In Short - The Noachide/7 Mitvahs an explaination

[Ehav4Ever]

if non Israelites wanted to live in Israel they had to be peaceable. But those that left Egypt with the Jews had to be circumcized. Exodus 12:38,39 - "If a foreigner resides with you and he wants to celebrate the Passover to Jehovah, every male of his must be circumcised. Then he may come near to celebrate it, and he will become like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised man may eat of it. 49 One law will apply for the native and for the foreigner who is residing among you.” One law. In order to celebrate the Passover they had to be circumcized.

There is no requirement for a Geir Toshav to keep the mitzvoth of Pesah. The Hebrew text of the Torah says:

וכי-יגור אתך גר, ועשה פסח ליהוה--המול לו כל-זכר ואז יקרב לעשתו, והיה כאזרח הארץ; וכל-ערל, לא-יאכל בו​

This (גר) "Geir" is a convert to Torath Mosheh. Meaning, someone who chooses to take on the same mitzvoth as a Jew does. The mitzvah of (תורה אחת, יהיה לאזרח, ולגר, הגר בתוככם) there being one Torah concerns born Jews and Geirim "converts".

There difference between a (גר) "Geir" and a (גר תושב)/(נוכרי) "Nochri" and a "Geir Toshav" mentioned in the Torah is that a Nochri and Geir Toshav are not converts. They are those who keep the 7 mitzvoth. They mentioned in Deut. in the verse that states:

(לגר אשר בשעריך תיתננה ואכלה, או מכור לנוכרי)​

See the importance of the Hebrew language?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Now about the courts or Sanhedrin. How do they apply to Jews and non Jews or...Noahides?

From the Mishnah Torah:

It is a positive Scriptural commandment to appoint judges and enforcement officers in every city and in every region, as Deuteronomy 16:18 states: "Appoint judges and enforcement officers in all your gates." "Judges" refers to magistrates whose attendance is fixed in court, before whom the litigants appear. "Enforcement officers" refers to those equipped with a billet and a lash who stand before the judges and patrol the market places and the streets to inspect the stores and to regulate the prices and the measures. They inflict corporal punishment on all offenders. Their deeds are controlled entirely by the judges. Whenever a person is seen perpetrating injustice, they should bring his to the court, where he will be judged according to his wickedness.

We are obligated to appoint courts in every region and in every city only in Eretz Yisrael. In the diaspora, by contrast, we are not obligated to appoint courts in every region. This is derived from the continuation of the above verse: "Appoint...in all your gates which Hashem your Elohim is giving you for your tribes."

How many established courts should there be among the Jewish people and how many judges should there be in each court?

First, a supreme court is established in the Temple. This is called the Great Sanhedrin. It was composed of 71 judges. This is derived from Numbers 11:16 which states: "Gather for Me seventy men from the elders of Israel." And Moses presided over them, as the verse continues: "And they shall stand there with you." Thus there are 71.

The one who is of greatest knowledge is placed as the head over them. He acts as the Rosh Yeshivah. And he is called the nasi by the Sages in all sources. He assumes the position of Moses our teacher.

The greatest among the remaining 70 is appointed as an assistant to the head. He sits at his right and is called av beit din. The remaining judges from the 70 sit before them and are seated according to their age and according to their stature. Whoever possesses greater wisdom than his colleague is seated closer than his colleagues to the nasi on his left. The members of the Sanhedrin sit in a semi-circle so that the nasi and the av beit din can see all of them.
In addition, two courts of 23 judges each are appointed. One holds sessions at the entrance to the Temple courtyard. and the other at the entrance to the Temple Mount.

In addition, in every city in Israel in which their are 120 or more adult males, we appoint a minor Sanhedrin. They hold court at the entrance to the city, as implied by Amos 5:15: "And you shall present judgment in your gates." How many judges should be in such a court? 23. The one who possesses the greatest wisdom is the chief justice and the remainder sit in a semi-circle so that the chief justice can see all of them.

