Introduction
An Excerpt From - Introduction
The wells from which the early Messianic Community (the Church) drank, began to be stopped up and covered over by those who seemed not to value the source from which they sprang. We have an illustration of this in the Book of Genesis,
“And Isaac digged again the wells of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father; for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham: and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them. And Isaac’s servants digged in the valley, and found there a well of springing water.” Genesis 26:18-19
In Abraham’s journeys, he dug wells along the roads he traveled. After his death, the Philistines had stopped them up by throwing stones and debris in them. Isaac found the wells of his father, dug them out, opening up the wells of springing water. Having opened the wells of his father, he called them by the names that his father had named them.
He didn’t use the names that the Philistines had named them. He reclaimed from the Philistines what originally had belonged to his father.
This is the task we have before us. Our fathers, the original apostles, dug wells of life for us, wells that sprang out of the fount of God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, flowing by that sacred olive tree.
Some of the wells that the apostles opened up for us have been stopped up, some have been renamed so that they are no longer recognized. In short, the Church, starting from the second century, dramatically changed the expression that was known to the first century Church.
The wells from which the early Messianic Community (the Church) drank, began to be stopped up and covered over by those who seemed not to value the source from which they sprang. We have an illustration of this in the Book of Genesis,
“And Isaac digged again the wells of water, which they had digged in the days of Abraham his father; for the Philistines had stopped them after the death of Abraham: and he called their names after the names by which his father had called them. And Isaac’s servants digged in the valley, and found there a well of springing water.” Genesis 26:18-19
In Abraham’s journeys, he dug wells along the roads he traveled. After his death, the Philistines had stopped them up by throwing stones and debris in them. Isaac found the wells of his father, dug them out, opening up the wells of springing water. Having opened the wells of his father, he called them by the names that his father had named them.
He didn’t use the names that the Philistines had named them. He reclaimed from the Philistines what originally had belonged to his father.
This is the task we have before us. Our fathers, the original apostles, dug wells of life for us, wells that sprang out of the fount of God’s promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, flowing by that sacred olive tree.
Some of the wells that the apostles opened up for us have been stopped up, some have been renamed so that they are no longer recognized. In short, the Church, starting from the second century, dramatically changed the expression that was known to the first century Church.
Brief Historical Overview
An Excerpt From - Brief Historical Overview
Along with prohibiting any Jew from entering or viewing what was once Jerusalem, Hadrian also made Judaism an illegal religion. He forbade the observance of the Sabbath, Circumcision, and possessing Torah Scrolls. So for all practical purposes, Judaism became outlawed. This was to have a broader effect than Hadrian could have anticipated. This would not only affect the Jewish community, but also the Church for centuries to come.
Another note of interest, considering today’s political climate, is that it was Hadrian who renamed the land Palestine. He did this as a further insult to the Jews. The Temple had been destroyed in the first revolt. He then took away their city, made their religion illegal, imposed a heavy tax upon them and then renamed their land after the ancient inhabitants, the Philistines.
What makes this interesting is that although the Jews were prohibited from entering what was once Jerusalem, many if not most of them, continued to live in the land of their fathers. So it would be correct to say, although not politically correct today, that the original inhabitants of Palestine were Jewish.
Along with prohibiting any Jew from entering or viewing what was once Jerusalem, Hadrian also made Judaism an illegal religion. He forbade the observance of the Sabbath, Circumcision, and possessing Torah Scrolls. So for all practical purposes, Judaism became outlawed. This was to have a broader effect than Hadrian could have anticipated. This would not only affect the Jewish community, but also the Church for centuries to come.
Another note of interest, considering today’s political climate, is that it was Hadrian who renamed the land Palestine. He did this as a further insult to the Jews. The Temple had been destroyed in the first revolt. He then took away their city, made their religion illegal, imposed a heavy tax upon them and then renamed their land after the ancient inhabitants, the Philistines.
What makes this interesting is that although the Jews were prohibited from entering what was once Jerusalem, many if not most of them, continued to live in the land of their fathers. So it would be correct to say, although not politically correct today, that the original inhabitants of Palestine were Jewish.
