notice that in Acts 28:17 Paul insists:

I have done nothing against our people
or the customs of our fathers.
(Acts 28:17)

Paul writes to the Thessalonians concerning these “traditions”:

“Therefore, brothers stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught…
withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly and not after
the traditions which he received from us.”
(2Thes. 2:15; 3:6)

Paul even made use of these oral “traditions” in his writings. Paul says "...they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them: and that rock was Messiah." (1Cor. 10:4). The Torah records more than one occasion when Moshe (Moses) brought forth water from
a rock (Ex. 16:4-35; 17:1-9; Num. 20:1-13; 16-20). According to Rabbinic tradition the rock did in fact follow them. The Talmud says that it was "a moveable well" (b.Shabbat 35a) and calls it "the Well of Miriam" (b.Ta'anit 9a). Rashi comments on b.Ta'anit 9a saying that the rock "rolled and went along with Israel, and it was the rock Moshe struck." The tradition of the moving rock known as the "Well of Miriam" is also found in B'midbar Parshat Chukkat. Paul's statement that the rock "followed them" testifies to the
fact that he accepted this oral tradition as being factual.

The second century Nazarene writer Gish’fa (Heggissipus) made use in his writings of these oral traditions. Eusebius writes of him:

And he quotes some passages from The Gospel according to
the Hebrews and from ‘The Syriac’, and some particulars from
the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was … from the Hebrews,
and he mentions other matters as taken from the oral tradition
of the Jews.”
(Eccl. Hist. 4:22)

Yeshua himself seems to have also accepted the “traditions of our fathers” which had been passed down orally.

In John 7:37-38 we read:

“And on the great day, which is the last of the feast, Yeshua stood and cried out and said, If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scriptures have said, rivers of water of life will flow from his belly.”

The occasion is the last great day of Sukkot (Jn. 7:2) and the setting appears to be the water libation ceremony at the Temple as prescribed by the Oral Law. A priest had a flask of gold filled with water and another has a flask of gold filled with wine. There were two silver bowls perforated with holes like a narrow snout. One was wide for the water the other is narrow for the wine. The priests poured the wine and water into each of their bowls. The wine and water mixed together. The wine flowing slowly through the narrow snout and the water flowing quickly through the wider snout. (m.Sukkot 4:9) Yeshua said that this ritual from the Oral Law was actually prophetic and symbolic of himself!

In all four Gospels Yeshua participates in the Passover Sader. The elements of the sader, such as the “cup of redemption”; dipping in bitter herbs; and the afikomen (the last piece of unleavened bread passed around and eaten at the end) all come from the Oral Law as recorded in the Mishna (m.Pes. 10). Yeshua not only accepted and kept these Oral Law rituals, but also spoke of them being prophetic of himself.

There is an interesting story in the Talmud which makes a profound point about the Oral Law:

Our Rabbis taught: A certain heathen once came before Shammai and asked him, ‘How many Torahs have you?’ ‘Two,’ he replied: ‘the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.’ ‘I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Oral Torah; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah [only]. [But] he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth; the following day he reversed [them ] to him. ‘But yesterday you did not teach them to me thus,’ he protested. ‘Must you then not rely upon me? Then rely upon me with respect to the Oral [Torah] too.’
(b.Shabbat 31a)

The point of the story is that the same forefathers that passed the written Torah down to us, also passed the Oral Torah down to us with it. What logic is there in accepting the written Torah that they delivered to us as truth, while rejecting the Oral Law passed down by the very same forefathers?

Now we as Nazarenes do not believe that the Rabbis or Pharisaic/Rabbinic
Judaism held the power to bind and loose after the first century, perhaps
not even before the first century. Thus we should not simply accept these
rulings, on the other hand we should not simply reject them out of hand.
In may cases the Talmud or the related halachic Midrashim present the line
of logic which led to the decisions being made. We should look at these
lines of logic to determine if the decisions were valid and sound.