When there are less than 120 adult males in a city, we appoint a court of three judges. For a court should never be less than three. In that way, there will be a majority and a minority if there is a difference of opinion in any particular judgment.
​

 

[YoursTrue]

There are about 5 mitzvoth from the written Torah that require Jews to a) teach Torah to children, b) help correct fellow Jews who have made mistakes or don't keep the Torah, and c) try to return those Jews who have been kidnapped from among the Jewish people. (Whether literally or figuratively). As as I mentioned before, any Jew can opt out of the Jewish Torah based nation. Whether literally or figuratively, but irregardless there are mitzvoth to try to help those Jews who are outside of the Torah either by choice or because they were forced out by parents or other non-Torah based factors.

Chabad is one of SEVERAL Jewish organizations who seek to do these 5 mitzvoth that Hashem gave to the Torah based Jewish nation. I.e. they are not missionizing to a Jew to change into something not Jewish. They are instead trying to convince any Jew that is not keeping Torah to return to the path of their Jewish ancestors. If someone doesn't want to return to the path of their ancestors in the current situation, it is the hope of every Torah based Jew that they will do it at some point in the future.



The halakhic rulings of the Sanhedrins from Mosheh to the last one over 1900 years ago still stand for all Torah based Jews, when they can be accomplished. BTW there were numerous smaller courts bellow the Sanhedrin in the land of Israel. A Jew can reject the Sanhedrin, just like they reject Hashem. The result is still the same since Hashem gave the mitzvoth to create a Sanhedrin in the land of Israel. The rulings of the Sanhedrin are applicable to Jews and Geir Toshavs living in the land of Israel. The Sanhedrin does not make rulings for Noachides living outside of the land of Israel. The Noachides living outside of the land of Israel are supposed to manage their own judicial systems based on the 7 mitzvoth.

The best way of understanding what a Sanhedrin is, it is like a Supreme Court for the Torah. Similar to have you have a Supreme Court in America.



I am saying that all humans are created with the baseline being the 6 mitzvoth. That started from Adam and Hawah. The 7th mitzvah was received by "humanity" during the time that Noach and his family left the ark. Post Mount Sinai, non-Jews can know about the the 7 mitzvoth by way of the Torah that was received from Mount Sinai.

During the time, before the flood outside of Noach and his family humanity had gotten to a point where they were breaking most if not all of the 7 mitzvoth. They were doing so to the point that they were influincing animals and plants. According to Jewish sources Noach, while building the ark, spent about 120 years trying to inform people about the mistakes they were making. They didn't listen until the boat had taken off, so to speak.

Ok, I see your point but am not analyzing them right now. I see you believe about Noah and the flood and consequences, although whether you realize it or not, Peter wrote that Noah was a preacher of righteousness. Thus Noah warned others in a sense. “He did not hold back from punishing an ancient world, but kept Noah, a preacher of righteousness, safe with seven others when he brought a deluge upon a world of ungodly people.” This meant a world destruction, and the Peter emphasizes this when he adds: “And by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.”—2 Pet. 2:5; 3:6. Obviously the ultimate judge is the Creator. By the way, Noah and his family survived the destruction, they didn't have the Law of Moses which came later.

 

[YoursTrue]

There is no requirement for a Geir Toshav to keep the mitzvoth of Pesah. The Hebrew text of the Torah says:

וכי-יגור אתך גר, ועשה פסח ליהוה--המול לו כל-זכר ואז יקרב לעשתו, והיה כאזרח הארץ; וכל-ערל, לא-יאכל בו​

This (גר) "Geir" is a convert to Torath Mosheh. Meaning, someone who chooses to take on the same mitzvoth as a Jew does. The mitzvah of (תורה אחת, יהיה לאזרח, ולגר, הגר בתוככם) there being one Torah concerns born Jews and Geirim "converts".

There difference between a (גר) "Geir" and a (גר תושב)/(נוכרי) "Nochri" and a "Geir Toshav" mentioned in the Torah is that a Nochri and Geir Toshav are not converts. They are those who keep the 7 mitzvoth. They mentioned in Deut. in the verse that states:

(לגר אשר בשעריך תיתננה ואכלה, או מכור לנוכרי)​

See the importance of the Hebrew language?

Let me be perfectly clear about this...there is a true God who is over all. That means the heavens and the earth. This true God, the One and only one that Jesus worshipped, is going to settle matters. I do see the importance of language, and proper understanding. Obviously includes Hebrew, don't forget Aramaic.

