Were Early Christians Actually Jewish? - The Naked Archaeologist 219 - Tracking the Tribe 

How tall is he exactly

Gospel mentions brothers and sisters of Jesus. However, some bible scholars do point out in Judiac tradition the concept of family is wide. One mentions that Joseph was a widower and older than Mary

James is the nickname of Andrew ; an uncle not a brother

We all do

Spare me, Willem... James actually has a book in the Christian canon... 🥱

We

Not quite. Early Christians started worshipping on Sunday for two reasons. One, Sunday was the day of Resurrection. Two, frequently they met in the synagogue, and the mainstream Jews met on Saturday, so...the Christians used the building on Sunday.

@@amywaters7246 where in history is this documented Open worship on sunday didnt start until the catholic church changed it

@Paula Wallace Thank you for your response sister but, I'm looking for something in the history books that corroborate your interpretation of that scripture. And this is what it comes down to, if I were to prove to you that sunday observance didn't didnt start until after 321 AD would you consider the 7th day Sabbath?

@Paula Wallace like for instance if Jesus had changed the memorial day of worship dont you think Josephus wouldve elaborated on that

@Paula Wallace Yeshua the Messiah who died for the sins of the world and rose from the dead. Believe in him for eternal life. Repent of sin.

Link?

Katherine W if you’re Christian you better start reading the Talmud and it’s references to Christ. Gittin 57a is a place to start.

of course, but I am sure that there were small enclaves of gentile believers prior to the arrival of Paul on the scene. Acts tells of a few stories that include encounters with gentile converts. That is, if you take the NT at its literal word.

@@Mermaid2261 Yes, that's so.

Who was the father of Jesus, ,,,,, thats why He was not Jewish.

Dear@@Mermaid2261 , "That is, if you take the NT at its literal word." Why not ? It is historic testimony of the spread of the teachings of Jesus the Messiah through His chosen Apostles. Be Well, DZ

Dear@@koosbos1114 , ???? The father of Jesus was the very God the Jewish people worship. That would reasonably make Jesus Jewish. The step father of Jesus was Joseph who was a descendant of David. That would also qualify Jesus as Jewish. The Mother of Jesus was Jewish and a descendant of David also. That would also qualify Jesus as Jewish. I disagree with your assertion on the basis of the evidence. I don't think your assertion is valid. Be Well, DZ

Cyn Salm yes! This series is just great! His sense of humor is particularly clever and free. I am watching this series for the second (maybe third) time as there are no new uploads. Great job Simcha! I am a true fan!

Cyn Salm did simcha give u money🤪💵💵💵

Sorry it doesn't work that way. Judaism came first if you had not noticed and Christian "copied" their stories - Old Testament and added it to theirs! Christ said "Go take the his message to lost tribes of Israel" what does that mean? It was Paul that changed all that and things for ever by creating a new religion! Go to ancients countries like Southern India you might learn something there. The Christ message was first to the Jews (lost tribes), why would Thomas go all the way to India? Jews had already settled there. Hence circumcision was replaced by baptism. Oh and for added interest Christ disciples were also given a voice in the temple to preach but were only stopped for a single reason, when they claimed Christ was God.

Consider rightly dividing the word of Truth then you will understand that there is two Gospels 1 to the little flock and one to the uncircumcised.

No, Saul of Tarsus was a later convert.

Dear A. WAL, Jesus did make it clear that He had other sheep not of this fold: "And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10:16) Don't forget that Jesus accepted and ministered to gentiles also. The Canaanite woman - Matt. 15:28, The Roman centurion’s servant - Luke 7:1-10, The Samaritan Woman - John 4:7-26, The Samaritan town - John 4:39-42. It was Jesus that gave this commission to "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” end of the earth would definitely include the gentiles. Jesus died for all. "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world". (1 John 2:2) "christ was specific he only came for the lost sheep of Israel" Emphatically not true. Be Well, DZ

@@Silverheart1956 of this fold meaning that they were scattered amongst the gentiles and they in turn became as one of them so that’s the fold he was speaking of

Roman tax collector.

