|
|
Post by alon on Apr 13, 2015 13:59:08 GMT -8
From the bottom of pge. 3 in the archives back to the top of the list  Jude Chapter 1 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling [words], having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.
Of course this isn't absolute proof until we find where in the Book of Enoch which we have now this quote came from. He does quote Enoch, but from what source? Still, is very possible I was wrong, since I had forgotten or missed this passage back when I did a study on Enoch way back while I was still in Hebrew Roots.
Dan C
edit: AND a whole new page! 
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Apr 14, 2015 18:08:33 GMT -8
Here are some other references to works not included in the "christian cannon" Jude 9 refers to the Assumption of Mosses. Feast of Dedication is from Maccabees. Hebrews 11:35 refers to II Maccabees 7:1. II Tim. 3:8 refers to The Pentitence of Jannes and Jambres. Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18 refer to the book of Jasher. I believe the book of Jasher and the book of Life are one and the same. Jasher means upright thus alive. See Psalms 69:28 Ester 6:1 speaks of the book of records of the Chronicles Num 21:14 the book of the wars of the LORD I Kings 11:41 book of the acts of Solomon I Chro. 9:29 book of Gad I Chron. 12:15 book of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the Seer I Chron. 20:34 book of Jehu Esther 10:2 the book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Apr 29, 2015 20:56:42 GMT -8
I used to agree with the prevailing wisdom that Yeshua was a Pharisee. Now I seriously doubt this to be the case. I think He was a Jew more along the lines of those at Qumran and Massada. He never compromised the truth, and the Pharisees were all about compromise and appeasement. This is why the Rabbis descended from the Pharisitic line. To say they were all this way would probably be grossly incorrect; however this is part of the overall character of the sect. Yeshua would never compromise the truth. He was the truth of God incarnate.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Apr 30, 2015 5:26:08 GMT -8
Amen.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 3, 2015 7:07:55 GMT -8
In considering this, I think it more likely that Yeshua had His own sect, something along the lines of the Zealots. They agreed with the Pharisees on most things, but were uncompromising in their faith. This is how I see Yeshua. The only difference would be that they pushed for war and Yeshua did not come as a warrior that time. So He may have led a sub-group of Pharisees, or possibly broke away completely to start what would later become the Nots'rim movement. There's no clear picture here, only clues.
We have that Yeshua dipped sop, which only the Pharisees did. He drank from the four cups, again from the Pharisees. He celebrated Chanukah, a Pharisee holiday. He mostly agreed with them on doctrinal issues. But again, the Zealots would do these things as well. So could Yeshua if He led a splinter group, or a sub-group dedicated to  .
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 3, 2015 7:11:34 GMT -8
Personally, I think it foolish to try to pigeonhole myself into one 1st cen group of Jews. I'd certainly identify with the Zealots, and probably their sub-group the Siccari. I'd also identify with elements of the Essenes, such as their apocalyptic views. None of these would ever compromise the truth or compromise with tyrants and traitors. They all demonstrated this by standing against Rome until the last man, woman and child had been killed. I mostly identify with the Nots'rim, who were forced to leave the 67 war because they challenged R Akiva and refused to bend their knee and call Bar Kochba HaMoshiach. They fled to Pella, as they had been instructed, and so lived. Otherwise, they would have fought to the last as well. The Pharisees were decimated, but their leadership compromised and they survived to once again be evicted from their land.
That same leadership which forced the Nots'rim out, then compromised with Rome, blamed the Nots'rim and spread hatred in the Jewish community for them. Caught between persecution from Jews and the Catholic church alike, they were eventually wiped out around the 6th cen CE. True to the end, the hateful writings of their own enemies tell us they refused to compromise.
Today, I am Messianic, a follower of and Yeshua. I am uncompromising, and pray daily for the strength to stay so. I don't know it all yet- but as this thread demonstrates I am learning. The truth is the truth, and that is what I seek. Never compromise the truth, but do seek to know it. And stand and be counted for it whenever God places opportunities or the enemy places minions' in your path!
Dan (the Zealot- sorta') C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 24, 2015 22:41:29 GMT -8
OK, I just found out from Questor that, no matter how embattled I may feel here at times, I cannot use my canon as wadding for my cannon!
canon 1 (kăn′ən) n.
1. An ecclesiastical law or code of laws established by a church council.
2. A secular law, rule, or code of law.
3a. An established principle: the canons of polite society.
3b. A basis for judgment; a standard or criterion.
