-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Want Info on Messianic Judaism (Non-Trinitarian)
- Thread starter xkatz
- Start date
I will look into that, thanks for the idea, it will be good to have a list like that here. :yes:
The '(Non-Trinitarian)' limit will be the tricky part, and since I am as non-t as they come I'm the perfect one to sort them out. (can sniff out trinity theology very fast) It won't be easy, as the most vocal MJ are going to be from a Christian background, and therefore trinitarian.
Sorry no progress, have had three PCs bite the dust in the past week, So I'm swamped with work. On a PIII W2K laptop ATM. I blame static electricity for at least one of them, power supply for another, third I have no clue. Newfangled PC's aint like the mainframes I learned on...
xkatz
Well-Known Member
Sorry no progress, have had three PCs bite the dust in the past week, So I'm swamped with work. On a PIII W2K laptop ATM. I blame static electricity for at least one of them, power supply for another, third I have no clue. Newfangled PC's aint like the mainframes I learned on...
Ahhh that sucks
But don't worry... I can wait.
I have looked. It's been a depressing experience, but one I expected.
Lots of Christian "Messianic" sites, almost no actual Jewish ones.
Not surprising, but also what I've seen in my time in the community. It's the Evangelicals who make all the noise, 'missionize' and proselytize. Those of us who are actual Jews, we tend to recognize each other amid all the noise, but have not the strength to oppose it.
I'm now exploring Ebionite Judaism, but this is made hard due to the two feuding groups who have commandeered the Ebionite concept with their own peculiar dogmas. As the movement is a Reconstructionist one, it's vulnerable to this kind of corruption. Will keep you posted.
Lots of Christian "Messianic" sites, almost no actual Jewish ones.
Not surprising, but also what I've seen in my time in the community. It's the Evangelicals who make all the noise, 'missionize' and proselytize. Those of us who are actual Jews, we tend to recognize each other amid all the noise, but have not the strength to oppose it.
I'm now exploring Ebionite Judaism, but this is made hard due to the two feuding groups who have commandeered the Ebionite concept with their own peculiar dogmas. As the movement is a Reconstructionist one, it's vulnerable to this kind of corruption. Will keep you posted.
xkatz
Well-Known Member
Sad but not surprising.
I find Ebionite Judaism very interesting. I like their concept of no longer having sacrifices (due to Jesus' sacrifice). It's an interesting development that there is a feud. Is it sort of a "Messianic Christian vs. Messianic Jewish" type of thing?
Last edited:
Pretty much. The Christian-based group (sorry about your eyes, in advance!): The Ebionite Home Page
The (seemingly) Jewish-based group: Ebionite Community -- Restoring the Way of the Ancient Evyonim, Yahwism, and Renewed Covenant
Here's an interesting web site that sadly seemed not to be completed, though their FAQ page is good: The Ebionite Network
The thing to remember is that 'Ebionite' is a term that applied to many groups in first century Israel, the common factor being they were originally local Jews who followed Yeshua in some way. It's likely they had different perspectives, just look at all the modern sects of Christianity.
None of these groups survived the coming persecution of Rome and later Roman Christians, who considered Ebionites to be heretics. So all individuals and groups that identify themselves as 'Ebionites' today, are practicing some reconstructed faith, based on their own beliefs. All fall under the umbrella term 'Messianic Jews', IMHO.
esmith
Veteran Member
Not sure of course, but then I don't know who their target audience is. Probably Messianic Jews, which certainly are a 'mixed multitude'. All I can say for sure is that if they're 'goyish' they sure do seem to be anti-church, just scroll down to the bottom of the page.
BTW, welcome to RF, feel free to make an intro thread in the new members forum.
Shalom
Shermana
Heretic
I am a non(read: Anti)-Trinitarian Messianic Jew (full blooded Yid) that accepts issues like the Deutero-Paulines are forgeries. (As well as Ruth), and that the Apocrypha, including Enoch, is legit. Perhaps I can answer a particular question. I represent a minority within the "movement" but I can offer personal opinion on specific issues if you wish. I personally wish more Messianic Jews would wake up to see the "Trinity" as a post 2nd century gentile concept.
Shalom, and Welcome to RF!
Many MJ have come on RF, but few have stayed. As you can see, I've stayed and am virtually the sole representative of non-Christian Messianic Judaism..
I'd be nice to have someone else on here.
