Jewish Messiah

[Ebionite]

The problem with Dictionaries is rigidly the words are used as stones to build walls and throw at those who believe differently.

Ebonite should be simply understood from the perspective of those that believe.

The problem can be described as owning the interpretation. Religions tend to prefer interpretations that give them more status, so they interpret terms that are used to identify their members expansively. Originally being called a Christian was an insult, but as the Hellenised disciples gained influence the term was used to describe anyone with Messianic beliefs.

 

[shunyadragon]

The common law approach to interpretation can be useful for prophetic texts. One rule is that an interpretation that is inconsistent, absurd, or repugnant is not the preferred interpretation. The number of potentially viable interpretations can be reduced by Occam's Razor, which favours interpretations that make a minimal number of assumptions about the known facts.

The problem that I have with a univeralist approach is that it's the opposite of being set-apart, qodesh.

Need some clarification on what is meant ny "being set-apart" What is "godesh?

 

[shunyadragon]

The problem can be described as owning the interpretation. Religions tend to prefer interpretations that give them more status, so they interpret terms that are used to identify their members expansively. Originally being called a Christian was an insult, but as the Hellenised disciples gained influence the term was used to describe anyone with Messianic beliefs.

I agree with the above especially Christianity becoming a Hellenist Roman Religion. Yes the connotation of names changes with time, but from the objective today the names people use to describe their beliefs is simply that.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Need some clarification on what is meant ny "being set-apart" What is "godesh?

Kodesh is the Hebrew word for holiness, and it means set aside for God's purposes. For example, if I set aside the seventh day from the other six days to make it a day to rest from labor and devote my thoughts and actions to God, it makes that day holy.

 

[Clear]

REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD “CHRISTIAN”

Ebionite claimed the definition of "Christian was" : “…disciples who aligned with Paul's accomodation of foreign interests, which was in conflict of with the nationalism of the original disciples of Galilee.” Post #461

Clear replied : “DICTIONARIES VERSUS EBIONITE
Oxford Dictionary : Christian : "a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Christianity".
Merriam-Webster dictionary Christian : "one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Wikipedia Christian : "people who follow or adhere to Christianity".
Dictionary.com Christian : "a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity".
Cambridge Dictionary Christian : "someone who believes in and follows the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Collins dictionary Christian : "A Christian is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Websters 1828 dictionary : "A believer in the religion of Christ".
Britannica Dictionary : "a person who believes in the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Vocabulary.com Dictionary : "A Christian is someone whose religious beliefs are based on the teachings of Jesus…" (Post #462)


Hi @shunyadragon

Shunyadragon commented regarding Ebionites “definition” of the word “Christian” versus the Dictionary meaning of the word “Christian” in typical historical usage.

Shunyadragon said : “The problem with Dictionaries is rigidly the words are used as stones to build walls and throw at those who believe differently.” (post #480)

I can’t tell if you are implying that it improper to use dictionaries and etymological historical references to reference historical meanings or if you are meaning something else.
I simply think that the most base meaning of the word “Christian” relates to one who believes in or follows “Christ” (i.e. “Christian”) as the dictionaries and etymology references tell us.
I think that creating new and irrational definitions that are historically incoherent creates historical confusion instead of historical clarity.

If you read #462 above, I asked other posters and readers :
Clear asked : "Is there ANYONE on the forum that believes this new definition of the word “Christian” instead of the typical dictionary meaning?
ANYONE want to try to help Ebionite support his new definition of the word “Christian” instead of the typical dictionary meaning? (post #462)

No poster or reader responded in support of this new definition so I suspect the new re-definition of the word "Christian" is not going to become part of any dictionary other than a personal opinion of Ebionites.


Shunyadragon said : “Ebonite should be simply understood from the perspective of those that believe.” (post #480)

Those that “believe” what?

If you are referring to those that believe the most basic definition of “Christian” is “…disciples who aligned with Paul's accomodation of foreign interests, which was in conflict of with the nationalism of the original disciples of Galilee.” are more correct than those that believe the most basic definition of the word "Christian" is simply "those who believe in or follow Christ" then you will have to provide more data to support this position (If that is even what you mean - I can't tell).

In any case, I hope your spiritual Journey is wonderful Shunyadragon.


P.S. I noticed that a few posts have been posted in discussion of this term. THIS post simply and specifically refers to my prior conversation with Ebionite.
I noticed that his later definition of "anyone with Messianic beliefs." is more to the dictionary meaning and I agree with this more than his initial definition we debated over.


Clear

 

[Ebionite]

Need some clarification on what is meant ny "being set-apart" What is "godesh?