 

[rosends]

What I am reading from Exodus is that non-Israelites came along with the Israelites escaping from Egypt. And these, too, were under the Law given by Moses. It says, "If a foreigner resides with you and he wants to celebrate the Passover to Jehovah, every male of his must be circumcised. Then he may come near to celebrate it, and he will become like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised man may eat of it. 49 One law will apply for the native and for the foreigner who is residing among you.” One law. Exodus. One God. Not two different or similar sounding laws. Exodus 12.

As has been pointed out, this verse refers to converts, not "strangers." (if your concern is the Aramaic, after being shown the Hebrew, consider the Targum Yonatan on the verse, "אוֹרַיְיתָא חָדָא תְּהֵא לְכָל מִצְוָותָא לְיַצִּיבָא וּלְגִיּוֹרָא דִי מִתְגַּיֵּיר בֵּינֵיכוֹן")

As has also been pointed out, Chabad, and other kiruv organizations try to help those with less exposure to Judaism or weaker backgrounds engage in the practice of fulfilling commandments. They educate and make resources available. They are hugely successful, not in convincing people to adopt a totally new lifestyle, but in facilitating the keeping of commandments in places where and by people who otherwise would not know how or be able to fulfill them.

 

[YoursTrue]

As has been pointed out, this verse refers to converts, not "strangers." (if your concern is the Aramaic, after being shown the Hebrew, consider the Targum YZonatan on the verse, "אוֹרַיְיתָא חָדָא תְּהֵא לְכָל מִצְוָותָא לְיַצִּיבָא וּלְגִיּוֹרָא דִי מִתְגַּיֵּיר בֵּינֵיכוֹן")

As has also been pointed out, Chabad, and other kiruv organizations try to help those with less exposure to Judaism or weaker backgrounds engage in the practice of fulfilling commandments. They educate and make resources available. They are hugely successful, not in convincing people to adopt a totally new lifestyle, but in facilitating the keeping of commandments in places where and by people who otherwise would not know how or be able to fulfill them.

Yes, Thank you.
The Law is good. Aside from the fact that it was not, and is not ever followed perfectly by the nation or anyone, to the letter, this in itself demonstrates not only the need for the Messiah, a Deliverer, but that the Law was given as it is written, as a Tutor. Leading to ? Ok, the Christ. Or Mashiach.

 

[YoursTrue]

As has been pointed out, this verse refers to converts, not "strangers." (if your concern is the Aramaic, after being shown the Hebrew, consider the Targum Yonatan on the verse, "אוֹרַיְיתָא חָדָא תְּהֵא לְכָל מִצְוָותָא לְיַצִּיבָא וּלְגִיּוֹרָא דִי מִתְגַּיֵּיר בֵּינֵיכוֹן")

As has also been pointed out, Chabad, and other kiruv organizations try to help those with less exposure to Judaism or weaker backgrounds engage in the practice of fulfilling commandments. They educate and make resources available. They are hugely successful, not in convincing people to adopt a totally new lifestyle, but in facilitating the keeping of commandments in places where and by people who otherwise would not know how or be able to fulfill them.

Further, those non Israelites who escaped with the Israelites from Egypt were commanded to get circumcized if they were to celebrate the Passover. I am doing some reading about that but cannot imagine there were those who left with the Israelites who did not celebrate the Passover with the natural children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. To remember God and keep his laws of righteousness is something very good. Leading to life.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Peter wrote that Noah was a preacher of righteousness. Thus Noah warned others in a sense. “He did not hold back from punishing an ancient world, but kept Noah, a preacher of righteousness, safe with seven others when he brought a deluge upon a world of ungodly people.” This meant a world destruction, and the Peter emphasizes this when he adds: “And by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was deluged with water.”—2 Pet. 2:5; 3:6.

With all due respect, I need to stress the following. As mentioned previously in other threads, the NT authors do not meet the Torah based requirements for me to consider their views to be valid. I.e.