A New Day
An Excerpt From - A New Day
This fact that the first day of the week in the Roman calendar during the first century was Saturn’s day seems to be well documented, but for reasons that should be obvious, is preferably ignored.
Rome’s historical connection to the god Saturn is quite old. Before Romulus and Remus founded Rome, a more ancient city was founded upon the same site. This ancient city was called Saturnia. The king or founder of this ancient city was none other than Saturn/Kronos, who in ancient mythology is identified with Ninus or more commonly known as Nimrod, the first king of Babylon.
It seems an accepted fact that the Romans did not begin to use the seven-day week until some time in the mid-first century. At that point, Saturn’s Day was fixed as the first day of the Roman week and was considered as a day of rest, of sorts.
This fact that the first day of the week in the Roman calendar during the first century was Saturn’s day seems to be well documented, but for reasons that should be obvious, is preferably ignored.
Rome’s historical connection to the god Saturn is quite old. Before Romulus and Remus founded Rome, a more ancient city was founded upon the same site. This ancient city was called Saturnia. The king or founder of this ancient city was none other than Saturn/Kronos, who in ancient mythology is identified with Ninus or more commonly known as Nimrod, the first king of Babylon.
It seems an accepted fact that the Romans did not begin to use the seven-day week until some time in the mid-first century. At that point, Saturn’s Day was fixed as the first day of the Roman week and was considered as a day of rest, of sorts.
A Sunday Resurrection?
An Excerpt From - A Sunday Resurrection?
However, not everyone thinks Matthew’s record can be trusted. William Barclay, a well respected and renowned Bible scholar, says this about the saying of Jesus as reported by Matthew,
This is common practice among many scholars - to determine what is and what isn’t the real words of Jesus. Now we have to ask, “What is he basing this determination upon?” I will let him answer this question. He continues,
He is making this assumption of the incorrectness of Jesus statement based not upon what Jesus said, but based upon the tradition of a Friday crucifixion and Sunday morning resurrection.
To put another way, he is basing his interpretation upon Church tradition, instead of what the Bible says. This is an excellent example of how we interpret the Bible according to our traditions, and not according to what it truly teaches.
However, not everyone thinks Matthew’s record can be trusted. William Barclay, a well respected and renowned Bible scholar, says this about the saying of Jesus as reported by Matthew,
Matthew says that the sign is that, as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. It is to be noted that these are not the words of Jesus, but the explanation of Matthew.
This is common practice among many scholars - to determine what is and what isn’t the real words of Jesus. Now we have to ask, “What is he basing this determination upon?” I will let him answer this question. He continues,
The fact is that Matthew understood wrongly the point of what Jesus said; and in so doing he made a strange mistake, for Jesus was not in the heart of the earth for three nights, but only for two. He was laid in the earth on the night of the Good Friday and rose on the morning of the first Easter Sunday.
He is making this assumption of the incorrectness of Jesus statement based not upon what Jesus said, but based upon the tradition of a Friday crucifixion and Sunday morning resurrection.
To put another way, he is basing his interpretation upon Church tradition, instead of what the Bible says. This is an excellent example of how we interpret the Bible according to our traditions, and not according to what it truly teaches.
A New Administration
An Excerpt From - A New Administration
Jesus knew the difference between the two methods of leadership. In Matthew, we have the account of how the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus and requested that her sons sit with him in his kingdom. After answering her, the other ten were moved with indignation, which is evidence of a jealous spirit. This spirit of jealousy has no place in a shepherd's heart. Jesus then began to instruct his disciples in the method of leadership that he expected from them. He said,
Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister. And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant; Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. Matt. 20:25-28
Here, Jesus contrasts the two methods of administration: ruling and leading. The practice of the Gentiles was to rule over the people. The practice of the Messiah and his apostolic shepherds was to lead by serving and by example. Jesus pointed out to them that he did not come to be served, but to serve. This was the point of the act of His washing the feet of the disciples. In this act, He was not instituting foot washing as an ordinance of the Church as some believe, but was giving them an example of what He had taught them in word. He was teaching them greatness through humility and service. If He, the Word of God in flesh, came to lead by serving, then it is imperative that those following him do the same.
