[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
orion Orion Sadducees (MMT) et al, Part 1
At 13:05 16/07/97 -0500, Jack Kilmon wrote:
>If we utilize the term "Christian" for those immediate followers of Yeshua,
No. Continuity between Christianity and this period must be demonstrated,
>we must remove the Hellenistic, developed christologic sense of the word.
No, you can't redefine "Christian" according to convenience.
>In this format, it is very likely that "Christianity" in that sense,
preceded Yeshua in >the form of the style of Enochian/Messianic Judaism into
which they fit.
This undefined "format" and "sense" is not Christianity. Define some terms
precisely, then use them consistently.
>Where is the line, therefore between "pre-Christan" and "proto-Christian?"
Proto-Christian exists only where continuity with Christianity can be
unequivocally demonstrated, and that, so far, is all post-64 CE.
Pre-Christian refers to Adam, Alexander the Great, and Antiochus, as well as
everything else prior to 135 CE.
>This is why I prefer the term "Yeshuine Judaism."
This implies that it is mutually exclusive from Perushim, from Qumran
Tsedoqim, and from Pseudo- Tsedoqim; which has not been demonstrated. It
would be more accurate to designate it as a sect within the overall
framework of one, or some combination, of these three major sects. This
historical name of this sect is Netzarim. Now some regularly accuse me of
mixing "my religion" into this because I happen to believe the Netzarim were
"correct." That's ad hominem. This is no excuse to exclude historical
evidence and documentation about the sect which virtually everyone
recognizes as a key player in this period just because it comes from me and
I happen to believe it. My beliefs don't invalidate historical evidence,
documentation, nor logic.
> I think the DSS texts clearly reflect disputation on "legitimate
Judaism" during >the 2nd temple period.
Thinking (assuming) it and demonstrating it are worlds apart. Each of the
three sects regarded the interpretations of Torah she-ba'al peh of the other
"minim" (the Perushim designation; I don't know what term the Qurman
Tsedoqim used) as misled. But if they were to be regarded as an
illegitimate sect and outside of legitimate Judaism it would have required
action declaring such in the Beyt Din Ha-Gadol -- the undisputed and
ultimate earthly authority defining Judaism during this period. There is,
of course, no such decision. The sects represented in the Beyt Din Ha-Gadol
were legitimate. 4Q MMT demonstrates that all sects represented in the Beyt
Din Ha-Gadol uncompromisingly insisted on observance of the *entirety* of
Torah -- that is Torah she-bikhtav *AND* Torah she-ba'al peh (whether
referring to the halakhah version, the ma'aseh version, or the "Book of
Decrees" version). There was no disputation "on 'legitimate Judaism'"
during this period.
(Continues in part 2)
Paqid 16, Global Congregation of Nazarene Jews
Netzarim Virtual Community Center