For example I heard one Messianic Rabbi bashing the Talmud and claiming
that the Rabbis had added thirty-nine rules to the simple commandment not
to work on the Sabbath. In fact the thirty-nine categories (given in
m.Shabbat 7:2) are drawn from the text of the Torah. In the Torah the
instructions concerning the building of the Tabernacle are interrupted by a
restatement of the commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Ex. 31:12-17).
The connection this section of Exodus has with the surrounding material
seems to be the word “work” (Ex. 31:14) and “workmanship” (Ex. 31:3) (same
word in the Hebrew). Thus the commandment not to “work” on the Sabbath
(Ex. 31:14) is restated as a reminder to abstain from the “workmanship” of
the Tabernacle mentioned in Ex. 31:3. Thus the term “work” in the
commandment not to work on the Sabbath may be elaborated and defined by the
thirty-nine categories of “workmanship” involved in building the
Tabernacle.

We as Nazarenes should not reject the material in the Talmud out of hand,
we should seek to understand it. Then we should “eat the date and spit
out the seeds”. The same approach should be taken to the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Nazarenes should not be modern day Sadducees.

Now more than ever we need your financial support. A special legal defense fund has been created to defend the HRV against this Christian organization. The WNAE is barely receiving enough funds to function, so we are asking the community to increase giving in order to support the WNAE and to help us defend the HRV from this frivolous law suite. HaSatan’s plan here is to financially tie down the WNAE and potentially ban the HRV Scriptures.

If you are not already tithing now is the time to start, the rubber is hitting the road, the battle is heating up, and there is no more time to play around. If you do not feel that you can tithe, then please make whatever offerings you can, as the time is now, the battle is here.


Is this work worthy of your support? What other ministry provides this kind of teaching?


I cannot do this alone, the work of WNAE is made possible by supporters like you. Your tithes and offerings make all of this work possible.



You can donate by going to the chip-in counter at http://www.nazarenespace.com or donations can be sent by paypal to donations@wnae.org

Donations can also be made out to “Nazarene Judaism” and sent to:

Nazarene Judaism
PO Box 471
Hurst, TX 76053

Views: 321

Comment by roger anderson on December 20, 2008 at 11:06am
I'm glad that you ended by saying we nazarines need to have our own halachic code. I have read some of the talmud and mishna and there is some wisdom and much human reasoning. Off course we need to measure everything by the keetvay ha kadosh,and not human reasoning. Many people reject christianity for its paganism rightfully so and go to judiasm thinking it is the true religeon. In fact judiasm has as much paganism and human reasoning as christianity. They have fallen to the ditches on either side of the road. We as nazarines need to prayerfully seek the kingdom through the holy scriptures. Yahueh has given much leeway in keeping His law. Different nazarine groups can have different halachah on their lifestyle and still be on the road to salvation. The key is loving the High and Exalted Yahueh and put His lilestyle before our own ways. Roger aka Gideon
Comment by Shawn on August 6, 2009 at 6:07pm
I agree with Aharon, and although this article is full of interesting information I do disagree with a few of its statements. I have been working on this subject for a couple of years now and still have not concluded on everything, but I have found some interesting information.

The article (correct me if I'm wrong) makes the following claims

1 - The Pharisees/Rabbinic Judaism have lost the authority to make halachic decisions.

My thoughts on this claim. It is clear that the article is well researched, but I feel that one important aspect of the first century setting is being left out. Although the article mentions the schools of Hillel and Shammai it does not address the true significance of this division in pharisaic Judaism. Around 30 to 40 years before Yeshua began his ministry there was a radical shift in Judaism. This changing of Judaism was instituted by Judas of Galilee. Josephus antiquities of the Jews book 18 chapter 1 tells about this crucial piece of history. Josephus tells us that one man Judas of Galilee created an alternate sect of Pharisaic Judaism. Through out all of Jewish history there was alway one form of oral Torah there were never any alternate schools of thought all the way until we come to the schools of Hillel and Shammai and then BOOM all of the sudden we have two radically different types of oral torah. Why? Because the man Judas of Galilee. Judas hate Roman interference in the state of Judeah so led a revolt against Rome. Part of his revolt against Rome included creating a new jewish religion, a new oral law. Josephus tells us that this new doctrine "added a great weight" to the traditions of the fathers. Josephus also says that "Such a CHANGE was made that added a mighty weight...which we were before unaquainted with." He tells of many other consequences of this brand new oral law. I dont want to post the whole chapter so i will post highlights and you can read it out of Josephus when you get a chance.