1. I have no evidence as to who the NT author of Peter really was.
2. Peter is not a 1st cent. Jewish name, so I have no evidence that Peter or the author of the text you reference was a Jew.
3. The NT claims that Peter had a family. I have asked several Christians in the past about Peter's family background and to date I have not found anyone who can give a reasonable answer to the following questions.
   • What was Peter's father's name?
   • What happened to Peter's family, mentioned in the NT, did they continue in his path? If so, what happened to them and are there Christians today that descend from Peter? If not, why not?
   • Whenever I ask the above question literally every Christian I have come across either a) doesn't answer the question/avoiding it or b) they ask me a question about something else in order to deflect the question.
4. If Peter and the other Jewish Christians were on the right path why did the Jewish beleivers in Jesus die out within 2 generations of their start.
   • Hashem made it clear, in the Torah, that if a group starts up making claims that can't be confirmed by the Torah from Mount Sinai they will die out and their non-Jewish students will overtake them. That happened to the non-Jewish Christians.

All of that being said, the Torah is clear that the flood took place all over the world. Further, there are a number of cultures around the world that have myths and legends of floods that are similar to what the Torah states. That being said, it is clear from archeology that there was a time when even the current highest mountains and numerous deserts were under water.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Yes, Thank you.
The Law is good. Aside from the fact that it was not, and is not ever followed perfectly by the nation or anyone, to the letter, this in itself demonstrates not only the need for the Messiah, a Deliverer, but that the Law was given as it is written, as a Tutor. Leading to ? Ok, the Christ. Or Mashiach.

Again, we are going in circles with this. We discussed this topic at least 3 times so far in various threads. If that is what you want to believe - that is up to you. You only got that from the NT. There is no place in the Hebrew Tanakh where you are getting those claims from.

Again, if it were true you would be able to prove that from the Hebrew text. Yet, we don't need to beat that dead horse do we? So, as to keep the peace I won't tread that road with you again.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Let me be perfectly clear about this...there is a true God who is over all. That means the heavens and the earth. This true God, the One and only one that Jesus worshipped, is going to settle matters. I do see the importance of language, and proper understanding. Obviously includes Hebrew, don't forget Aramaic.

The Hebrew text doesn't use the word "God." Besides, there are some who say that the word "god" is a term that has pagan origins. What is the JW concept on the history of that word, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Ok, I see your point but am not analyzing them right now.

Then why did you bring them up?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Yes, Thank you.
The Law is good. Aside from the fact that it was not, and is not ever followed perfectly by the nation or anyone, to the letter, this in itself demonstrates not only the need for the Messiah, a Deliverer, but that the Law was given as it is written, as a Tutor. Leading to ? Ok, the Christ. Or Mashiach.

I just found this video. Does this represent correctly what JW's beleive? Does this video correctly represent your personal belef?

 

[Sundance]

With all due respect, I need to stress the following. As mentioned previously in other threads, the NT authors do not meet the Torah based requirements for me to consider their views to be valid. I.e.

1. I have no evidence as to who the NT author of Peter really was.
2. Peter is not a 1st cent. Jewish name, so I have no evidence that Peter or the author of the text you reference was a Jew.
3. The NT claims that Peter had a family. I have asked several Christians in the past about Peter's family background and to date I have not found anyone who can give a reasonable answer to the following questions.
   • What was Peter's father's name?
   • What happened to Peter's family, mentioned in the NT, did they continue in his path? If so, what happened to them and are there Christians today that descend from Peter? If not, why not?
   • Whenever I ask the above question literally every Christian I have come across either a) doesn't answer the question/avoiding it or b) they ask me a question about something else in order to deflect the question.
4. If Peter and the other Jewish Christians were on the right path why did the Jewish beleivers in Jesus die out within 2 generations of their start.
   • Hashem made it clear, in the Torah, that if a group starts up making claims that can't be confirmed by the Torah from Mount Sinai they will die out and their non-Jewish students will overtake them. That happened to the non-Jewish Christians.

While this question wasn’t addressed to me, as a person who happens to be quite fond of early Christianity, I think I’m able to shed some light on these issues, dear @Ehav4Ever (by the way, I’m very much a fan of your YouTube channel. I find your content informative!):

1. Peter wasn’t a particularly well-known individual. We do know, however, that he was one of the first followers of Jesus.
2. In the Apostolic Writings, it’s made evident that all of the Apostles were Jews, both ethnically and religiously. As to Peter, his original name was Shimon, or Simon.
3. - Peter’s father’s name was Jonah.
   - While the Apostolic Writings do not go too deeply into the lives of the Apostles past particular points, we can safely say that if they had children, that they did continue down this path.
4. As to why the original Jewish Christians died out after two generations, they didn’t actually. Contrary to popular conception, Jewish Christians had split from the main Jesus Movement sometime after the Council of Jerusalem in 50 CE; this being due to their disagreement with the Apostolic Decree, which decided that non-Jewish converts did not need to keep the entirety of the Laws of Moses. They were only required to abstain from four things: sacrifices to idols (idolatry), consuming blood, strangled meat (non-kosher foods), and sexual immorality (adultery). They were, basically, the early Christian equivalent to the Noahide Laws.