@@rpm1796 Roman tax

Ya thats part of the reason the lord chose him he could travel the roman empire without any problem and he would be protected under roman laws.

@@rpm1796 , "Roman tax collector." ??? Never heard that one. Where did you get it ?

I'm not sure if Paul himself claims this, but I think the author of Acts claims he did.

Alexander the Great invaded the area which is now Israel and Palestine in 330s BC and brought the Greek language as the common trade flourished from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD.

John the Baptiste, Yoha, was a nazorean (natzir) according to the gospels, and the talmud, and gospels talk of them constently, despite what the greek changes in the text and translation from aramaic to greek. Constently, because Natzir means "dissident" or sect, no city called nazareth in jesus's time. I wonder if there is any mention of the natzirim in qumran books. This sect was well known in Jesus's time. The catholic churchs had crashed this fondation of Jesus's community, erasing even James work's, even dissimilating the jesus's sect name, Jesus The Nazorean. If John was near qumran, so neceserally, the word "natzirim" shoud appeared in the rolls.

Thank you for this information, very interesting. John the Baptist, according to his fellowers the mandaean, called in arameic as Yahya Yahana Musbana, which means the the baptiser. The Nazorite know as the Nasorite, are those people who know the religion very well, not necessarily to be priests. His teaching is completely different from Jesus. Some scholars believe that Jesus was one of John's fellowers but defected from the main stream and created his own. A British author called Lady Drawer wrote a very interesting book about the Mandaean fellowers of John the Baptist in Iraq and Iran.

@@redmoon7189 Jesus and the nefew of his mother, John the baptiste, had almost the same years old. Maryam beeing orphan and without husband, John had recieve more teaching from his father Zaccharia, priest from Levite family. So Jesus could recieve teaching from John, but as the gospels tell us, John recognized the mission of Jesus as prophet too. What we could think it's that Jesus inherite the John's followers at least in Galilee and Judea.

@@redmoon7189 Interesting points to look into. If you have the time, consider watching The God Culture channel's videos on the Dead Sea Scrolls (Qumran, John the baptist). They actually have a lot of research on different Bible topics which are actually based on scripture and free from the leaven of the Pharisees.

@@victoremman4639 John the baptist was a son of Zadok, the keepers of scripture and the temple practices. I'd be careful reading on what the talmud teaches because they were written by enemies of the Messiah, full of leaven.

@Zechariah12.10 Hi, thank you for replying. I'm Egyptian and have studied History. So my opinion here is not of internet fantasy, but based on actual documents found. Now, the reason people are lead to believe that the 1st Century accs are incorrect, is because it directly opposes the KJ version of the Bible and the power and Presence of Catholic Church. However, i see that the Jewish traditions remained unchanged for 6000 years! That's fascinating to me!

@Zechariah12.10 Whoa so much to reply to! Thank you Zechariah for your informed opinion on this. i got to learn a lot from your writing but i also understood, that different Christians, will have different opinions on this. Take for example, our Coptic Community, which considers Nag Hamadi as important. Different people will have different view on this and it was nice reading your perspective. " The writings which were identified as authentic and apostolic that is from eye witness testimonies, were already known and collected by this time and can be found in two early canons of writings, the later one being the Muratorian canon" And yet the 1st century Christians, who were the Judeo-Christians, the particular people that were close to Jesus, like His brother James, Mary Magdalene, ie, the Ebionites, were completely removed from History? Why i said the scrolls were considered a threat was because of two reasons: 1. It has Mary Magdalene's Gospel, where she was described as the favourite. 2. The other Gospels don't give divine power to Jesus but rather call Him a Messiah. Please don't think that i'm against anything, as the Biblical stories are mixed with archaeology with lots of room left for speculation. Same with Jewish traditions. Yes, Theologians will say it remained unchanged and yet there are changes, information lost to history,etc. Well, this is my perspective and i, by no means wish to encroach or belittle yours. Thank you for discussing this. xPeace.