A - Judas of Galilee created a new form of anti-gentile pharisaic judaism.

B - This new pharisaic judaism added a great weight to the customs of the fathers

C - This new pharisaic judaism was extremely hypocritical, self serving

D - This new pharisaic judaism was nationalistic in nature and anyone who opposed it was murdered

E - This new pharisaic judaism was described as a rapidly growing infection that filled up the entire land of Judeah (IE a little leaven leavnes the whole lump)

F - According to Josephus, this new form of pharisaic judaism was the reason for all the hardships and destruction that came upon judea in the first century.

This brand new over burdern some anti-gentile corrupt form of pharisaic judaism took over the entire land of Judea in a very short period of time. By the time Yeshua was thirty the vast majority of all Judeans followed this new form of pharisaic judaism and only a handful of pharisees still followed the old kind and gentle form of oral law.

It was this alternate form of Pharisaic judaism that Yeshua came against and took away. All of Judeah followed, and was ruled by, this alternate form of pharisaic judaism. Only a handful of people opposed it such as the school of Hillel and later Yeshua and his disciples. It could just as easily be said that Yeshua took the keys away from (The corrupt anti-gentile-judas of galilee-school of shammai) Pharisees, and NOT all the pharisees.


2 - Yeshua gave halachic authority to "his students" therefore this authority CANNOT be found among rabbinic Judaism, but must be found among some group of christians.

There is a lot to be said about this claim from the above article.

FIRST - giving halachic authority to his students does not mean he took it away from the pharisees. In light of the above information about the corrupt form of pharisaic judaism, it could just as easily be said that Yeshua was giving halachic authority to his students who were pharisees who followed the school of hillel. In other words he was simply removing the leaders of the school of shammai and instituting new leaders who followed the school of hillel or atleast an oral torah extremely similar to hillel.

SECOND - It is an assumption not a proven fact that the rulings of the Talmud (mishnah, gemarah) are made by non believers in Yeshua. In Simcha Pearlmutters famous online testimony he shows that ancient Jewish documents, that were written by the Hazal, had information in them stateing that Yeshua is Mashiach. He shows a few different places in orthodox jewish texts that the leadership in Judaisms past did believe in Yeshua as the Mashiach and atonement for sin. Simcha spends most of this testimony explaining that many people through out the history of Judaism including the leaders, believed in Yeshua, but they kept this secret so as to save lives. One could just as easily assume that the vast majority of the talmud and all jewish doctrine today is derived FROM JEWISH believers in Yeshua. We must also remember that all of orthodox Judaism of today rejects the ruling of Shammai and accepts that of Hillel. Meaning that all the things that Yeshua came against they reject. The orthodox judaism of today is very close to what Yeshua asked. And for all we know most of them do secretly believe in Yeshua.

THIRD - Let us assume for a moment that Yeshua completely stripped all authority from Judaism and created a new body known as, lets say, the nazarenes. And lets say that these nazarenes were the direct students of Yeshua and they recieved the holy spirit and the authority to make decisions. And let us assume that they did not continue to live among mainstream judaism (even secretly). Let us assume that they decided to be completely seperate from Judaism. According to this scenario the true "way" would have died out about 1700 years ago. There has been no form of Christianity, of any kind, catholic or protestant, that has maintained an unbroken line of torah observant/oral torah observant followers. Which leads us to the only conclusion that we MUST MAKE UP OUR OWN way, which has never been the case for Israel.

It is much more likely that the many believers in Yeshua among Judaism (including even those who do not know his name but know his teachings) have maintained the true way of oral law. Lets face it there is no such thing as christian midrash. And we know that the NT uses Midrash. HOW IN THE WORLD ARE WE GONNA SAY WHAT STAYS AND WHAT GOES, when they are the ones who have maintained this info, (and more than likely the true belief in Yeshua).

Who are we to say "well I have the holy spirit because I got goose bumps at church ten years ago, and now I know about the Torah, therefore I must be the right person to decide what halacha is."

