Pinoy Messianic
  • Home
  • Blog
  • Fellowship
  • Light of Messiah Ministries Canada

Some are Quick to Judge

3/1/2013

2 Comments

 
It is sad that  some people have NOT completely researched the whole messianic movement and  after meeting some, have concluded that all of us are the same. I would  certainly love to present to you some groups that DO NOT fall into the category of some questionable theologies. When  people started to call messianic groups as "Cults", they already painted black many legitimate messianic groups. Obviously, they seem to have encountered those  with bad theologies but what about others who dont fall into that category? There are many messianic groups in Israel and North America that adhere to the Jewish customs and Biblical practices at the same time and yet have the right theologies and same beliefs with mainstream evangelicals but they dont call themselves "christians". There are also a lot of so-called evangelicals who  do not adhere to the Biblical theologies and what do you call them?

If you  further examine the early believers especially those in Judea and Asia Minor  during the 1st and 2nd centuries, you will find them very different from those christians in Rome, Alexandria and other places. No wonder pope or bishop Victor of Rome towards the end of 2nd century called them heretics and yet if you examine deeper, they actually adhere to the teachings and practices of apostles John, Phillip and other heavy weights of the early faith.

Quoting from the HISTORY OF THE CHIRSTIAN CHURCH by Phillip Scahff vol 2:

Much more  important and vehement was the third stage of the controversy between 
190 and 194, which extended over the whole church, and occasioned many synods and
synodical letters. The Roman bishop Victor, a very different man from his
predecessor Anicetus, required the Asiatics, in an imperious tone, to abandon
their Quartadecimanian practice. Against this Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus,
solemnly protested in the name of a synod held by him, and appealed to an
imposing array of authorities for their primitive custom. Eusebius has preserved
his letter, which is quite characteristic.
 
"We," wrote the Ephesian bishop to the Roman pope and his church, "We observe
the genuine day; neither adding thereto nor taking therefrom. For in Asia great
lights have fallen asleep, which shall rise again in the day of the Lord’s
appearing, in which he will come with glory from heaven, and will raise up all
the saints: Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who sleeps in Hierapolis, and
his two aged virgin daughters; his other daughter, also, who having lived under
the influence of the Holy Spirit, now likewise rests in Ephesus; moreover, John,
who rested upon the bosom of our Lord, who was also a priest, and bore the
sacerdotal plate, both a martyr and teacher; he is buried in Ephesus. Also
Polycarp of Smyrna, both bishop and martyr, and Thraseas, both bishop and martyr
of Eumenia, who sleeps in Smyrna. Why should I mention Sagaris, bishop and
martyr, who sleeps in Laodicea; moreover, the blessed Papirius, and Melito, the
eunuch [celibate], who lived altogether under the influence of the Holy Spirit,
who now rests in Sardis, awaiting the episcopate from heaven, in which he shall
rise from the dead. All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover
according to the gospel
, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of
faith.

 "Moreover, I, Polycrates, who am the least of you, according to the tradition
of my relatives, some of whom I have followed. For seven of my relatives were
bishops, and I am the eighth; and my relatives always observed the day when the
people of the Jews threw away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, am now
sixty-five years in the Lord, who having conferred with the brethren throughout
the world, and having studied the whole of the Sacred Scriptures, am not at all
alarmed at those things with which I am threatened, to intimidate me. For they
who are greater than I have said, ‘we ought to obey God rather than men.’ … I
could also mention the bishops that were present, whom you requested me to
summon, and whom I did call; whose names would present a great number, but who
seeing my slender body consented to my epistle, well knowing that I did not wear
my gray hairs for nought, but that I did at all times regulate my life in the
Lord Jesus." (pages 216-217)


Did we ever wonder why is it that the letters of Jesus in  Revelation where only sent to the seven congregations in Asia Minor and not to bigger "churches" like Rome, Antioch, Syria and Alexandria. We also have to ask  why did apostle John preferred to stay in Ephesus after his exile in Island of Patmos until his death. We also have to ask why the practices John's disciples like Polycarp and many others in Asia Minor were different from the rest of Christendom during that time? Why was it that John being the last apostle and outlived many were not considered as the "pope" or the highest ranking bishop during that time? Did we ever wonder why some people have the guts to go against the only living apostle at that time (3John 1:9). Why is it that John kept on repeating in the gospel and the epistles that he wrote to keep the commandments of God?

Sometimes it is better to understand fully before we do name calling. Summing it all, practices are not  salvation issue and come to think of it, even some "minor" deviations in beliefs does not disqualify a person from being saved. If you read and study the beliefs and writings of many apostolic fathers (e.g., the converts of the apostles) and  anti-nicene fathers (2nd-3rd centuries) you will find that they too have major flaws in theology and have different beliefs and practices from modern evangelicals yet we know that many of them (if not  all) were true believers and were saved because they gave and lost their lives for Jesus. Many of them were martyred in the most inhumane way and they stood their ground till death.