@Zechariah12.10 Whew!! That's quite a read!! However, i must correct you on two things, no three things: 1. Coptic Christian community doesn't NOT exclusively rely on Nag Hamadi. It is used as a validation as the 1st Cen. Judeo Christians, existed. Remember, it was written in Coptic language, so, as you say, it is rightly the copying of the text from a once original (but now lost) source. 2. Buddhism and Hinduism are not the same. Buddhism's concept of achieving of Nirvana is not the same as becoming Buddha Himself, but is of being free from all earthly bounds. 3. In Hinduism you CANNOT be God. It's a no-no thing. I'd recommend reading Bhagavada Gita and then comparing it The Upanishads (hope i'm spelling them right). But you'll see the ideology is to free the soul, on one hand, and how to lead a life in accordance with God's will (much like the commandments), on the other hand (Gita). The reason The scrolls were of immense importance was because it showed proof that there were varying views. These views went everywhere. Coptic community have their copy/validation of it. I'm not saying that they be included in the Bible, but saying that this proves that the first Judeo-Christians were 'removed'. We would never have known of James, or Mary NOT being the character that she was slandered with, had we not have these scrolls. There were fighting amongst the sect of 1st followers, that's one thing scholars do agree upon. We read about Paul who picked and chose which of the rules need to be followed and which not. And thus, pure Christians, different from Judeo-Christians were there. Peter went a different way, the other groups went another way, wherever they go, they were actually running from the Romans while keeping the revolution alive; the Word of God alive. Also, haha, internet conspiracies talk about books being burned? Internet wasn't there when i read about it at age 6. :) It was written in history books. Then, straight read that again once i was in the University. Gospels that didn't match with the chosen set of Gospels, were discarded. Conspiracies would be like Earth is flat or something, no? Haha or that Out ancestors didn't make the Pyramids, it was Aliens? hahaha It was very interesting talking to you and get your perspective. Thank you for letting me know things, which i didn't know at first. However, with all due respect, i will keep your comments as a biased but informed opinion, much like mine is (but mine is not so informational i guess haha).

@Zechariah12.10 Once again, i most humbly thank you for taking your time to write so much! "...I've only been meaning to help you a little with this subject, as this is something I've spent a lot of time studying." i can understand that and that's why i respect each and every statement you put forward. You taught me a lot, thank you so much for that. i never said that Nag Hamadi dated to 1st Century, but as you clearly said it was way later.Rather i did say it was in Coptic. Gnosticism is what the Theologists are giving it a character of, as these are translated copies of writings from original 1st ce writing which are lost. Anyways, you too, please stay safe!

The concept of Jesus beeing god it's not from paul, but later on. The gospels doesn't describe Jesus beeing a god, nor he said it. Undestand that christianity rose upon illettrate citizen and just listen their priest doctrine, this is why today, each one can read the Gospels, an see that churches tradition is a ideologic construction, mythic one.

Dear@@victoremman4639 , The deity of Jesus Christ is a essential doctrine from the first days of Christianity. Jesus had a discussion with some Jews in the Temple and they wanted to know if he was the Messiah. The conversation progressed concerning the identity of Jesus where Jesus confirmed his deity by proclaiming that, "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" (I and the Father are one). (John 10:30) Some people mistakenly try to twist this pronouncement to be taken as Jesus is claiming to be one in purpose with God. This would be a violation of sound hermeneutics and exegetical principles. Look at the context; they are discussing Jesus' identity. Also the manner in which is was spoken was clearly understood by the Jews. They said His words were "blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” They were going to stone His for blasphemy because He claimed to be God. They understood what Jesus said ! Then notice Jesus did not deny this accusation. If the statement was misunderstood by the Jews, one would expect Jesus to clearly explain and clarify that was not what He meant by his words. However, Jesus did not deny this accusation. In essence Jesus responded by saying, If some men were called "gods" to whom the Word came, then why is is wrong for the one who is genuinely sent into the world as the Son of God to be considered deity (remember, the Jewish people only believed in ONE true God. The Son of God would be deity also and they would not accept two true deities, The Jews were monotheists) Do the gospels describe Jesus being a god ? Well, in John 10:30-39, Jesus claims to be God. In John 1:1 the text says: "Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος." (In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God) Who was the Word ? Jesus; this becomes clear in the following verses and really confirmed in verse 14: "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. Conclusion Yes, the gospels do describe Jesus as being God ? Dear , It appears you have some misconceptions and misunderstandings concerning authentic Christianity. I strongly suspect you have had no formal training in basic Christian Systematic Theology, for if you had you would not be asserting such misconceptions about authentic Christianity. Be Well, DZ

