Virtual Chamber of Hewn Stone

Comment by James Trimm on January 19, 2010 at 1:52pm

It is quality rather than quantity we are concentrating on. We do not want to hurriedly fill 68 seats with unqualified persons.

The seats need to be filled by people who are familiar with the Scriptures, including the Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus, Philo, the Talmuds etc.

Comment by Charlayne Crawford on January 19, 2010 at 2:40pm

a beit din is crucial. the messy antics movement is growing. people who are well grounded in Torah and kabbalah are needed to fill this need, along with the talmud etc. i would be very interested in being a part of this. the jerusalem council is one i have been following, but they are orthodox oriented and not willing to undo the extra legalism that orthodoxy embraces.

Comment by Charlayne Crawford on February 10, 2010 at 6:10pm

Moedim, I can see making a stance on the issue, but how would you enforce it? Will we turn into meat police on each other and sick the beit din on each other? I could see where this could get vicious and ridiculous. Or am I missing the point?

Comment by Charlayne Crawford on February 10, 2010 at 6:11pm

Also, keep in mind, most people do not understand that there are various level s of kashrut within Judaism. Most only understand the strict teachings of Orthodox. Reform teaches that your level of kosher is between you and G-d.

Comment by Charlayne Crawford on February 10, 2010 at 7:00pm

I agree Anaiah, however, most consider what the orthodox are doing and not realizing that Conservative and Reform have differnet views from orthodox and most hold to clean and unclean issues only. Interestingly enough, considering the law we are considering here, many run to bind heavy burdens upon their necks, when most religious Jews do not even keep kashrut themselves. The latest statistics from conservative and reform rabbis worldwide are 2% and 4% and of course orthodox is much higher. Judaism as a whole has loosened up on kashrut, but does demand kosher (clean and unclean to be observed).

My point was, I am on another egroup where everyone is going crazy trying to turn orthodox and missing a lot of points with messianic movement. It is a huge problem in MJ as a whole. There are things within we need to consider before running around and being the meat/milk police. Also, a beit din is only effective to congregations that agree to answer to that beit din. Aside from that its all virtual reality and nothing more.

So what groups agree to be bound by halacha of the beit din is my big question?

Comment by Cindy on May 2, 2010 at 10:51am

James,

I understand that you believe you have restored the Beit Din and opened the sealed book, among other things. I respect your teaching. However, what is to stop anyone else in this movement from claiming the same thing. For instance, will the MIA, UNOYC or any other "union" or body recognize your authority? And if the WNAE is now the halachic authority of Nazarene Judaism through its established Beit Din, then, why did the Av Beit Din start his on union 2 years ago, only a year after the beginning of the Beit Din?

I am not trying to cause a problem, just trying to understand. Any one could stand and make the same claims as you using the same evidence. What makes this body "the" one to which we should come into submission?

Comment by Cindy on May 2, 2010 at 11:14am

Also, the fish being a symbol of dagon, why do you use it on books and on this sites logos?

Comment by James Trimm on May 2, 2010 at 1:37pm

The Nazarene Space logo includes the "Nazarene Seal".


The Nazarene Seal is a seal that was found on several artifacts found in the ancient Essene Quarter of Jerusalem in a grotto adjacent to the upper room, which is directly astride the ancient location of the ancient Nazarene Synagogue on Mt. Zion. This is a synagogue which was built after 70 CE with stones from the recently destroyed Temple

carried over from the adjacent ridge of the Temple Mount. The artifacts are widely regarded as being of Nazarene origin and dating to the early second century.



The artifacts in question are some shards of pottery, n oil lamp and a "stand" labeled in a first century Aramaic script "for the anointing oil" which appears to be a stand for a flask of anointing oil. Remains of a matching flask, also containing the seal were found nearby.



The seal is made up of three parts. The center of the seal is the Mogen David (Star of David, or literally "Shield of David"). The top "point" of the Mogen David serves as the triangular shaped base for a seven branched menorah. The bottom "point" of the Mogen David is part of the lower, more controversial symbol.



This lower symbol has been mistaken by some as a "Christian Fish" and redrawn by many so as to more closely resemble a Christian fish. In fact an image of a fish would have violated the Torah commandment against religious images of “…anything… that is in the water under the earth…” (Ex. 20:4).