That line of thinking sounds some what naive and arrogant if you ask me. Even if I have missunderstood the implications of this article I do know of others who follow this line of thought. So hopefully what I have said can be positive information in further discussing this topic.
Comment by YishaiMonty on August 6, 2009 at 7:13pm
If it does not align its self with the Torah or comes against the Torah, the the "oral tradition" must be thrown out..... that being said there is a lot of good things to be learned from the midrash, talmud etc.... where do you think Yeshua got the cups of Pessach from? not the Bible....... Torah, Prophets, Apostolic Scriptures, Talmud etc... In that order!
Comment by Wayne Ingalls on August 6, 2009 at 9:50pm
Shalom Shawn, is it not this "alternative form" of Pharisaic Judaism that has prevailed today, the survivors of which wrote the Mishnah, Gemara and even later, texts like Shulchan Aruch? We know from the book of Acts that many Jews *did* believe that Yeshua was the Messiah. But -- within Pharisaic Judaism, majority rules. The majority did not believe, and the majority invoked the 19th benediction (Birkat HaMinim) to the Amidah, a curse against heretics, against the Nazarenes (whether or not it existed prior to the Nazarenes, it was applied to them by the rulers), driving the Nazarenes from the synagogues as Yeshua said would happen.

If the Nazarenes were driven from the synagogues by the corrupted form of Pharisaic Judaism, why would Nazarenes agree to abide by the rules given by those who drove them out? In other words, if the corrupted form of Pharisaic Judaism rejected the Messiah of Israel and drove the Nazarenes from the synagogues, it seems to me that the corrupted form of Pharisaic Judaism was not hearing from the Ruach HaQodesh, and so must be hearing from a different spirit.

I know you have been studying the topic of Yeshua and Oral Torah for some time now, and found your teaching on the subject quite thought-provoking last Sukkot. My thought is that if even the corrupted Pharisaic halakhah was a burden at the time of Yeshua, how much more burden has been added to it by the interpretations of the rabbis who stand on the shoulders of those who threw the Nazarenes out of the synagogues? I am not sure that there is any evidence remaining except for what can be gleaned from Josephus and the Mishnah for an approximation of pre-corrupted Pharisaic halakhah. My guess is that not much remains of that original halakhah from what has been filtered through the rabbinic rulings of medieval European Judaism.

Blessings,
Wayne
Comment by Shawn on August 7, 2009 at 4:17pm
Hey Wayne. It is my current understanding that it is NOT the alternative corrupt form of Oral Torah that Judaism has today. I base this on Judaism having been told by the Bat Kol that they should reject the rulings of Shammai and so they have accepted Hillel.

It is my current opinion that the Oral Torah of todays Judaism is the correct form of Oral Torah (as correct as we will ever recieve until another full manifestation of Mashiach). I would like to explain this opinion.

FIRST - a response to this statement "if even the corrupted Pharisaic halakhah was a burden at the time of Yeshua, how much more burden has been added to it by the interpretations of the rabbis who stand on the shoulders of those who threw the Nazarenes out of the synagogues?"

It is my opinion (current understanding) that the practiced form of Oral Torah amongst the majority of orthodox Judaism is not based on or founded upon the corrupt shammai form of the time of Yeshua. Since the Bat Kol stated to reject this harsh form of Oral Torah This corrupt form has gone defunct and all though many of the teachings of this corrupt form were preserved in the Talmud, it is not the observed form. Further, Even if some amongst Judaism do (or at times did) practice the corrupt form, or draw ideas from it, that does not change the fact that universally they agreed not to follow it. Therefore anyone amongst Judah applying Shammai style Oral Torah is in rebelion against main stream Judaism.

SECOND - Indeed the "Nazarenes" were driven from the synagogues and killed by the followers of the predominant form of Oral Torah of the time (Shammai - harsh form). In my opinion, this fact does not mean that the nazarenes had a different (or radically different) Oral Torah than that of the school of Hillel. I believe that it actually helps prove that the nazarenes had the Oral Torah of Hillel (or something extremely close). Since the Hillelites in Josephus suffer all the same fates as the nazarenes of the exact same period.

THIRD - It is my opinion that the main problem discussed in the NT in regards to Oral Torah is the accepted conversion procedure of gentiles/ephraimites. The nazarenes came to the same conclusion as modern judaism that it is mikvah - learn torah - circumcision. Or rather they have the same Oral Torah.