@@Silverheart1956 You have a doctrinal posture, christian one, but not related with the holies written, Jesus's teaching and historical fact. The deity of jesus was even not invented by paul, so your claim of "first early christians" is false on many sides. You even reject that Paul was ennemies of James churches. For any jew, till today, paul is not a jew, in the form and means. Paul was probably invented, since there is no evidence of his existence (no report of any saul of tarse near the sanhedrin in jewish sources, no jew in tarse in jewish sources, no paul in Flavius sources, nor any historians of these times). And today, the specialists of the NT say that paul is not the author of these letters in the NT. May you star the real study about Jesus and the greek religion christianity built by a roman emperor in the 4th century.

@@Silverheart1956 My rpvious post diseappear, so again : you don't know the meaning of Father, and so, the meaning of One with the Father, just because you decided to be a rabbit with horse-tie ;) . Yes, you mix hebrews words with pagan beliefs. Father is one of the name of God in hebrew tradition (not greek one, your sources). To be One with the father means there is no obstacle between God will with Jesus will : jesus was fully submitted to God will (= muslim). You deny Jesus tells, so you cant' be from Jesus teaching.

@@Silverheart1956 'Son of God' is a common Jewish expression to show *affection* with God and is still in use by the Jews today. It's not literal meaning because the children of Israel has been believing in monotheism since 39 centuries ago. The first commandment is not a new invention. It just follows what had been believed before. In John 10, when Jesus was falsely accused of blasphemy -in his defense, he claimed to be the son of God (10:36), _34. Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35. If He called them gods to whom the word of God came (and Scripture cannot be broken”),_ (John 10:34-35). Jesus referred to the Old Testament verse: _“I said, _*_“You are gods,_*_ sons of the Most High, all of you”_ (Psalms 82:6). In another chapter of Psalms, it states, _“God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgement”_ (Psalms 86:1). The Father is called “a God” many times in the Bible (Genesis 16:13, Exodus 34:6, Deuteronomy 32:4, 1 Samuel 2:3, 17:46, Nehemiah 9:17, Psalm 7:11, 58:11, Isaiah 30:18, 44:8, etc.). If Jesus has a God, then he must worship his God. Verses indicate that *Jesus worships his God* (John 4:22; Mark 14:26; Hebrews 2:12; Revelation 15:3). Because of God’s exclusive greatness, He alone *(never Jesus)* is called the “one God” or “only God“,: etc. (Deuteronomy 4:35, 39; 6:4; 32:39; 2 Samuel 7:22; 2 Samuel 22:32;1 Kings 8:60; 19:15; 1 Chronicles 17:20; Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 18:31; Isaiah 37:20; 43:10; 44:8; 45:; 45:14; 45:18; 45:21; 46:9; Zachariah 14:9, etc. This thread (the one God is only the Father) continuous throughout the New Testament, starting with Jesus: John 5:44, 17:3; Mark 10:18; 12:28-34; Romans 3:30; 1 Corinthians 8:4-6; Galatians 3:20, 1 Timothy 2:5, etc.).