Many redrawings of the seal have altered the "snout" of the supposed fish, making it pointed, as it is in the Christian fish. I have examined photographs of all eight of the "seal" artifacts, and in only one is the "snout" pointed, and that is one in which the entire seal is drawn with straight lines, so that the bottom symbol is diamond shaped. In the seven remaining artifacts the "snout" is missing from five, and rounded in the remaining two.



The next question is the "eye" of the "fish". The eye portion is missing from four artifacts. In three others the "eye" appears to be a dot, in two of these the dot is off centered and could an "eye", while in one of them it is nearly centered. In the remaining artifact the "eye" is a "+".



This symbol is not a "fish" but the Hebrew letter ALEF as drawn in the Essene "Cryptic Script" used in 4Q298. The "eye" was originally a TAV as written in the ancient Paleo Hebrew Script (which also closely resembles the TAV used in the Essene "Cryptic Script" of 4Q298. This TAV is written dead center. It appears to have later been replaced in time by a "dot" which eventually evolved into the "eye" of a "Christian Fish". The original bottom portion of the seal was a representation of "The Alef and the Tav".

Comment by James Trimm on May 2, 2010 at 2:36pm

>I understand that you believe you have restored the Beit Din and opened the sealed
>book, among other things. I respect your teaching.



>However, what is to stop anyone else in this movement from claiming the same thing.

By “the same thing” you apparently refer “restored the Beit Din” and “opened the sealed book” so I will deal with these each separately.

Can anyone else claim to have “restored the Beit Din”? If one refers to an International Nazarene Beit Din then the answer is that in the absence of an International Nazarene Beit Din Deut. 16:18 requires the creation of one. If one already exists, the creation of a competing International Nazarene Beit Din would be an act of Sectarianism. It was Korakh that tried to create such a leadership structure when one already existed. When we established the International Nazarene Beit Din in 1996 it was in the absence of such a body.

Can anyone else claim to have “opened the sealed book”? Let me clarify that there are many levels of meaning to the sealed book prophecy. The sealed book is among other things: the title deed to the Land of Israel and the Ketuvah of the wedding between YHWH and Israel. However one level of this prophecy refers to the original Hebrew and Aramaic “New Testament” and to that degree we were the first to publish a Messianic Sacred Name NT translated from Hebrew and Aramaic sources. (We published Matthew alone in 1990 and the complete NT in 2001). I have to say back in the 80’s and early 1990’s I was a lone voice in the Messianic movement arguing that the Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts of the NT are the original and not the Greek. I suppose anyone can re-open what others have “unsealed”

I could go on to reference the fulfillment of prophecy concerning the giving of other books (see the free book The Apostasy and Restoration) and point out that the International Nazarene Beit Din has taken the important step of canonizing the Apocrypha and the Book of Enoch.

>For instance, will the MIA, UNOYC or any other "union" or body recognize your >authority?

The MIA was not conceived as an attempt to restore the ancient Sect of Nazarene Judaism.

The UoNYC began as a split from the MIA over Sacred Name issues. I do not believe they have made any attempt to create an International Nazarene Beit Din. The UoNYC began as the Union of Two House Congregations and changed their name from “Two House” to “Nazarene” in 2003. That same year we entered into an understanding of Unity with the UoNYC Which said that the two organizations would “Based on mutual understandings and a common desire for Nazarene brotherhood and effectiveness” the two organizations “have agreed to work together in some limited but tangible ways for the benefit of all NETZARIM.” The UoNYC has been less active as far as sponsoring events and such in the last six years, but I see no dis-unity here. I see here two groups that have grown together and may yet grow closer in the future, and which are endeavoring to the Unity of the same Body.

>And if the WNAE is now the halachic authority of Nazarene Judaism through its >established Beit Din, then, why did the Av Beit Din start his own union 2 years ago, >only a year after the beginning of the Beit Din?

The authority lies with the International Nazarene Beit Din which is recognized both by the WNAE and the IANI (the group you mention started by the Av Beit Din Rabbi Rob Miller) both recognize the authority of the International Nazarene Beit Din. In ancient tomes the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai both recognized one Beit Din, Hillel was the Nasi and Shammai was the Av Beit Din. These two groups (WNAE and IANI) are in Unity one with another, and that Unity grows every day. We see ourselves as members of the same Body.

Comment by Cindy on May 2, 2010 at 2:45pm

What was the purpose of beginning another "body"? Why not just all be under the WNAE and promote the Beit Din?

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page