FOURTH - It is again my opinion and not a universally confirmed fact, that in most if not all cases where we "think" Oral Torah (accepted and practiced) is conflicting with written Torah or Yeshua we have not fully searched out all the understanding in Judaism which would actually explain and clarify that in that particular piece of Oral Torah it actually means something else or is applied differntly than we think.

FIFTH - "if the corrupted form of Pharisaic Judaism rejected the Messiah of Israel and drove the Nazarenes from the synagogues, it seems to me that the corrupted form of Pharisaic Judaism was not hearing from the Ruach HaQodesh, and so must be hearing from a different spirit."

In deed the corrupt form Pharisees (Shammaiites) in large reject Yeshua (although some did except him, and later caused trouble). And indeed these Shammaiites were not walking in the Ruach ha Kodesh but some other spirit. But shortly after 70 AD this form of pharisiac Judaism began to deminish (due to Bat Kol) and for many centuries now the dominant form of Oral Torah has been the that of Hillel (in my opinion nearly identical to Yeshua's) It is my opinion that many of us have falsely assumed that Judaism has maintained the same Oral Torah as they did in the time of Yeshua. They have not. They have a very different Oral Torah than what was going in the first century. The Judaism of today is not the same as the Pharisees of 1st century. Although they have kept record of the Shammai style, they do not observe the shammai style.

SIXTH AND FINAL - I know of no christian sect that has maintained Torah and Oral Torah observance. I know of only one place that has preserved oral traditions (I mean Torah observant traditions not catholic ones) going back to the time of Yeshua, Judaism. In my opinion the correct form rests in their hands. Additionally Yeshua stated that we are liable to a Sanhedrin.

We have two choices as to where the correct power to judge and make halachah went.

Catholocism.

Judaism.

Both claiments to halachic authority have had believers of Yeshua among them.

But only one has maintained Torah and Oral Torah observance and traditions that match that of the NT and the Tanak, Judaism.

Therefore it is my opinion that those who have authority to tell me what Halachah is, is the rabbi's of Judaism.

I do not believe that anyone from Christianity has any connection to the true ancient path, or authority to make or decide what halachah is.

That includes well intended, some what educated, messianics/ephraimites.

I also have issues with Christians/Messianics saying that "the Jews dont have the holy spirit and we do therfore we have the authority, they dont."

Please prove to me that an orthodox Jew does not have the holy spirit and that a christian does.

I am open to other ideas on this topic however. These are just my current thoughts and opinions. I would be interested to hear alternate thoughts on my points (in particular point 6).
Comment by James Trimm on August 7, 2009 at 4:28pm
The problem is that Nazarene Judaism is the true representative of Judaism, not Rabbinic Judaism.
Comment by Shawn on August 9, 2009 at 5:24pm
Yes I do believe that is the problem. That a newly forming group is making a claim that they are true representatives of Judaism (with out providing any historical records showing an unbroken link to the past), and that the jewish community is not the true representative of Judaism (even though they can provide historical records showing an unbroken link to the past).

I would be totally kosher with this concept if anyone could provide some decent proof of this idea.

Evidence of the following would be helpful in proving the above claim.

1 - That there has been a perpetual group/organization known as "Nazarene Judaism" that has a documented succession of teacher/student relations going all the way back to Yeshua.

2 - That no group among orthodox judaism (whether small, large, openly, or secretly) has maintained belief in Yeshua. **According to the testimony of Simcha Pearlmutter and others there has always been believers in Yeshua amongst the rabbis and that they have maintained the true traditions and path for us to follow.**

3 - That the Tanak or NT allows for any ol' random group of people to all of the sudden declare themselves the true authority on halacha. (For all that I have seen in the Tanak and NT halachic authority must be prophetically instituded and then handed down in an unbroken succession.)

4 - Historical evidence of continued persecution, through out the ages, of a group known as "Nazarene Jews" because of their faith in Mashiach and the keeping of the Torah. (only Judaism has continuely been persecuted and murdered for their keeping the Torah and faith in Mashiach.)

Right now the rabbi's of Judaism, by far, have the best claim to halachic authority because they have maintained a teacher to student connection to the past. They have maintained the Torah, oral Torah, belief in Yeshua, kabbalisitic knowledge, and profound explanation of the soul of Mashiach, and been persecuted unto death in every generation because of their faith.