4. The books of the Bible officially accepted as Holy Scripture.
cannon (kăn′ən) n. pl. cannon or can·nons
1. A large mounted weapon that fires heavy projectiles.
I could have claimed a typo ... I could lie about most anything else too! 
I have spell check ... I need "meaning check" ... 
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Nov 25, 2015 22:48:37 GMT -8
The above is my post copied from another thread. It doesn't fall strictly into the "I was wrong" category- I actually was right. However it does show that even if I am right, I can still be missing something important. I can always learn more. Furthermore, it was another poster here (jimmie) who pointed me in the right direction to see this. It's kind of what we do here; each bringing his/her own perspectives to the table and often helping us to see things in a whole new light. It doesn't necessarily negate our own understanding. But we are studying the infinite Word of God here. All the minds of all the believers in every age combined could not plumb the depths of meaning of a single verse.
I have gained insights from many others too. Some of the posts by the women here have revealed things I would never have thought of. They have a perspective I can't begin to see unless they walk me through it. And while I have a fairly extensive practical background in evangelical Protestantism, we've had Catholics, Adventists, and every other stripe of ex-Prods here, each with a unique perspective. At times there are Jews who come here with a perspective I cannot know unless I study and ask; and one which I need to understand if I am to properly read scripture. Unfortunately we are a bit limited in what we can discuss here. But still, any learnin' is good learnin', as long as it IS good learnin'!
So thanks to you all. I hope you get as much from my insights as I get from yours.
Dan C
ref: theloveofgod.proboards.com/thread/2226/niddah?page=2&scrollTo=19817
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Feb 4, 2016 16:01:32 GMT -8
In my comments on 1 Kings:12:1-17 I called Rehoboam and Jeroboam brothers. Had I thought about it it was clear they were not; and I’d even knew this before I started. But we (I) can get so focused on the lessons we (I) get other things confused. I could see where my thinking went wrong, as I had seen them as brothers in spirit- both entitled and hungry for power. Also Jeroboam was a servant of Solomon, and so was in that respect a part of his household. But what constituted that status and what the term household evokes in 21st cen thought is two different things. So I made a mistake; which points out a few things.
One, I need to be more careful (always good advice), as I do not want to put up falsehoods here. We Meshiachim try to avoid that. Two, we all (including me) make mistakes, and the more we post the more likely it is that will happen. So we do all need to be checking each other as well as ourselves.
Lastly, when someone catches a mistake, or what they perceive to be a mistake, we should first check out what they said against what we said and see who is right. And it can be that both are either right or wrong! Have an open mind and use discernment. And when I do make a mistake, I try to 1.) be thankful it was caught, 2.) be thankful I now learned, and 3.) I post it here as a reminder to me and a help to others. I started this thread quite a while ago (before I was put on staff- way back when being wrong wasn't such a big deal!  ). Actually, even staff makes mistakes. We all do, being human and all. And honestly, it isn’t nearly as long as I thought it would be!
It gets a little complicated reading several sources, sorting what I want to get across and deciding what to let go. There is also a lot of discernment involved since almost always my sources are either Jewish or Christian. There are not many good Messianic commentaries out there. There's a lot of crap on the net, but I generally avoid that as it'd take forever to sort out the gold from the rock. Then I have to summarize everything, using my own terms instead of theirs, adding my own insights which their writings sparked and hopefully God guides/provides. But that ole' debil, he gets in his licks every so often. I am at times easily confused, so by all means check me out. I always checked others, even when I first came here!
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Feb 5, 2016 5:50:05 GMT -8
I agree, never be ashamed of a sincere mistake when you know you have only good intentions and seek to rectify it. A well handled mistake is where we as a community get our best education. Discussion that seeks truth and biblical consistency is my goal, and the mistake brought about a discussion on a level of thought I had never even considered. It's educating so no worries. As long as we handle our own and each other's mistakes well, we will all just grow.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Apr 17, 2016 1:55:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jul 24, 2016 21:14:31 GMT -8
Well, quite literally a couple of hours after my telling a brother Balaam was a pagan, Rav S did a teaching on that very thing- that most Christians, and particularly Baptists (which is exactly what I was before finding the truth) believe Balaam was a pagan. Turns out he wasn't.
There were several proofs in his teaching, but the fact El Elohe Yisro'el spoke through him is really proof enough, if I'd actually thought about it.
Romans 3:1-2 (ESV) Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.