From there developed two groups: one was called the Ebionites, who kept all the commandments of the Torah, adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, followed a text known as the ‘Gospel of the Ebionites’, and held to an adoptionist Christology.

They survived until as late as the 7th century CE. Another was known as the Nazarenes, who also kept all of the laws of the Torah, followed a text called the ‘Gospel of the Hebrews’ (of which only small portion remains), and – unlike the Ebionites – had not accepted the Virgin Birth nor the concept of Jesus as the Son of God as they had thought the concept too Hellenic.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

While this question wasn’t addressed to me, as a person who happens to be quite fond of early Christianity, I think I’m able to shed some light on these issues, dear @Ehav4Ever (by the way, I’m very much a fan of your YouTube channel. I find your content informative!):

Greetings. Glad to hear that.

1. Peter wasn’t a particularly well-known individual. We do know, however, that he was one of the first followers of Jesus.

Peter is more than someone who was not well known. I don't have any proof from Jewish sources to explain anything about him. That is a problem. In terms of his role as a follower of Jesus, again the Christian accepted gospels paint one picture of him and the Gnostic gospels paint a different one. I consider both of them to have problems but I also don't consider them to be more authoratative than the other.

1. In the Apostolic Writings, it’s made evident that all of the Apostles were Jews, both ethnically and religiously. As to Peter, his original name was Shimon, or Simon.

The writings you are talking about are not considered authentic or authoratative sources of information so what they state about Jesus followers aren't any more acceptable than the Gnostic gospels are. In order for it to proven who Jesus' followers were, halakhically, we would need more information from various sources to address that.

1. - Peter’s father’s name was Jonah.
   - While the Apostolic Writings do not go too deeply into the lives of the Apostles past particular points, we can safely say that if they had children, that they did continue down this path.

So who was Jonah? Jonah son of who? From what city and from what tribe? Who were Peter's children and grandchildren? What happened to his family post 3rd century? This is what I mean. I can't safetly say that his children continued in his path if I look around historically and see no one who can claim to be his descendants. For example, today there are Jews who have family trees that can be traced back to King David, Aharon brother of Moses, various Jewish leaders mentioned in the Tanakh, and many of the rabbis mentioned in the Talmud.

I don't know of any Jews, or even any Christians, who claim to descend from Peter or any other of the original group of Jesus' followers or are proven to be following in their ways. I have though come accross Christians who claim that Peter and others did not have children who continued in their path. I once asked someone at Jews for Jesus this question and they claimed that Peter and the students of Jesus did not have children.

In terms of the NT writings not getting into details. That is a problem for a Torah based Jew. Thus, we are required to not pay much concern to such types of information.

1. As to why the original Jewish Christians died out after two generations, they didn’t actually. Contrary to popular conception, Jewish Christians had split from the main Jesus Movement sometime after the Council of Jerusalem in 50 CE; this being due to their disagreement with the Apostolic Decree, which decided that non-Jewish converts did not need to keep the entirety of the Laws of Moses. They were only required to abstain from four things: sacrifices to idols (idolatry), consuming blood, strangled meat (non-kosher foods), and sexual immorality (adultery). They were, basically, the early Christian equivalent to the Noahide Laws.

Actually, the first generation of Jesus's followers did die out within two generations. What I mean is that they and their immediate followers are not proven to be the parents of or the teachers of the split you mentioned. The author of Acts paints a historical picture that can't be varified by checking non-Acts sources. In fact, Acts is the only source of information for the information you mention. See my further comments below.

From there developed two groups: one was called the Ebionites, who kept all the commandments of the Torah, adhered to a strict vegetarian diet, followed a text known as the ‘Gospel of the Ebionites’, and held to an adoptionist Christology.

Here is exactly what I am talking about. Can you provide me the following?