If there is a group or organization known as "Nazarene Judaism" that can make the same claims and provide some sort of proofs then we could begin discussing who is the true representative of Judaism.

But for some random guy or gal to start reading the NT, then the Torah, then a little bit of Jewish oral tradition, and suddenly decide he or she is now the true halachic authority is a little scary.

It is true that during the time frames of 30 CE to around 100 CE, the group that followed Yeshua (for grins lets call em Nazarene Judaism) recieved halachic authority from Yeshua. But after that time period this group disappears. It is my current understanding that they absorbed into two different locations, Roman empire paganism and Exiled Judaism. Their authority must remain among one of those two groups.

Dont get me wrong please. It is absolutely wonderful and the work of Hashem that many Ephraimites around the world are beginning to crack their baby eyes open and see the reality of all that is spoken in the Tanak. It seems very presumptious however, to claim that "now that we have had are eyes opened just a tiny little bit we are the representatives of truth and the jews aren't."

Just to be clear, I am not Jewish, or wasn't raised Jewish. I consider myself an Ephraimite soul restored to Hashem. But I also recognize an ugly history of Ephraimites exalting themselves to postitions they are not supposed to have.

In the story of the prodigal son (which is clearly a story about the two houses) it is not the older brother and father who have to travel to go be with the younger son. It is the younger son who has to travel to the father and older brother. To me, for some among the Ephraimite communities to say that they are now the representative of all truth and the true authorities of halakah, this is equal to the prodigal son sitting in his pig slop demanding that the older brother come over there to him and do what he says.

The Tanak and the parable of the prodigal son tell us in all certainty THAT EPHRAIM MUST RETURN IN EXTREME HUMILITY AND SHAME AND NO SELF EXALTATION.

Why cant we just be satisfied to be students of the Torah and spend of few generations raising well Torah grounded children? Why must we immediately emulate that which we have left (the church) and create some group or organization that is THE FULL AUTHORITY ON ALL THINGS AND THE ONE TRUE PATH TO HASHEM.
Comment by James Trimm on August 9, 2009 at 5:31pm
A brief history of the current Nazarene movement is at:

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2182335%3ABlogP...

I will add that there have always been Torah Observant Jewish believers in Messiah here or there, (the "remnant") but until the Web we were not able to find each other and network. In 1996 that changed.
Comment by Wayne Ingalls on August 9, 2009 at 11:17pm
Shalom Shawn,
I have never read before that “the observed form” or “the practiced form” of the Oral Torah today is in conflict or in opposition to many of the teachings of the Oral Torah as recorded in the Mishnah and the Gemara, or that Orthodox Judaism has universally agreed not to follow the Mishnah and the Gemara. I think I am probably misunderstanding you, so please do correct me.

The school of Hillel is the the dominant voice of the Mishnah and Gemara. There are a few occasions in which the view of Shammai was taken as the majority opinion, but one of those places is on the subject of hatafa dam brit in which the stricter school of Shammai’s opinion became normative:

“Concerning what did they dispute? Concerning a convert who
converted already circumcised. For the House of Shammai say, ‘It is
necessary to draw from him a drop of blood of the covenant.’ And the
House of Hillel say, ‘It is not necessary to draw from him a drop of blood
of the covenant’” (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 135A)

What is your source for the order or sequence of conversion that is practiced today? The Oral Torah gives the sequence as beginning with circumcision:
The master has said, “Just as your forefathers entered the
covenant only with circumcision and immersion and
sprinkling of blood through the sacrifices, so they
[proselytes] will enter the covenant only through
circumcision, immersion, and sprinkling of blood on the
altar.” (Talmud Bavli, Keritot 9A)

This is the order given in the oral Torah: circumcision (milah) first then immersion (tevila). We know this is the order because the Talmud elsewhere (Yevamot 47b) states that the proselyte will be given time to recover from his brit milah prior to immersion.

Since I understand that the sequence of these events is central to some of the controversy in the Apostolic Scriptures, I would be interested to find who is doing mikveh/tevila first. I have looked, and I have yet to find any Jewish sect doing immersion first and circumcision second. I think RamBaN said that a conversion that had immersion first was still valid, but that is as far as it goes. I have even checked the “e-How” site, for what it’s worth, and they gives the conversion as circumcision first, followed by immersion.