Wim M Judaism is beautiful because it’s the beginning teachings of OUR God...Jesus is the incarnation of God. It’s the Holy Trinity. The father which is God Son which is Jesus, and the Holy Spirit., meaning 1. Jesus the lamb of God or OUR last sacrificial sacrifice for all sin....God is the last sacrifice who takes a away the sins of the world for all of humanity. Christianity is already there and have known this. Christianity which is the followers of our Messiah, Christ Yeshua/ Jesus the one and only Jewish God. It’s the others who have not understood this fact that is not a belief but the truth including Many Catholics with little faith or belief, people who worship money and little things of this world that mean nothing....Christianity is a continuation of Judaism period. The Old Testament which is the Torah combined with the New Testament the Holy Bible. Father then son, the healer of all. The ancient but living ONLY GOD of all things right and good, faith, trust and love and the word combined with Gods laws the commandments. It’s the only way or else, separation from God or going further from God. God who loved us so much gave us his only son....OUR Savior. The only way to find father God is through his son the lamb of God our savior Jesus Christ our Messiah. The Father Son and Holy Spirit. On RU-vid: Rabbi in Israel who said Who the Messiah is before he died

No, they knowing all that stuff, would have let God do it, not that they did. All that stuff shows, is that how crazy it got with all those factions fighting over who was right, and who was going to take control. Paul after he was changed by Christ, knew the truth, that it was everything we could do to save ourselves, and Christ filled in the rest of what everyone could not do, and making it a gift from God, not by what we could do. So many lies, no one knows real Christians, but they do exist, you wouldn't recognize them. I know because I saw the same image as Paul in the mirror, that which the person writing it did not want to say it was Paul.

@Paula Wallace Even I agree to use the Hebrew, and stay away from the Greek, and I believe it was Daniel who said when Christ was to show up, right at the end of the temple. He did not show up to destroy the temple, he came to fulfill everything, because the Hebrews could not save themselves with their laws or their deeds, they fell short of the glory of God. Just so you hear me, its a cross between trying to be good, and Christ, not just Christ alone. But at that time, the dispensation had changed, and the Hebrews didn't want to admit it, nor the Levitical priests, and with Josephus running around stirring up everyone, was like the guy in France who did the same thing for power, lopping off everyone's heads that stood in his way, with lies, and eventually delivering it to the Roman empire after everyone was removed. The reason for Qumran was to create a cemetery to burry all the evidence they had destroyed. So they treated the scriptures just like they did the dead, they buried them as they were not considered Hebrews, or Hebrew text. But at the same time, they were not Essenes, they were another type of temple priest who were removed, more than likely Melchizedek, which would have been Jesus and the crew. So the original Church was destroyed, and the Romans ran with it and created the Roman Catholic Church, which is not true, nor any of the spin offs from it, There would not be spin offs if any of it was true. Jesus did come, he was crucified, he was a man, but was shown to be from God by his birth, not having a earthly Father like the rest of us. Christ and us are all related, even when we were in heave with them, but that memory has been removed, but wasn't from Christ, the only thing we can remember is how we felt about God. You see Apostle Paul asked God what he should do, he wanted to know the truth because of what he was being told to do, so God and Christ both introduced themselves to him, but Paul was given the ability to discern the truth. Because of Christs death on the cross, and everything being destroyed, Christ has come back to rebuild his church in preparation of the end, but if your a bible reader, you also understand not everyone will perish.

@Paula Wallace I guess if you believe God is dead, then yes, that's who introduced himself to me, and showed me. I to this day have not met anyone like myself, they all being dead and all, except for those who recreated the original Church for Christ, that does exist, but as for the Mystical aspect of visions and direction, not so much, as I guess people don't ask God much for the truth. You try and explain that to your friends when God changes you into the very thing everyone else was, would they believe such a thing?? Did you grow up like Moses wanting to be like a God, only to find out everyone was not telling the truth? Did God put himself in a place you could find him because you asked him? Maybe your just carnal like the rest of the world, and the only thing you can do is kill them off.

You are an ad

Lol ....muhammad is not among the biblical line of prophets

God saved the Israelites of the land of Egypt. Now he has sent us his only begotten son Christ. For let us repent in the name of Christ for his name sake.

Nah not really

@Paula Wallace found truth in this statement. Crickets on my end.