Qodesh is a transliteration of קדש

And ye shall be holy[קדש] unto me: for I YHWH [am] holy, and have severed you from [other] people, that ye should be mine.
Leviticus 20:26

 

[Ebionite]

Yes the connotation of names changes with time, but from the objective today the names people use to describe their beliefs is simply that.

The original argument involved how the name of Christian was used in Paul's day. Using the modern meaning meaning of the word obscures the difference between Hellenised Messianics and the nationalistic ones who were aligned with James the Just. James the Just was written out of the early account in Acts and in the gospel of Mark is called James the less.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Jesus did not

I would argue that since Jesus complained WHILE ALIVE that his disciples didn’t understand his message, he wasn’t doing all that well either.

 

[paarsurrey]

REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD “CHRISTIAN”

Ebionite claimed the definition of "Christian was" : “…disciples who aligned with Paul's accomodation of foreign interests, which was in conflict of with the nationalism of the original disciples of Galilee.” Post #461

Clear replied : “DICTIONARIES VERSUS EBIONITE
Oxford Dictionary : Christian : "a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Christianity".
Merriam-Webster dictionary Christian : "one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Wikipedia Christian : "people who follow or adhere to Christianity".
Dictionary.com Christian : "a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity".
Cambridge Dictionary Christian : "someone who believes in and follows the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Collins dictionary Christian : "A Christian is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Websters 1828 dictionary : "A believer in the religion of Christ".
Britannica Dictionary : "a person who believes in the teachings of Jesus Christ".
Vocabulary.com Dictionary : "A Christian is someone whose religious beliefs are based on the teachings of Jesus…" (Post #462)


Hi @shunyadragon

Shunyadragon commented regarding Ebionites “definition” of the word “Christian” versus the Dictionary meaning of the word “Christian” in typical historical usage.

Shunyadragon said : “The problem with Dictionaries is rigidly the words are used as stones to build walls and throw at those who believe differently.” (post #480)

I can’t tell if you are implying that it improper to use dictionaries and etymological historical references to reference historical meanings or if you are meaning something else.
I simply think that the most base meaning of the word “Christian” relates to one who believes in or follows “Christ” (i.e. “Christian”) as the dictionaries and etymology references tell us.
I think that creating new and irrational definitions that are historically incoherent creates historical confusion instead of historical clarity.

If you read #462 above, I asked other posters and readers :
Clear asked : "Is there ANYONE on the forum that believes this new definition of the word “Christian” instead of the typical dictionary meaning?
ANYONE want to try to help Ebionite support his new definition of the word “Christian” instead of the typical dictionary meaning? (post #462)

No poster or reader responded in support of this new definition so I suspect the new re-definition of the word "Christian" is not going to become part of any dictionary other than a personal opinion of Ebionites.


Shunyadragon said : “Ebonite should be simply understood from the perspective of those that believe.” (post #480)

Those that “believe” what?

If you are referring to those that believe the most basic definition of “Christian” is “…disciples who aligned with Paul's accomodation of foreign interests, which was in conflict of with the nationalism of the original disciples of Galilee.” are more correct than those that believe the most basic definition of the word "Christian" is simply "those who believe in or follow Christ" then you will have to provide more data to support this position (If that is even what you mean - I can't tell).

In any case, I hope your spiritual Journey is wonderful Shunyadragon.


P.S. I noticed that a few posts have been posted in discussion of this term. THIS post simply and specifically refers to my prior conversation with Ebionite.
I noticed that his later definition of "anyone with Messianic beliefs." is more to the dictionary meaning and I agree with this more than his initial definition we debated over.


Clear

Doesn't one's definition make Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israeli Messiah, a non-Christian, please, right?

Regards

 

[Muffled]

" Saul was sent by the Pharisees to Damascus to persecute Christians there "
Friends @rosends , @Clear , @IndigoChild5559 , @Ebionite

And didn't he (Saul/Paul) continue that mission firmly even afterwards in a more clever way, and by faking a vision to defraud the credulous "Christians" better to be called Paulines rather than "Christians", right??

Regards

I believe there is not shred of evidence to support that view.

 

[Muffled]

I rated our friend @Ebionite's post as winner for the above sentence, Paul never became a follower of the truthful Israelite Messiah, as I understand, instead he tried and converted the credulous to his religion of Hellenism- who already believed "dying, rising and atoning deity" just using the nomenclature of "Christ" and "Christianity", I understand, please, right?