God did not give His word to anyone other than those called from His people. The Midianites and Moabites had very close ties, both to themselves and to Israel. They were probably descended from Jews who left Egypt before their enslavement. But Moses father-in-law was from Midian, and he was a godly man.
It's also in scripture that the One True Elohim was his God: If he were a pagan prophet, he could easily have told the king of Moav what he wanted to hear.
Numbers 22:18 (ESV) But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more
If he were a pagan prophet, he could easily have told the king of Moav what he wanted to hear. He did fall away and told the king how to turn their God away from the Hebrews- by sending the children of Moav to seduce the Hebrews. This is why the Baptists won't say he was a prophet of God- if he was a prophet, then he had a salvation relationship with God. If he fell away like that, it flies in the face of their doctrine of "Once saved always saved." But most Christians, regardless of denomination believe he was a pagan, because they just don't want to spend that much time in the "Old Testament" to thoroughly research the topic.
At any rate, I was wrong about it myself. Hope someone else can learn from my error there.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 26, 2016 6:39:26 GMT -8
Well, quite literally a couple of hours after my telling a brother Balaam was a pagan, Rav S did a teaching on that very thing- that most Christians, and particularly Baptists (which is exactly what I was before finding the truth) believe Balaam was a pagan. Turns out he wasn't.
There were several proofs in his teaching, but the fact El Elohe Yisro'el spoke through him is really proof enough, if I'd actually thought about it.
Romans 3:1-2 (ESV) Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.
God did not give His word to anyone other than those called from His people. The Midianites and Moabites had very close ties, both to themselves and to Israel. They were probably descended from Jews who left Egypt before their enslavement. But Moses father-in-law was from Midian, and he was a godly man.
It's also in scripture that the One True Elohim was his God: If he were a pagan prophet, he could easily have told the king of Moav what he wanted to hear.
Numbers 22:18 (ESV) But Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak, “Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not go beyond the command of the Lord my God to do less or more
If he were a pagan prophet, he could easily have told the king of Moav what he wanted to hear. He did fall away and told the king how to turn their God away from the Hebrews- by sending the children of Moav to seduce the Hebrews. This is why the Baptists won't say he was a prophet of God- if he was a prophet, then he had a salvation relationship with God. If he fell away like that, it flies in the face of their doctrine of "Once saved always saved." But most Christians, regardless of denomination believe he was a pagan, because they just don't want to spend that much time in the "Old Testament" to thoroughly research the topic.
At any rate, I was wrong about it myself. Hope someone else can learn from my error there.
Dan C
This makes so much more sense. There was always something confusing in this passage and you just helped me straiten it out. Thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 1, 2016 18:49:10 GMT -8
LOL, I suggested making a shofar out of a cows horn, and got an immediate and very emphatic rebuttal from Benayahu. He says that would be suggestive of the Golden Calf. Fair point ... no blowing of cows horns. Since I do muzzle-loading, and I make powder horns, I happen to have a nice cows horn on hand. I was looking at it just the other day and thinking ... glad you said something Ben!
Dan C
PS- I do have a regular shofar from a sheep of some kind. I ordered it from the Shofar Man, so it's gotta be kosher. I just like to do things myself- it's harder that way I guess. 
edit: and this thread for some reason just keeps making its way back to the top of the heap ...
|
|
Loxody
Junior Member
Posts: 63 
|
Post by Loxody on Oct 4, 2016 11:39:20 GMT -8
LOL, I suggested making a shofar out of a cows horn, and got an immediate and very emphatic rebuttal from Benayahu. He says that would be suggestive of the Golden Calf. Fair point ... no blowing of cows horns. Since I do muzzle-loading, and I make powder horns, I happen to have a nice cows horn on hand. I was looking at it just the other day and thinking ... glad you said something Ben!
Dan C
PS- I do have a regular shofar from a sheep of some kind. I ordered it from the Shofar Man, so it's gotta be kosher. I just like to do things myself- it's harder that way I guess.
edit: and this thread for some reason just keeps making its way back to the top of the heap ...
I'm going to add this:
I always used a Yemenite shofar for Rosh Hashanah (made from the horn of a Kudu) until I was emphatically told by one of the leaders at my congregation that it has to be a ram's horn for Rosh Hashanah.
I couldn't argue because he quoted one of the most authoritative Messianic Jewish Rabbis in my opinion (and one of the most influential to me) who said the same.  Of course, I don't know it all and don't want to pretend to because I know I have a LOT I can add to the "I Found I Was Wrong" thread!!  |
|
- there are 70 faces to 