Jesus knew the difference between the two methods of leadership. In Matthew, we have the account of how the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus and requested that her sons sit with him in his kingdom. After answering her, the other ten were moved with indignation, which is evidence of a jealous spirit. This spirit of jealousy has no place in a shepherd's heart. Jesus then began to instruct his disciples in the method of leadership that he expected from them. He said,
Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister. And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant; Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. Matt. 20:25-28
Here, Jesus contrasts the two methods of administration: ruling and leading. The practice of the Gentiles was to rule over the people. The practice of the Messiah and his apostolic shepherds was to lead by serving and by example. Jesus pointed out to them that he did not come to be served, but to serve. This was the point of the act of His washing the feet of the disciples. In this act, He was not instituting foot washing as an ordinance of the Church as some believe, but was giving them an example of what He had taught them in word. He was teaching them greatness through humility and service. If He, the Word of God in flesh, came to lead by serving, then it is imperative that those following him do the same.
A New Method of Financing
An Excerpt From - A New Method of Financing
The proper understanding of 2 Corinthians 8-9, is found in the context of the collection for the saints, who had been hit hard by famine. This famine was prophesied by the prophet Agabus (Acts 11:27-30). Actually, this famine hit in three waves. The first wave hit Judea in A.D. 44 - 45. The second wave hit Greece in A.D. 49 and Italy in A.D. 51. According to Josephus, the famine in Judea lasted three to four years, during the governor-ships of Cuspius Fadus and Tiberius Alexander. These men ruled Judea from A.D. 44-48.
Judea was not a major producer of grain. At least not enough to support all the peoples of the land. Those who had money, would likely be able to buy grain from Alexandria in Egypt, which was a major port for exporting grain. The poor had no such option. It is for this reason that the Apostles at Jerusalem admonished Paul and Barnabas to “remember the poor” (Gal. 2:10), which Paul had already determined to do. This collection apparently went on for several years after the famine. The need was great, particularly for the Messianic community, who took it upon themselves to care for their own (Acts. 6:1).
During Paul’s missionary endeavors with Barnabas, and later with Silas, he made this collection one of his top priorities. During Paul’s third missionary endeavor, while in Macedonia, he writes the letter known to us as 2 Corinthians.
The proper understanding of 2 Corinthians 8-9, is found in the context of the collection for the saints, who had been hit hard by famine. This famine was prophesied by the prophet Agabus (Acts 11:27-30). Actually, this famine hit in three waves. The first wave hit Judea in A.D. 44 - 45. The second wave hit Greece in A.D. 49 and Italy in A.D. 51. According to Josephus, the famine in Judea lasted three to four years, during the governor-ships of Cuspius Fadus and Tiberius Alexander. These men ruled Judea from A.D. 44-48.
Judea was not a major producer of grain. At least not enough to support all the peoples of the land. Those who had money, would likely be able to buy grain from Alexandria in Egypt, which was a major port for exporting grain. The poor had no such option. It is for this reason that the Apostles at Jerusalem admonished Paul and Barnabas to “remember the poor” (Gal. 2:10), which Paul had already determined to do. This collection apparently went on for several years after the famine. The need was great, particularly for the Messianic community, who took it upon themselves to care for their own (Acts. 6:1).
During Paul’s missionary endeavors with Barnabas, and later with Silas, he made this collection one of his top priorities. During Paul’s third missionary endeavor, while in Macedonia, he writes the letter known to us as 2 Corinthians.
A Theological Shift
An Excerpt From - A Theological Shift
These early Church Leaders were operating in a system that had become more and more antagonistic toward the Jewish Faith. To be fair, the Jewish Faith had also become very antagonistic toward the Christians. These two brothers, born of the same Father, were at war with each other for the hearts of the people, to their own detriment. On the Jewish side, they had cut ties with their Jewish brothers who believed in Jesus as the Messiah, during the Second Jewish War with Rome (A.D. 132-135). The Church officially cut ties with Judaism at the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325), although this was only a pronouncement of what was already common practice.
During this period, what was once considered a part of the Jewish life and faith, was now becoming the possession of the Gentile believers, and would be made into their image.