There is very little to go on as far as ancient Nazarene halakhah is concerned. However, a source (Jerome) quoting a source (a Nazarene commentary on Isaiah) does not have nice things to say about Hillel or Shammai:

"On Isaiah 8:14
"The Nazarenes, who accept Christ in such a way that they do not cease to observe the old law, explain the two houses as the two families, viz. of Shammai and Hillel, from whom originated the Scribes and Pharisees. Akiba, who took over their school, is called the master of Aquila the proselyte, and after him came Meir who has been succeeded by Joannes the son of Zakkai and after him Eliezer and further Telphon, and next Joseph Galilaeus and Joshua up to the capture of Jerusalem. Shammai then and Hillel were born not long before the Lord; they originated in Judaea. The name of the first means scatterer and of the second unholy, because he scattered and defiled the precepts of the Law by his traditions . . . And these are the two houses who did not accept the Saviour who has become to them destruction and shame" (Ray A. Pritz, Nazarene Jewish Christianity, pg 58).

The commentary also says on Isaiah 8:20-21: The Scribes and the Pharisees tell you to listen to them, answer them like this:

"It is not strange if you follow your traditions since every tribe consults its own
idols. We must not, therefore, consult your dead [sages] about the living one."
On the issue of the Holy Spirit, first I will show that R. Aqiva did not have the Set Apart Spirit, and he is the compiler of much of the Mishnah. Second, I will show why Orthodox Judaism does not have the Set Apart Spirit.

First, R. Akiva did not have the Set Apart Spirit because he was a false prophet. R. Akiva declared a false Messiah (bar Kochba) to be the true Messiah. It is clear that R. Akiva did not know how to hear from HASHEM and that if R. Akiva did have the Set Apart Spirit he would not have declared bar Kochba to be the Messiah. I think this confirms that R. Akiva’s Sanhedrin in Yavneh was the heir of the Spirit-less Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. Caiphus did not recognize the true Messiah when Yeshua came, and R. Akiva declared a false Messiah to be the Messiah.

Today’s Orthodox Judaism cannot say “Yeshua is Marya,” and so indicate that they do not have the Set Apart Spirit:

1 Cor 12: 3b (Aramaic Peshitta) …(A)nd no one can say that Yeshua is Marya except by the Rukha Qadisha (Set Apart Spirit).

Marya is the Aramaic word that is used exclusively for YHWH in the Aramaic Peshitta Tanakh (when used as a noun). Orthodox Judaism denies that Yeshua is Adonai, let alone Marya. If they had the Ruach HaQodesh, they would acknowledge that Yeshua is Marya, according to the Scripture.
My alternate thoughts on “point 6” is that from what I have read, the Nazarene halakhah does not match that of Orthodox Judaism or the Talmud with regard to conversion/circumcision, and ancient Nazarenes (at least those whom Jerome was in contact) rejected the authority of Hillel or Shammai. The evidence that the Nazarenes did not submit themselves to the Sanhedrin that condemned Yeshua is found in the Beit Din of Acts 15. The Nazarene Beit Din issued their own ruling, and sent out messengers to announce the ruling throughout the community. The “re-formed” Sanhedrin in Israel today does not acknowledge that Yeshua is Marya, and does not have the Set Apart Spirit to guide them. I do not think it would be prudent to willingly submit to such a body of authority, in much the same way as Ya'akov haTzaddiq did not check with the Sanhedrin in Acts 15 before sending the messengers.

Blessings and peace,
Wayne
Comment by Shawn on August 10, 2009 at 3:21pm
Shalom again Wayne and thanks for answering some of the questions. Like I said I am on an ongoing search on this topic so any additional information is helpful. Don't have to long right now to respond to first two so will give a quick answer, then go onto my main concerns or questions.

1 - In reference to recorded and observed laws. I am referring to there being an anti gentile law that was created by Judas of Galilee as recorded in Josephus. One particular example being the (I believe it was) 18 decrees of Shammai which are no longer recorded from what I understand. From what I can gather there was an earlier over burdensome anti-gentile hypocritical nationalistic form of oral torah that was dieing out by the time the mishnah and gemara were being written. From what I understand that is why mishnah contains mostly hillel pov;

2 - For the circumcision thing, it was my understanding that it was acceptable to do mikvah - learn torah - then circumcision in modern day judaism. Perhaps I missunderstood that, but that was far from my MAIN CONCERN.