Rabbinical judism is not biblical either it man made laws building fences around Torah

The need for grace, Paul argues, is because the whole world was condemned under sin at the time. Every one, Jews and Non-Jews. Gentiles purposefully forgot God long ago, and Jews, despite being given the law and personal hands-on knowledge of sin and God, still chose sin and activated the curses and condemnation of the law as noted by exile to Babylon (and even sinned afterwards?). This is Paul's rationale as to why grace was needed, because otherwise it would have been condemnation and death for everyone. As for your other questions I can not answer. Why a sacrifice? I don't know or understand either and can't confidently say I understand what the New Testament authors believed about it. The gospels say it was prophecized and that he must suffer. Paul compares his death to the mercy seat of the temple. The author of Hebrews definitely compares him to sacrifice of the OT. It's just my opinion that part of what happened was that people wanted to murder Jesus and God and Jesus just accepted it, and for some reason God took value in it. I don't know and it bothers me that I don't understand

Actually Paul and Jesus were born about the same time. If Jesus was at the temple during Passover and preaching in the area at that time it is plausible that Paul saw Jesus then. It is believed that Paul saw Jesus on the road to Damascus and Paul claims he did (Acts 9:27, 1 Cor. 9:1). , Paul certainly knew Jesus had been crucified and buried, but apparently seeing Jesus after the death of Jesus, understandably had a great impact on Paul, and was the reason he stopped persecuting Christians and became believer. Be We'll, DZ

Jesus (pbuh) only came for the jews, Mohammed (ppbuh) came for every one on earth. Islam will bring peace.

Carl If Islam is to bring world peace, where is it? Jesus came for the Jews first then the Gentiles which is why Paul was sent to the Gentiles. God also told Peter to accept the clean with the unclean, aka Jews and Gentiles.

@@robinhassler1677 Jesus never came for the Gentiles. That's why there was confusion with Paul amongst the Apostles. That's one of the reasons Paul and the Apostles never got along was because of the teachings of Paul. The letters of rebuke against Peter and the other Apostles are a one sided story, Paul's story. We don't have a lot of information from the Apostles side of the story, you analysis it through Paul's beef and read between the lines.

Christ came to save the world of our sins. Christ came in the flesh so all will be accountable for our own Sins. So we can not blame no other of our ways. Adam blamed Eve and she blamed the serpent. Christ took all sin and died for all sin. But he was not found in sin until he died for ours. So we can repent in Christ for his name sake or be in the coming judgement. Repent be humble for we was born in sin and surely would have died in our sin. Thanks to God his glory the only begotten son Christ we can be saved from our sin. No man comes to the Father but through Christ. God I repent my sins in the name of your glory I ask the name of your only begotten son Christ for his name sake. for I would not know of my sin and we would all have died and went to the pit.

@@carlanderson2468John 3:16 /17 16 for God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son, for whom ever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send his son to condemn the world but maybe through his son the world might be saved.

Kosher food and preparation is defined in Exodus-Deuteronomy. There is also so called "oral-Torah" as well.

You get Paul's perspective. Well done.

"Paul or the Constatine's Roman Priests that compiled the Christian Bible were the earliest New Testament Editors, influenced the Peter, Paul, and James stories.

@Paula Wallace it takes a wise spirit to interpret and practice Paul's teachings. Must love to read in between the lines.

@Paula Wallace Getting closer to truth telling! The only person that never met Christ but now his teachings command the Churches beliefs! If anyone cares to read Christ message there not too much pages in the Bible in what he says? So who is interpreting his words and what he means?

He was from the tribe of Benjamin, not a jew

He makes so many errors in Laws of Torah he can't even be a Jew .

@Shameless Papist Unfortunately my computer is not working (and Best Buy isn't open to fix anything because of the virus), so I don't have specific sources at the moment. But much of this we learn from the church fathers. Where as a few church fathers confuse Nazarenes and Ebionites (because they are both Jews who believe Jesus is the Messiah), there are others (like Jerome for example) who saw that they were distinct from each other. Their Christology (Nazarenes - Messiah is the Son of God, Ebionites - Messiah is just a man), the status of Apostle Paul (Nazarenes - accept Paul, and even Jerome gives a Nazarene Midrash which is pro Paul, Ebionites - rejected Paul), and a few other things separated these two groups.