As we view the Church Fathers’ approach to understanding God, and compare it to that of the Hebraic approach, there is one thing that seems clear. We can sum it up in one word: Definition.
The fathers, approaching God from a more Western and a more analytical view, seemed to feel the need to lay down a definition of God, where the Hebraic approach does not.
These early Church Leaders were operating in a system that had become more and more antagonistic toward the Jewish Faith. To be fair, the Jewish Faith had also become very antagonistic toward the Christians. These two brothers, born of the same Father, were at war with each other for the hearts of the people, to their own detriment. On the Jewish side, they had cut ties with their Jewish brothers who believed in Jesus as the Messiah, during the Second Jewish War with Rome (A.D. 132-135). The Church officially cut ties with Judaism at the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325), although this was only a pronouncement of what was already common practice.
During this period, what was once considered a part of the Jewish life and faith, was now becoming the possession of the Gentile believers, and would be made into their image.
As we view the Church Fathers’ approach to understanding God, and compare it to that of the Hebraic approach, there is one thing that seems clear. We can sum it up in one word: Definition.
The fathers, approaching God from a more Western and a more analytical view, seemed to feel the need to lay down a definition of God, where the Hebraic approach does not.
A New Ritual
An Excerpt From - A New Ritual
What does Paul refer to when he speaks of the 'Lord's Supper'? Let us first notice that this phrase appears one time in all the Scriptures. Only in I Corinthians 11, and there it appears negatively. He tells the Corinthians when they come together, “ . . .it is not to eat the Lord's supper.” So what does this mean? We must first understand the context and background of Paul's statement.
In the city of Corinth, there were a multitude of temples dedicated to numerous pagan deities. Each one of these gods would have their own feast. As part of this feast or celebration, there was a meal incorporated into it. This meal was, in the Greek, a deipnon (deipnon). This term can mean a simple meal. However, when it is attached to the name of a deity, it takes on a cultic nature. Every god had his own deipnon. This feast was participated in and viewed as being able to bring the participants into a fellowship or intimacy with the god to whom it was dedicated. For instance, if one attended the deipnon of Aphrodite, then by your participation in the meal, you were brought into fellowship with Aphrodite, and so on.
The Corinthian Church believed, that Jesus was entitled to such a feast. In some circles it was called the Agape Feast. What transpired at these feasts was anything but an exhibition
of love. The rich would arrive first, and begin without the rest of the assembly, who obviously were still at work. They would indulge themselves with food and wine until it turned into nothing but a gluttonous, drunken display of sensuality.
What Paul says to this is in essence, "What you are doing is not the feast that brings you into intimate fellowship with the Lord." Then Paul takes them back to the feast that does bring them into intimacy with the Lord, the true Lord’s Supper. He takes them back to the Last Passover Meal.
What does Paul refer to when he speaks of the 'Lord's Supper'? Let us first notice that this phrase appears one time in all the Scriptures. Only in I Corinthians 11, and there it appears negatively. He tells the Corinthians when they come together, “ . . .it is not to eat the Lord's supper.” So what does this mean? We must first understand the context and background of Paul's statement.
In the city of Corinth, there were a multitude of temples dedicated to numerous pagan deities. Each one of these gods would have their own feast. As part of this feast or celebration, there was a meal incorporated into it. This meal was, in the Greek, a deipnon (deipnon). This term can mean a simple meal. However, when it is attached to the name of a deity, it takes on a cultic nature. Every god had his own deipnon. This feast was participated in and viewed as being able to bring the participants into a fellowship or intimacy with the god to whom it was dedicated. For instance, if one attended the deipnon of Aphrodite, then by your participation in the meal, you were brought into fellowship with Aphrodite, and so on.
The Corinthian Church believed, that Jesus was entitled to such a feast. In some circles it was called the Agape Feast. What transpired at these feasts was anything but an exhibition
of love. The rich would arrive first, and begin without the rest of the assembly, who obviously were still at work. They would indulge themselves with food and wine until it turned into nothing but a gluttonous, drunken display of sensuality.
