Christian Scholars about the NT? Yeshua, Torah vs NT and Christian dogma

2011-05-27T04:08:00.000-07:00

Roman Hellenizing (Syncretizing & Redacting)

Even Christian Scholars of the World's Top Universities Agree

The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible acknowledged, "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," 2^nd edition, Abingdon, 1962). Of course Christians redacting the Jewish texts made Christian redactions that perverted the Jewish texts remolding them to be compatible with "the substance of Christian dogma" !!! "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 that were, surprise, 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., emphasis added) – as perceived by the antinomian, i.e. misojudaic Hellenist Roman Christian redactors, of course.

All Major Historians of World's Top Universities Concur

4^th-Century Anti-Tor•âh′ Christianity 180° Opposite to
1^st Century Pro-Tor•âh′ N^әtzâr•im′

Why? How? How Does That Affect You As A Christian Today?

It's well established by historians like the late Oxford scholar James Parkes (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue) that post-135 C.E. Christianity — from which ALL Christianity today derived — was opposite in the most fundamental ways to the 1^st century historical Rib′ i Y^әho•shu′ a and his original N^әtzarim followers. Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN) demonstrates from the historical record — from archaeological evidence to ancient Judaic documents (e.g. Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT) — that the 1^st century historical Jew, Rib′ i Y^әho•shu′ a — and his N^әtzarim followers consistently taught pro-Torâh Judaism, contradicting anti-Torâh (antinomian) Christian doctrines. This persisted until 333 CE, when the remaining vestiges of the N^әtzarim were eradicated by the Church for obstinately remaining Torâh observant (cf. WAN).

Church historian Eusebius recorded that after suppressing the Bar-Kokh′vâ Revolt in 135 C.E., "Hadrian now resolved to launch a war of annihilation against the Torâh and to expunge the name of Israel from the land… Desirous of blotting out, too, all reference to the Jews' association with Ërëtz Yisrâ·eil, Hadrian changed the name of Judea to 'Syria Palaestina,' by which it henceforth came to be known in non-Jewish literature." ("Israel," Ency. Jud., 9:248).

The Romans destroyed and paganized Y^әrushâlayim, which had even back then already been our Holy Capital for 1159 years (since B.C.E. 1024), paganizing and renaming the city "Aelia C*apitolina" and renaming Y^әhudâh "Palestine." The Romans expelled all Y^әhudim from Y^әrushâlayim – including our 15^th N^әtzârim Pâqid, a Y^әhudi named Y^әhudâh. Describing these Romans, the cradle and mother of Ch*ristianity and the Church, as misojudaic is fully justified. It's blatant ignorance, or unscholarly negligence, whenever anyone refers anachronistically to Yisrâ·eil or Y^әhudâh as "Palestine" before about 135 C.E.. After 135 C.E., it's merely misojudaic to refer to the Judaic Holy Land by the Hellenist pagan Roman name.

In the vacuum left in "Aelia C*apitolina" as a result of the Romans banishing the Netzarim Paqid, misojudaic gentile Roman Ch*ristians were enabled to install their first non-Jew, Rome-oriented, misojudaic "bishop" — Marcus. Here, and only here, is the otherwise missing transition from strict Torah-observance of 1^st-century Ribi Yehoshua and his original Netzarim followers (demonstrated from Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT and Church historians) to the well documented antinomian Ch*ristianity of the 4^th, and subsequent, centuries! Now Rome-oriented for the first time, these post-135 C.E. misojudaic pagan gentiles were the first to proclaim their Romanized, de-Judaized, gentile-saving, divine man-g-o-d image — J*esus! (Documentation and details in the book Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN).)

[Quote: www.netzarim.co.il ]

The Bible student

Christian Scholars about the NT? Yeshua, Torah vs NT and Christian dogma

Roman Hellenizing (Syncretizing & Redacting)

Even Christian Scholars of the World's Top Universities Agree

All Major Historians of World's Top Universities Concur

4th-Century Anti-Tor•âh′ Christianity 180° Opposite to1st Century Pro-Tor•âh′ Nәtzâr•im′

4^th-Century Anti-Tor•âh′ Christianity 180° Opposite to
1^st Century Pro-Tor•âh′ N^әtzâr•im′