So, please complete your profile, and make an introduction thread over in the new members forum.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
Wouldnt Messianic Christianity be useless to thous who are not Jewish, since in the NT while the Apostles were talking about the Gentile converts to Christianity, whether they should follow the Torah, the answer was no.
Shermana
Heretic
Where does Jesus say you can't punch your father in the face and why are you forbidden from eating blood?
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
These are basic laws. Notice the Apostles did not say the gentile converts had to eat kosher? Or follow any of the oral law that the Pharisees followed? They did not say they had to wear teffilim or use mezuzahs.
They instructed the gentiles to follow Noachide type of laws.
Shermana
Heretic
Now they become "Basic laws", but yet you feel you can cherry pick. So are you able to eat a deadly South American Tree Arrow Frog because Jesus made it clean, or if you die from the poison will you at least not be "Ceremonially unclean" as the toxins burn inside?
The ORAL Law however is the thing in question, that's what Jesus was out to preach against. In fact, that was the point of Mark 7:20 (of which the KJV translates correctly "And purges all foods" instead of "Made all meats clean", which is in relation to the Unscriptural ritual handwashing that the Pharisees had enforced. Qairites are the modern equivalent to the concept of today, the Rabbis are the Pharisees of today. As well, when the Disciples were picking grain on the Sabbath, that's not work. That's not using a sickle to slice and bind them and load them all day. Neither is performing a Divine healing, today Rabbis allow surgeons to work on Sabbath, but back in the day, they had interpreted Torah to mean you couldn't even save a man's life on Sabbath.
If you say there is a "Basic Law" beyond the 4 given including abstaining from blood, then now suddenly you are assigning a new term to label things in your own context. That's fine privately, but in scriptural terms, there's no distinction between a "Basic Law" and the ones that supposedly the gentiles are free from. As I've said in another thread, Paul would have been stoned to death at his trial in Jerusalem if he was accused of teaching any Lawlessness. The controversy was almost entirely over c-cision was about an unscriptural forcing of the procedure, which is only for one's offspring, that is why Abraham is mentioned as performing it at age 90.
Yashua mentions teffelin too, he says that the Jews had lost its meaning and instead were just wearing it for the Bling.
If you feel you can now eat any animal you want, then you should feel there is no harm in eating a Poison arrow frog. The word "Clean" is up to debate, what is "cleanliness", and why were ancient Jews told to avoid pig as an "Abomination". What is "Abomination", it doesn't just mean "Ceremonially unclean" whatever that means as a few translations make a euphamism for.
The ORAL Law however is the thing in question, that's what Jesus was out to preach against. In fact, that was the point of Mark 7:20 (of which the KJV translates correctly "And purges all foods" instead of "Made all meats clean", which is in relation to the Unscriptural ritual handwashing that the Pharisees had enforced. Qairites are the modern equivalent to the concept of today, the Rabbis are the Pharisees of today. As well, when the Disciples were picking grain on the Sabbath, that's not work. That's not using a sickle to slice and bind them and load them all day. Neither is performing a Divine healing, today Rabbis allow surgeons to work on Sabbath, but back in the day, they had interpreted Torah to mean you couldn't even save a man's life on Sabbath.
If you say there is a "Basic Law" beyond the 4 given including abstaining from blood, then now suddenly you are assigning a new term to label things in your own context. That's fine privately, but in scriptural terms, there's no distinction between a "Basic Law" and the ones that supposedly the gentiles are free from. As I've said in another thread, Paul would have been stoned to death at his trial in Jerusalem if he was accused of teaching any Lawlessness. The controversy was almost entirely over c-cision was about an unscriptural forcing of the procedure, which is only for one's offspring, that is why Abraham is mentioned as performing it at age 90.
Yashua mentions teffelin too, he says that the Jews had lost its meaning and instead were just wearing it for the Bling.
If you feel you can now eat any animal you want, then you should feel there is no harm in eating a Poison arrow frog. The word "Clean" is up to debate, what is "cleanliness", and why were ancient Jews told to avoid pig as an "Abomination". What is "Abomination", it doesn't just mean "Ceremonially unclean" whatever that means as a few translations make a euphamism for.
Shermana
Heretic
If God made poisonous frogs clean, why can't you eat them? What is the definition of a "Clean" animal. God did not make them all clean, the purpose of Acts 10' Peter's vision is clearly explained as a metaphor. Mark 7:19 the KJV is the correct Greek ("The stomach purges all meats"), the "Thus he declared all foods clean" isn't even remotely Grammatically correct. It would be like "He cleanses all foods" assuming you interpreted the pronoun as "he" and "purges" as "Cleanses", but it's not in the past tense.