What Paul says to this is in essence, "What you are doing is not the feast that brings you into intimate fellowship with the Lord." Then Paul takes them back to the feast that does bring them into intimacy with the Lord, the true Lord’s Supper. He takes them back to the Last Passover Meal.
Jesus, Our Covenant Man
An Excerpt From - Jesus, Our Covenant Man
God knew, as many of us know, that if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. So God sent forth His Word, made of woman, made under the law, and took upon himself the form of a servant. If the Law was to be fulfilled, He would have to do it Himself, as Man, as an Israelite. He would have to fill full to satisfaction the requirements of the Law, which the Israelites had failed to keep. He says this very clearly, when he says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”
The I AM came in the flesh to dwell among His People. God in flesh, Jesus of Nazareth, Immanuel, came to fulfill the law, which the nation had failed to fulfill.
Since I AM made covenant with Israel, and Israel could not fulfill the covenant, then He would step in, on their behalf, and fulfill it for them, as one of them. This made the first covenant, in essence, a covenant between God and God as Man. This is the formula that He found to be successful.
God knew, as many of us know, that if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. So God sent forth His Word, made of woman, made under the law, and took upon himself the form of a servant. If the Law was to be fulfilled, He would have to do it Himself, as Man, as an Israelite. He would have to fill full to satisfaction the requirements of the Law, which the Israelites had failed to keep. He says this very clearly, when he says, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”
The I AM came in the flesh to dwell among His People. God in flesh, Jesus of Nazareth, Immanuel, came to fulfill the law, which the nation had failed to fulfill.
Since I AM made covenant with Israel, and Israel could not fulfill the covenant, then He would step in, on their behalf, and fulfill it for them, as one of them. This made the first covenant, in essence, a covenant between God and God as Man. This is the formula that He found to be successful.
The Prophetic Apostasy
An Excerpt From - The Prophetic Apostasy
Several streams of teachings began to flow in the 1940s and 50’s, which by the 1980s and 90's, have come together in a torrential flood of perverted doctrine.
In the 40's and 50's we have several movements that began as individual streams.
The Latter Rain Movement/Manifest Sons of God. - The Shepherding Movement. - Kingdom Now/Dominion Theology - Positive Confession/Thinking.
All of these seemed to have flowed together now days, into a somewhat unified thought. All of these teachings added their own particular aspect, but when taken as a whole, they make up what is today known as the Modern Charismatic Movement. The particulars of this movement are found in the following doctrines.
The Dominion/Kingdom Now Theology
The Church will establish the Kingdom of God on earth. In the extreme it will convert by evangelism or it will kill. The Inquisition will return.
It largely denies the catching away(rapture) of the Church. All the promises of blessings made to Israel, are now for the Church, the New Israel. The curses are left for the Jews. Hence, a Replacement Theology.
Several streams of teachings began to flow in the 1940s and 50’s, which by the 1980s and 90's, have come together in a torrential flood of perverted doctrine.
In the 40's and 50's we have several movements that began as individual streams.
The Latter Rain Movement/Manifest Sons of God. - The Shepherding Movement. - Kingdom Now/Dominion Theology - Positive Confession/Thinking.
All of these seemed to have flowed together now days, into a somewhat unified thought. All of these teachings added their own particular aspect, but when taken as a whole, they make up what is today known as the Modern Charismatic Movement. The particulars of this movement are found in the following doctrines.
The Dominion/Kingdom Now Theology
The Church will establish the Kingdom of God on earth. In the extreme it will convert by evangelism or it will kill. The Inquisition will return.
It largely denies the catching away(rapture) of the Church. All the promises of blessings made to Israel, are now for the Church, the New Israel. The curses are left for the Jews. Hence, a Replacement Theology.
Appendices
Appendix A: Dating the Last Passover
Appendix B: Constantine's Easter Letter
Appendix C: Apostle/Sh'leka
Appendix D: Jesus and the Right Hand of God
Appendix E: Biblical Predestination
Appendix F: The Christian and the Sabbath
Appendix B: Constantine's Easter Letter
Appendix C: Apostle/Sh'leka
Appendix D: Jesus and the Right Hand of God
Appendix E: Biblical Predestination
Appendix F: The Christian and the Sabbath
src="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js">