Regards
_______________
"A dying-and-rising, death-rebirth, or resurrection deity is a religious motif in which a god or goddess dies and is resurrected.[1][2][3][4] Examples of gods who die and later return to life are most often cited from the religions of the ancient Near East. "

Dying-and-rising deity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I believe you are consistent and consistently wrong.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

" Saul was sent by the Pharisees to Damascus to persecute Christians there "
Friends @rosends , @Clear , @IndigoChild5559 , @Ebionite

And didn't he (Saul/Paul) continue that mission firmly even afterwards in a more clever way, and by faking a vision to defraud the credulous "Christians" better to be called Paulines rather than "Christians", right??

Regards

Actually, Gamaliel, the head of the Sanhedrin and top Pharisee, actually said to leave the Christians alone.

It would appear that Paul was employed by the Sadducees, working as a temple police.

I doubt that Paul faked the vision. I think it is far more likely that he had some sort of medical problem, such having seizures.

I also doubt that Paul was some sort of "mole" in the Christian church. I think he truly thought that he was some kind of appointed apostle who knew better than anyone else.

Yes, Christianity today is the Pauline version (as opposed to Nazarene, Ebionite, Marcionite, or Gnostic). This includes a deemphasis on the Law (as opposed to Jesus preaching the keeping of the Law).

 

[Ebionite]

Doesn't one's definition make Jesus/Yeshua- the truthful Israeli Messiah, a non-Christian, please, right?

Regards

The Christians were associated with Hellenised religion, while Galilee was known for it's nationalism. Likewise Paul associated Roman rule with deity but Yeshua made a distinction between these two. It was this issue which was a the centre of the trap that was set for him:

Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in [his] talk.
And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any [man]: for thou regardest not the person of men.
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, [ye] hypocrites?
Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
And he saith unto them, Whose [is] this image and superscription?
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Matthew 22:15-21

And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this [fellow] perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King.
Luke 23:2


For without cause have they hid for me their net [in] a pit, [which] without cause they have digged for my soul.
Psalm 35:7

False witnesses did rise up; they laid to my charge [things] that I knew not.
Psalm 35:11

 

[paarsurrey]

"Jewish" Messiah​

Jesus was a Jew and all the NT writers were Jews except for Luke.
But that is just the story that Christians would have us believe.

were Jews except for Luke

If Luke was not a Jew, then what was he, please, right?

Regards

 

[Brian2]

"Jewish" Messiah​

If Luke was not a Jew, then what was he, please, right?

Regards

He seems to have been an educated Greek who was a medical Doctor and companion of Paul on his journeys.

 

[YoursTrue]

"Jewish" Messiah​

If Luke was not a Jew, then what was he, please, right?

Regards

I'd like to say something here. It is true that some say that Luke was not a Jew, and they base this mainly on Colossians 4:11 and 14.
Some draw the implication that Luke was not circumcised and therefore was not a Jew. But this is not conclusive and Romans 3:1,2 states that God entrusted his inspired utterances to the Jews -- Luke is one to whom inspired utterances were entrusted.

 

[YoursTrue]

Actually, Gamaliel, the head of the Sanhedrin and top Pharisee, actually said to leave the Christians alone.

It would appear that Paul was employed by the Sadducees, working as a temple police.

I doubt that Paul faked the vision. I think it is far more likely that he had some sort of medical problem, such having seizures.

I also doubt that Paul was some sort of "mole" in the Christian church. I think he truly thought that he was some kind of appointed apostle who knew better than anyone else.

Yes, Christianity today is the Pauline version (as opposed to Nazarene, Ebionite, Marcionite, or Gnostic). This includes a deemphasis on the Law (as opposed to Jesus preaching the keeping of the Law).

Interesting that you say that because I was watching Jewish TV here (that's one of the channels along with other religious stations) and they broadcast a recount of a Pew analysis, stating that about 1/3 of the Jews did not believe the Torah while a great majority of those in non-Jewish religions do. Many Jews are Jewish by birth and do not go to synagogue or do more than profess a bond with the culture if that much.

 

[YoursTrue]

Qodesh is a transliteration of קדש

And ye shall be holy[קדש] unto me: for I YHWH [am] holy, and have severed you from [other] people, that ye should be mine.
Leviticus 20:26

That makes sense to me. Of course the aftermath needs to follow that, but that scripture sure makes sense to me.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"Jewish" Messiah​

If Luke was not a Jew, then what was he, please, right?

Regards

Greek

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Interesting that you say that because I was watching Jewish TV here (that's one of the channels along with other religious stations) and they broadcast a recount of a Pew analysis, stating that about 1/3 of the Jews did not believe the Torah while a great majority of those in non-Jewish religions do. Many Jews are Jewish by birth and do not go to synagogue or do more than profess a bond with the culture if that much.

That is correct. Just as someone who is Navajo may or may not follow Navajo religion, someone who is a Jew may or may not follow Judaism.