 After all said and done, we cannot deny that salvation comes ONLY from Jesus of Nazareth as there is no other name
under heaven that we can be saved. If you want to discuss this further (or if anyone are interested to know more), you can reach us at ministry@pinoymessianic.tk and I believe it is important to distinguish who are  real and who are not, at least among the messianic community. God bless and shalom!
2 Comments
Jonah Doctura
3/1/2013 10:39:36 am

The Nazarenes & Christian Labels versus History -

The Bible showed that the Lord Yeshua, the Messiah and His disciples thought of themselves as Nazarene Israelites, and the “Christians” were a different group entirely?

One of the most influential so-called "Church Fathers" of all time
was Epiphanius of Salamis. He lived from 310 to 403 CE. He declared that the Nazarenes and the Christians were 2 separate (but related) groups who kept two related (but different) faiths in the fourth century CE— and that is how it still is today.

“The Nazarenes do not differ in any essential thing from them (meaning the Orthodox Jews), since they practice the customs and doctrines prescribed by Jewish Law; except that they believe in Christ. They believe in the resurrection of the dead, and that the universe
was created by God. They preach that God is One, and that Jesus Christ is His Son. They are very learned in the Hebrew language. They
read the Law (meaning the Law of Moses)…. Therefore they differ…from the true Christians because they fulfill until now [such] Jewish
rites as the circumcision, Sabbath and others.” [Epiphanius, “Against Heresies,” Panarion 29, 7, pp. 41, 402]

In Panarion (Against Heresies), Epiphanius attempts to prove that the Catholics were the true descendants of the first century apostles (James, John, Peter, Paul, etal). Although Epiphanius’ claim was widely accepted in his day, many other Catholic scholars have disagreed
with him since.

Among those who disagreed with Epiphanius was Marcel Simon, a devout Catholic expert on the first century assembly. Marcel Simon said Epiphanius knew that it was not the Catholics, but the Nazarenes, who were the real descendants of the first century assembly—yet Marcel Simon still called the Nazarenes “heretics” because he said the Catholic Church did not like their doctrines.

They (Nazarenes) are characterized essentially by their tenacious attachment to Jewish observances. If they became heretics in the
eyes of the (Catholic) Mother Church, it is simply because they remained fixed on outmoded positions. They well represent, (even) though Epiphanius is energetically refusing to admit it, the very direct
descendants of that primitive community, of which our author (Epiphanius) knows that it was designated by the Jews, by the same
name, of ‘Nazarenes’.” [First Century expert Marcel Simon, Judéo-christianisme, pp 47-48.]

Marcel Simon acknowledged that the Nazarenes were the direct spiritual descendants of the first century apostles (James, John, Peter, et al); yet
still he called the Nazarenes “heretics” because they earnestly contended for the faith once delivered to the saints, just as Jude 3 commands.

Jude (Yehudah) 3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to
you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.

The question now is - how can Marcel Simon call the Nazarenes “heretics” for obeying Jude 3? Are we “heretics” if we do what Scripture says? Are not the real heretics those who teach against what Scripture says -for example like Sunday as the Biblical Sabbath when it is not so?

Reply
Richard
3/2/2013 12:49:15 pm

The mainstream christianity differs from the practices of John and Phillip and other apostles on the basis that their practices were carried over by Polycarp, Melitus and many others in Asia Minor and it was so obvious that by 150-155 C.E., Bishop Anicetus and Polycarp had major differences in practices and by 196 C.E., the whole Asia Minor synod headed by Polycrates of Ephesus were declared heretics by Pope Victor of Rome because they adhere to Quartodecimanism (i.e., observing Passover instead of Easter and Sabbath instead of Sunday, etc). The main argument of Polycarp againsts Anicetus was that Polycarp was only following what was passed on to him by apostle John, Phillip and other apostolic fathers but the argument of Anicetus was that he was following the traditions of the Elders. You can immediately see who has the right practice and who has the wrong one. After Constantine took over Rome and Catholics became the religion in power, those bishops and congregations in Asia Minor was forced to refrain from their old practice and be in uniformity with Rome or faced with severe punishment such as vanishment or death. Christians has to understand how and when these practices started and how it was enforced and they will see that it was not "christianly" at all.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    December 2010

    Categories

    All
    Biblical Practices
    Cults
    Early Churches
    Filipino Christians
    Filipino Messianic
    History Of Christian Church
    Jewish Holiday
    Jewish Practices
    Leaven
    Messianic
    Messianic Theology
    Nisan
    Pascua
    Pasko Ng Pagkabuhay
    Paskua
    Passover
    Passover Lamb
    Pesach
    Pinoy Messianic
    Quartodecimanism

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.