No Name unless you’re Jewish it’s not for you. The early council in Jerusalem ruled that Gentiles are not required to keep the Mosaic law, only the Law of the Sojourners in Leviticus.

No Name this jewish do what its best... manipulate Christian....hahaha😈hohoho

@@mattportnoyTLV Please take your argument up with Paul in Romans. In his own words he said, "May it never be!" Paul and the Jerusalem council made the same argument that Jews make today that being Jewish is hard and takes true commitment over time. Therefore, we don't circumcise just because someone says they are committed. Circumcision is not required for salvation. That is what Galatians is about, but 2000 years, spiritual distancing from our Jewish brothers, and later antisemitism has caused us to forget. We were told by Jerusalem council in Acts 15 to meet at the synagogue on Sabbath to learn more Torah. When threatened with imprisonment, Paul's confession later in Acts was that he never broke the Torah nor encouraged others to either. We have blinders for Torah like Jews have blinders for Messiah! Please unlearn everything you've been told and read the NT with fresh eyes. You will see. Some of it is written in literary devices, like what is "the law of sin and death" and what is the allegory with Hagar. You must read it for definitions. What is the "one new man" and what does it mean to be " a citizen of the Commonwealth of Israel". Don't let someone else, a church or denomination, tell you what it means. Blessings and shalom

No Name Acts 15:24-29. This is the law required for gentile believers. It’s the law for Sojourners traveling through Israel. I’m a Jew. Circumcision is a requirement to be part of the Abrahamic Covenant. It’s why Titus was not circumcised but Timothy was.

@@mattportnoyTLV are you suggesting that the 10 Commandments is not required for Gentiles? What about the 2 greatest commandments as taught by the Messiah on which the others hang? What about the other laws either mentioned or eluded to in the NT...Why would it be just those 4? Acts 15:21 says, "Because Moses is taught every Sabbath in the synagogue." In other words, we were meant to learn as we go, in order to not be burdened/overwhelmed as the Scripture puts it.

There's twelve different tribes and the jews in israel today are probably no more related or even less than the farmers in alabama are to jesus.

British and used the KJV Bible lol

@@MitzvosGolem1 Are You A Jew

@@ADeeSHUPA yes

@@ADeeSHUPAwhy? Are u?

??????????????/

The Sea people. The exiled tribes

I follow another theory : paul was invented for a purpose : stabilize the middle-east and greeko-roman occupation. The raised of paul appeared lately, as well his gospel, the fabricated John's gospel. There is no jew lineage authentified for saul of tarsus, no jew community know in Tarse accoring to jew tradition, no paul near the sanhendrin learning Torah and judaism, no report by F. Joseph nor any historian, and to day what ? A majority of schoolar deny Paul could wrote the letter attribuated to him in the NT. If Paul had met James the just, bring a proof. So, it appears that Paul could be invented under Agrippa II and wife, Berenice. The intent was to reconciliate roman occupants with the local culture, either pagan, saduccean, pharisies, natzirim (John bpt, Jesus and James sect), and paul's doctrine offered this calling through this new religion. Paul a myth itself.

Why wouldn't you read Paul's own work as a start to get a "true nature of Paul and what he's all about"? Paul thought Gentiles were not subject to the law of Moses, only to Jesus's commands. And Paul probably thought ultimately that neither were jews subject to the law and only to Christ's words but agreed to not force that idea upon the Jews he met among the diaspora

Paul Changed what ? Paul and the other apostles were in agreement concerning the Gospel and Christian beliefs. Be Well DZ

REALLY?

Dear @Neuroscientist T, Perhaps you can give a few examples to explain what you mean. Be Well, DZ

Exactly... they were fed up with nonsense not believing so they simply gave light to open minded believers that are ready for eternal life not waste time with kosher or sabath but in what bought modernity and evolution to our life today