3 - My main concerns were modern day claims to halachic authority.

FIRST - A connection to the past. Still my main concern by far. The only group who can claim a connection to the past by teacher to student torah and oral torah and belief in mashaich is Judaism.

I dont know of group catholic, protestant, messianic, ephraimite etc. That can come close to making that claim. THIS IS MY PRIME CONCERN.

SECOND - Proof of having the Ruach haKodesh. The only place in the Tanak that I have seen that gives a direct explanation of the fruits of the spirit is Ezekiel chapters 11 and 36.

"And put my spirit within you and I will cause you to walk in all my laws and guard my right-rulings and shall do them."

Adressing your statement about Akiva not having the Ruach ha kodesh. Is making a mistake a PROOF that someone does not have the ruach ha kodesh? There are many christians and Messianics and Ephraimites who claim to have the holy spirit and still make big mistakes even prophetic declaration mistakes. Akiva mistaking bar kochbah as Mashiach in my opinion does not automatically rule him out as being under the influence of the Ruach ha kodesh.

Addressing the statement about the Orthodox not having the Ruach ha kodesh. First we do not know what each and every orthodox believes in their heart about Yeshua. I will keep going back to the testimony of Simcha pearlmutter in which he states that every single jew in every single synagogue on Rosh ha shanah declares that Yeshua is = to Metatron (Metatron bears the name YHVH). Just because the orthodox have AN EXTREME HATRED OF THE PERSON KNOWN AS JESUS CHRIST THE ROMAN SUN GOD IDOL, does not mean that they dont believe that the man known as Yeshua is Metatron (YHVH). According to Simcha Pearlmutters testimony many orthodox do that exact thing, hate Jesus and secretly believe in yeshua.

In addition I personally know one orthodox Jew very well and this person agreed that this is true.

The prophet Ezekiel only gives one fruit that would be recognizably the spirit of Hashem. A desire to do the Torah. Ezekiel did not include "and they will call Yeshua Marya" as proof of having the Ruach haKodesh.

I believe what we read in the NT is simply a matter of what teacher or Torah they were desiring to follow not whether they confessed Jesus as YHVH.

Additionally many christians confess Jesus as lord and then live a life in complete opposition to Torah.

Confessing Jesus as lord is not the indicator the Tanak gives as our indicator for someone having the spirit.

The only one true indicator is DOES THE PERSON DESIRE TO DO THE TORAH. If they do not desire to do the Torah NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY SUPPOSEDLY LOVE JESUS AND CONFESS HIM AS LORD they are not being led by the ruach ha kodesh.

According to Yeshua himself many shall do many things IN HIS NAME, but he will tell those people i never knew you depart from me you who work lawlessness.

So confessing his name, even according to Yeshua himself, is not enough or is the one true indicator. The only one true indicator of being led by the spirit is a desire to live according to the Torah. The orthodox fullfill this obligation. And as far as we know they confess him as Metatron-YHVH-High priest of the heavens- every Rosh ha shanah and Yom kippur.

It would be very hard to prove that christiandom has maintained the ruach ha kodesh having long been against the torah from generation to generation and that the Jews dont have it having long been in favor of the torah from generation to generation. Confessing Yeshua is not the indicator for having the ruach, its just that for some people that is the first step into desiring to do the torah.

So again my 2 main concerns are...

orthodox judaism has the best claim on halachic authority because they have maintained a connection to the past and in general all aspects of Jewish life (such as siddur - or aggadah) do not come against any teachings of yeshua.

Orthodox Judaism also has just as strong or stronger claim on having the ruach ha kodesh than any christian. In fact even the so called fruits of the spirit that we see in the NT such as healing, prophecy, tongues, and so on are all done by the orthodox rabbis. But unlike christians who broadcast world wide every little good deed or supposed miracle they have ever done, the jews keep secret their good deeds so that most people dont even know that they do these things. I even know of one who does healings by secretly using the name of Yeshua.

If those two concerns could be addressed that would help me a lot.

Comment

You need to be a member of Nazarene Space to add comments!

Join Nazarene Space

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service