1. Names of the leaders of the Ebionites?
2. Fragments of texts authored by the Ebionites?
3. Which students of Jesus taught the leaders of the Ebionites?
4. Which Ebionites were direct descendants of Jesus' immediate students?

The only information about the Ebionites comes from the Church Fathers who describing the Ebionites as heretics to their own Christalogy. Further, the description of the Ebionites that is given is that they "ONLY" accepted a version of Matthew and not Acts and the writings of Paul, whom they considered a heretic. None of the information about the Ebionites comes from sources proven to be from them but instead comes from the Christians they supposidly opposed.

They survived until as late as the 7th century CE. Another was known as the Nazarenes, who also kept all of the laws of the Torah, followed a text called the ‘Gospel of the Hebrews’ (of which only small portion remains), and – unlike the Ebionites – had not accepted the Virgin Birth nor the concept of Jesus as the Son of God as they had thought the concept too Hellenic.

Concerning the Nazarenes, can you provide me the following?

1. Names of the leaders of the Nazarenes?
2. Fragments of texts authored by the Nazarenes?
3. Which students of Jesus taught the leaders of the Nazarenes?
4. Which Nazarenes were direct descendants of Jesus' immediate students?

The only information about the Nazarenes comes from the Church Fathers who describing the Ebionites as heretics to their own Christalogy.

This is what I mean that within 2 generations the original Jewish Christian movement dissappeared off the historical map. All groups who came after them are the stuff of legends only written from the standpoint of the Christians who opposed them and not from their own sources.

 

[Sundance]

Greetings. Glad to hear that.



Peter is more than someone who was not well known. I don't have any proof from Jewish sources to explain anything about him. That is a problem. In terms of his role as a follower of Jesus, again the Christian accepted gospels paint one picture of him and the Gnostic gospels paint a different one. I consider both of them to have problems but I also don't consider them to be more authoratative than the other.



The writings you are talking about are not considered authentic or authoratative sources of information so what they state about Jesus followers aren't any more acceptable than the Gnostic gospels are. In order for it to proven who Jesus' followers were, halakhically, we would need more information from various sources to address that.



So who was Jonah? Jonah son of who? From what city and from what tribe? Who were Peter's children and grandchildren? What happened to his family post 3rd century? This is what I mean. I can't safetly say that his children continued in his path if I look around historically and see no one who can claim to be his descendants. For example, today there are Jews who have family trees that can be traced back to King David, Aharon brother of Moses, various Jewish leaders mentioned in the Tanakh, and many of the rabbis mentioned in the Talmud.

I don't know of any Jews, or even any Christians, who claim to descend from Peter or any other of the original group of Jesus' followers or are proven to be following in their ways. I have though come accross Christians who claim that Peter and others did not have children who continued in their path. I once asked someone at Jews for Jesus this question and they claimed that Peter and the students of Jesus did not have children.

In terms of the NT writings not getting into details. That is a problem for a Torah based Jew. Thus, we are required to not pay much concern to such types of information.



Actually, the first generation of Jesus's followers did die out within two generations. What I mean is that they and their immediate followers are not proven to be the parents of or the teachers of the split you mentioned. The author of Acts paints a historical picture that can't be varified by checking non-Acts sources. In fact, Acts is the only source of information for the information you mention. See my further comments below.



Here is exactly what I am talking about. Can you provide me the following?

1. Names of the leaders of the Ebionites?
2. Fragments of texts authored by the Ebionites?
3. Which students of Jesus taught the leaders of the Ebionites?
4. Which Ebionites were direct descendants of Jesus' immediate students?

The only information about the Ebionites comes from the Church Fathers who describing the Ebionites as heretics to their own Christalogy. Further, the description of the Ebionites that is given is that they "ONLY" accepted a version of Matthew and not Acts and the writings of Paul, whom they considered a heretic. None of the information about the Ebionites comes from sources proven to be from them but instead comes from the Christians they supposidly opposed.



Concerning the Nazarenes, can you provide me the following?

1. Names of the leaders of the Nazarenes?
2. Fragments of texts authored by the Nazarenes?
3. Which students of Jesus taught the leaders of the Nazarenes?
4. Which Nazarenes were direct descendants of Jesus' immediate students?

The only information about the Nazarenes comes from the Church Fathers who describing the Ebionites as heretics to their own Christalogy.

