andersbranderud

Did you know that the original “Matthew” was written in Hebrew and it’s called Hebrew Matityahu. It speaks about an Orthodox Jewish leader – a Pharisee.

I am a follower of Ribi Yehoshua – I believe he was the Messias (he was not divine, he was a human like us) – who practiced Torah including Halakhah with all his heart.
He was born in Betlehem 7 B.C.E . His faher name was Yoseiph and mother’s name was Mir′ yâm. He had twelve followers. He taught in the Jewish orthodox synagogues.

Thousands of Jews were interested in His Torah-teachings. The “Temple” Sadducees (non-priests who bought their priest-ship in the “Temple” from the Romans, because they were assimilated Hellenist and genealogically non-priests acting as priests in the “Temple”; they were known by most 1st-century Jews as “Wicked Priests.” decided to crucify him. So they did - together with the Romans. His followers were called Netzarim (meaning offshoots [of a olive tree]) and they continued to pray with the other Jews in the synagogues.

Christianity does not teach the teachings of Ribi Yehoshua. Ribi Yehoshuas teachings were pro-Torah. The teachings of Christianity are anti-Torah.

Ribi Yehoshua is called a Ribi in the earliest source documents of gospel of Matthew, and only Pharisees were called that. The scroll 4Q MMT – found in the Qumran cave – makes it clear that the Pharisees practiced Torah including the Oral Law.

The Qumran scroll 4Q MMT makes it crystal clear that at the beginning of the 1st century C.E., not only that Torah was the center of the life of every religious Jew but that the Oral Law was the core of Torah for every religious Jew – including Ribi Yehoshua and the Netzarim!

Except for that there are more errors in Christanity.
1. The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius (260-340 CE), recorded in his Ecclesiastical History (EH II.xxiii.4) that the "charge" over the original Jewish followers of Ribi Yәhoshua had been given over to his brother, the first Nәtzarim Paqid, Ya•aqov "ha-Tzadiq" Ben-David (Hellenized to "James the Just").
2. The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius also documented that the Nәtzarim excised Saul, thereafter referred to exclusively as Paul, judging him an apostate (EH III.xxvii.4; see also NT corroboration in Ma•avar 15.41 with note 15.41.0 of Appendix V in Atonement In the Biblical 'New Covenant' (ABNC).
3. The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius further documented (EH IV.vi.3-4) that, in 135 CE, the Roman gentiles displaced the Nәtzarim by their expulsion ("ethnic cleansing") from Yәrushalayim of every Jew… which included the 15th Nәtzarim Paqid (EH IV.v.1-4) whom the Romans displaced with the first gentile "bishop," Marcus (EH V.xii.1) — the birth of the gentile Roman Church in 135 CE!!!

To learn more about the Historical Ribi Yehoshua, whom Orthodox Jews can live with (witness the Netzarim Jews in Raanana, Israel, members in good standing in an Orthodox synagogue), I reccommend the following books: How Jesus Became Christian by Prof. Barrie Wilson (most bookstores) and Who Are The Netzarim? (publ. www.schuellerhouse.com) by Israeli Orthodox Jew, Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism
www.netzarim.co.il

No Robots

Christ had the same relationship with the Pharisees that Socrates had with the sophists, ie., one of complete antagonism.

andersbranderud

Hello!

I am not talking about the Christian "Jesus".

I am talking about the historical Pharisee Ribi Yehoshua, who practiced Torah including Halakhah - oral Torah.
Surely Ribi Yehoshua would have had the same practice as the rest of the pharisees, otherwise he would have been excluded from the pharisees.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism
www.netzarim.co.il

No Robots

Christ stood in opposition to the Pharisees just as Socrates stood in opposition to the sophists. We have here to do with the division of Judaism into the prophetic stream and its priestly/Pharisaic/rabbinic opponent:

[H]is struggle against Pharisaism—according to absolute and historic right, it was the struggle of prophecy against Pharisaism. It is the struggle of the intuitive Judaism of genius against its apish inversion and petrification in pharisaic rabbinism, against the mechanical pressure of the lifeless upon life, against the mechanism of the instrument, that played endlessly and spiritlessly on itself and on the player.--Constantin Brunner / Our Christ: The Revolt of the Mystical Genius, p. 158-9.

spamandham

Some backup of this claim would be appreciated.

By the way, welcome to IIDB.

manwithdream

I tried to look at the Netzarim site, but I could not find out from the site if you all believe in the virgin birth or what your beliefs are compared to Christianity. Maybe I looked the wrong place or maybe I have to buy a book to find out. Does the site you gave list your beliefs?

andersbranderud

Manwithdream,

Thanks for your questions!
Our beliefs about the משיח (Mashiakh (Messias)) are limited to doctrines that are compatible with Halakhah (oral-Torah in an uninterrupted chain since Moshe (Moses)).

You will find out the answer to your quetions in our Netzarim Quarter (NQ) (www.netzarim.co.il);
then click the link "Jews".
Also read in our "History Museum" at the left panel.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism
www.netzarim.co.il

andersbranderud

No robots,
I only accept sources that are Scholars in the world’s leadings universities.

It is a well-settled issue that Rib′ i Yәho•shu′ a was a Pәrush•i′ (Pharisee) . The consensus of virtually all historians in every leading university of international stature confirms that Rib′ i Yәho•shu′ a was a Pәrush•i′ . None of the other sects had "rabbis" and he was identified by the Pәrush•i′ title of that time and place (i.e., Rib′ i). There's no dispute among serious historians about that point.

So why do you neglect what serious historians say?

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism
www.netzarim.co.il

andersbranderud

Hello,
Thanks for the welcome!

Backup of claim:
"The earliest extant Church historian, Eusebius further documented (EH III.xxvii.4-6) that the original Nәtzarim accepted only the Jewish Tana"kh as Bible and only The Netzarim ("their own") Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) as an authentic account of the life and teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua, never accepting the the 2nd-4th century, heavily gentile-redacted (Greek), NT."

Source: www.netzarim.co.il; click at the page "Christians" in the middle of the page.

Regarding Pharisee; see my recent answer.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism
www.netzarim.co.il

Huon

1. The evil demon, however, being unable to tear certain others from their allegiance to the Christ of God, yet found them susceptible in a different direction, and so brought them over to his own purposes. The ancients quite properly called these men Ebionites, because they held poor and mean opinions concerning Christ.

2. For they considered him a plain and common man, who was justified only because of his superior virtue, and who was the fruit of the intercourse of a man with Mary. In their opinion the observance of the ceremonial law was altogether necessary, on the ground that they could not be saved by faith in Christ alone and by a corresponding life.

3. There were others, however, besides them, that were of the same name, but avoided the strange and absurd beliefs of the former, and did not deny that the Lord was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit. But nevertheless, inasmuch as they also refused to acknowledge that he pre-existed, being God, Word, and Wisdom, they turned aside into the impiety of the former, especially when they, like them, endeavored to observe strictly the bodily worship of the law.

4. These men, moreover, thought that it was necessary to reject all the epistles of the apostle, whom they called an apostate from the law; and they used only the so-called Gospel according to the Hebrews and made small account of the rest.

5. The Sabbath and the rest of the discipline of the Jews they observed just like them, but at the same time, like us, they celebrated the Lord's days as a memorial of the resurrection of the Saviour.

6. Wherefore, in consequence of such a course they received the name of Ebionites, which signified the poverty of their understanding. For this is the name by which a poor man is called among the Hebrews.