The point of the cherry picking is that you say that some of the Laws are still in place like not striking your father or mother, yet you say Gentiles are exempt. Are you saying they are only exempt from the Sabbath and from eating pork? Shellfish poisoning (and resulting paralyzation) didn't go away for 2,000 years, so define "clean". There's a 100x greater risk eating clams than beef for one th9ing. So at what point do you say that Christians are still under the Old Testament commands and what happens if they break them? When the Rich man asks Jesus "what must I do", Jesus says "Follow the commandments" and starts listing them....including "Do not defraud" and "Do not steal" in the same sentence, so he's talking more than just the 10 commandments.
You may have a point about gathering mana being a sin on the Sabbath. Regardless, Yashua compares him and his compansions to David on the run (and they were on the run, they were on the Pharisees' watchlist), but also, the gathering of mana is a lot different than picking grain, the gathering of mana was intensive gathering and putting it into a sack, compared to picking heads of grain. But you have a point on that at least. Would Jesus and the disciples have done so if they weren't on the run or was it an "emergency" measure?
Either way Jesus says "Pray that your flight does not take place in Winter or on the Sabbath day". He's not comparing Sabbath to Winter in the sense that it will be too harsh for them to run, he's giving it as a separate indication. No matter what, the disciples are supposed to pray that they don't have to be on the run on the Sabbath.
The Kosher Laws though, are not voided by Mark 7:19 or Acts 10. Even in Mark 7, his Disciples call the teaching a "Parable", as in there was something "hidden" in the message and his words shouldn't be taken as literal. The concept was about unritual handwashing that the Pharisees were emphasizing at the expense of other parts of the Law itself that they broke. "Straining for gnats and swallowing camels". Context is everything. If Jesus really preached eating whatever you wanted, they'd have an actual charge for him at his trial. Along with Paul.
The point of the cherry picking is that you say that some of the Laws are still in place like not striking your father or mother, yet you say Gentiles are exempt. Are you saying they are only exempt from the Sabbath and from eating pork? Shellfish poisoning (and resulting paralyzation) didn't go away for 2,000 years, so define "clean". There's a 100x greater risk eating clams than beef for one th9ing. So at what point do you say that Christians are still under the Old Testament commands and what happens if they break them? When the Rich man asks Jesus "what must I do", Jesus says "Follow the commandments" and starts listing them....including "Do not defraud" and "Do not steal" in the same sentence, so he's talking more than just the 10 commandments.
You may have a point about gathering mana being a sin on the Sabbath. Regardless, Yashua compares him and his compansions to David on the run (and they were on the run, they were on the Pharisees' watchlist), but also, the gathering of mana is a lot different than picking grain, the gathering of mana was intensive gathering and putting it into a sack, compared to picking heads of grain. But you have a point on that at least. Would Jesus and the disciples have done so if they weren't on the run or was it an "emergency" measure?
Either way Jesus says "Pray that your flight does not take place in Winter or on the Sabbath day". He's not comparing Sabbath to Winter in the sense that it will be too harsh for them to run, he's giving it as a separate indication. No matter what, the disciples are supposed to pray that they don't have to be on the run on the Sabbath.
The Kosher Laws though, are not voided by Mark 7:19 or Acts 10. Even in Mark 7, his Disciples call the teaching a "Parable", as in there was something "hidden" in the message and his words shouldn't be taken as literal. The concept was about unritual handwashing that the Pharisees were emphasizing at the expense of other parts of the Law itself that they broke. "Straining for gnats and swallowing camels". Context is everything. If Jesus really preached eating whatever you wanted, they'd have an actual charge for him at his trial. Along with Paul.
Shermana
Heretic
Thought I'd share, here is a quote from Hippolytus stating that the original Nazarenes were not any different than other Jews except they followed Yashua's teachings and accepted him as the Moshiach. Despite what I've heard others say, the "Messianic movement" is not just a product of modernity, it was what the original Antioch and Jerusalem Church taught, and it was not until after the 2nd century that anti-Judaizers appeared without the Jerusalem Church to challenge them.
"
"
They have no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and in the Jewish fashion – except for their belief in Christ, if you please! For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of all things, and declare that God is one, and that his Son is Jesus Christ.
—Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.2"
—Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29.7.2"