This is what I mean that within 2 generations the original Jewish Christian movement dissappeared off the historical map. All groups who came after them are the stuff of legends only written from the standpoint of the Christians who opposed them and not from their own sources.

As to who Jonah was, we only know that he is named as the father of Peter.


Regarding whether Peter’s family had continued in the path, again, we do not know. We don’t know whether Peter had children. We do know that he was married, however. None of the other Apostles had been married. In fact, they all were martyred by the end of the second century. Even so, this is not consequential, as neither Christian discipleship and identity nor leadership are contingent upon genealogical connection, only upon conversion. It’s not the same as in Rabbinic Judaism.

(Regarding the matter of the book of Acts, as an aside, it’s not the only biblical source of information about the events that occurred at the Council of Jerusalem. The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians is another. Though these would be all in terms of historical sources, my question is: why would this fact automatically discredit the information given therein as unreliable, especially when there’s nothing that would contradict it?)

As to the Ebionites and the Nazarenes, from the information that is given (albeit, yes, from opposing sources) they were not sects that had particular leaders at the heads. Rather they were groups of Jewish believers that either split from the main Christian community or had developed independently of it. As to their texts, the Ebionites’ literature had initially resembled the Gospel of Matthew, but they later had rejected it and compiled their own writings. The Nazarenes used an Aramaic version of the Gospel Writings called ‘The Gospel of the Hebrews’.

Regarding which students of Jesus taught the leaders of either group or the matter of direct descendants of Jesus’s immediate students, again, there were no particular leaders of either group as far as history records. Most likely, they would have picked up information from other disciples than the Twelve. Additionally, Christianity had never worked this way. Christian leadership or identity was never a matter of birth or becoming apart of a particular group of people or a family line. It was simply about conversion.

 

[HarryT98]

Random question here. Can't find anything answer wise that's actually relivent to the question online. So here...if and can god and satan together create a child. Both of them. Like how god created jesus from impregnating mary, what if the two forced decided to make a 50/50 child together.

Could the child have ultimately free will?and that means the child could be either the "anti-christ" or perhaps a "demi-god".
If this were conceptually possible what might this being end up looking like here on earth? Would they even be walking along side mankind? What if?

 

[RabbiO]

Just be patient, @HarryT98

I’m sure it is soon to be a cheaply made direct to TV movie starring has-beens
and never-beens—-- and which will be followed by a slew of sequels of increasingly lesser merit, if you can believe it, than the original.

 

[rosends]

Random question here. Can't find anything answer wise that's actually relivent to the question online. So here...if and can god and satan together create a child. Both of them. Like how god created jesus from impregnating mary, what if the two forced decided to make a 50/50 child together.

according to Judaism, no as God didn't impregnate anyone and Satan doesn't create things.

Could the child have ultimately free will?and that means the child could be either the "anti-christ" or perhaps a "demi-god".
If this were conceptually possible what might this being end up looking like here on earth? Would they even be walking along side mankind? What if?

Since it is not possible, the "what if" is limited only by (and TO) your imagination.

 

[YoursTrue]

according to Judaism, no as God didn't impregnate anyone and Satan doesn't create things.

Since it is not possible, the "what if" is limited only by (and TO) your imagination.

According to Judaism did God make Adam and Eve?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Random question here. Can't find anything answer wise that's actually relivent to the question online. So here...if and can god and satan together create a child. Both of them. Like how god created jesus from impregnating mary, what if the two forced decided to make a 50/50 child together.

Greetings. It is possible that your question should be posted as a question to Christians and not Jews. This thread has mostly be about discussing Jewish inforomation about Jewish concepts and texts. Jews don't share the concept of satan that is found in Christianity. Concerning jesus and his origins, including mary, that again is a part of Christian legend that Torah based Jews don't share with Christians. I.e. the entire story is only accepted among Christians and thus you may want to have Christians address that in a different thread.

Could the child have ultimately free will?and that means the child could be either the "anti-christ" or perhaps a "demi-god".
If this were conceptually possible what might this being end up looking like here on earth? Would they even be walking along side mankind? What if?

Again, the above hypothetical situations you present are not things that are found in Torath Mosheh or Torah based Judaism. Again, it would appear that your question would be better served as a question in a thread managed by Christians.