andersbranderud

Regarding the NT and its various readings:

Christianity was born with the Hellenist-Roman expulsion of the 15th Nәtzarim Paqid from Yәrushalayim in 135 C.E. and his consequent displacement by the first gentile – (Hellenist-Roman) Christian – "bishop." While the occasional verse of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) may have been translated into Greek from ca. 64 C.E., large-scale translation by Hellenists into Greek and redaction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) and various letters, with the inherent Hellenization, began in earnest only subsequent to 135 C.E.

Even according to the most authoritative Christian scholars, e.g., The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk), acknowledges:
"A study of 150 Greek MSS of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings… It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the NT in which the MS tradition is wholly uniform… But there are many thousands which have a definite effect upon the meaning of the text. It is true that not one of these variant readings affects the substance of Christian dogma" ("Text, NT," 2nd edition (Abingdon, 1962).

Of course Christians redacting the Jewish texts made Christian redactions to make the Jewish texts compatible with "the substance of Christian dogma." Duh.

Quoting again from The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible,
"It is equally true that many of them do have theological significance and were introduced into the text intentionally… Many thousands of the variants which are found in the MSS of the NT were put there deliberately. They are not merely the result of error or careless handling of the text. Many were created for theological or dogmatic reasons — even though they may not affect the substance of Christian dogma. [Thanks for reminding us that Christians made Christian redactions compatible with Christian dogma; ybd]). It is because the books of the NT are religious books, sacred books, canonical books, that they were changed to conform to what the copyist believed to be the true reading. His interest was not in the 'original reading' but in the 'true reading'"

(ibid.) — as perceived by the Roman Christian redactors, of course. (Emphasis added and quoted from Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN))

The Nәtzarim never changed their mind about it, maintaining that only the Jewish Tana"kh is Scripture and only their own The Nәtzarim Hebrew Matityâhu (NHM) was a legitimate account of the life and teachings of Ribi Yәhoshua.
The Nәtzarim haven't changed from this position, and won't change from this position.

So how can Christians rely on for example the gospel of Luke when the most authoritative Christian Scholars says doctrines has been added?

Quotes included from: www.netzarim.co.il

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

Sheshbazzar

Shalom, and welcome Anders.
A visit to your interesting site has left me with many questions regarding your groups religious beliefs and practices.

I was unable to locate a "search" function, or a Question & Answer section, or any concise "Statement of Beliefs".

Could you please direct me to the section, or to a published article that deals with your sects beliefs and position on the subject of circumcision of non-Jewish converts?

Sheshbazzar