During the time of Jesus’ life he, as well as Stephen, Paul,
and the rest of the sect of Nazarenes were falsely accused throughout the
Bible. The question then is this, what were they falsely accused of? I would
say, based on what the Bible tells us repeatedly, they were falsely accused of
changing the Law of Moses and ultimately starting a new religion. This is precisely
what the Christian religion preaches today. So, does that make our current
church leaders the same as the Pharisees of Christ’s day? I understand that it isn’t
exactly the same in terms of what the Pharisees did, but ultimately, yes our
Christian pastors and preachers teach their own man made traditions as holy and
disregard what the Father has said was Holy, basically raising the commandments
and traditions of men above the Word and commandments of God. Let’s take a look
at some of the biblical evidence for this claim.
Acts 6: 11-14
Then they secretly induced men to say, “We have
heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.” And they stirred up
the people, the elders, and the scribes; and they came upon him, seized him, and
brought him to the council. They also
set up false witnesses who said, “This man does not cease to speak
blasphemous words against this holy place
and the law; for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will
destroy this place and change the customs which Moses delivered to us.”
Acts 7: 58
…And the witnesses
laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul.
Here we can see that they falsely accused Stephen of
speaking words against the Law of God. The only way to understand this is that
he was not actually preaching against the Law, but instead promoting what the
Law the way Moses wrote it, the way the Father intended it to be promoted.
Next we see that Paul was present at the stoning of Stephen.
Paul knew the scriptures better than most. I believe the reason he not only is
mentioned in the bible but also wrote a large portion of it is the evidence we
must use to show that there was no change in the Law of God. None. There is no
way Paul would have just given up everything he believed in, in terms of his
God, to follow something that directly contradicted it. Our current promotion
of Christianity does just that.
Acts 23: 27, 29
This man (Paul) was
seized by the Jews and was about to be killed by them…
I found out that he
was accused concerning questions of their law…
Paul being seized by the Jews and accused of breaking their law
should have been easily proven by the Pharisees if it were true. During this
time he had written multiple letters. These letters, if promoting a new doctrine
contrary to the Law written down by Moses would have been used as evidence
against him. The Pharisees knew the scriptures better than anyone and they
could not find any specific instance of any of the Nazarenes preaching a change
in the Law of God. They were only able to see instances of them promoting a
change in the traditions of men promoted by the Pharisees. This is why they
were so mad.
Acts 24: 5, 14
For we have found this
man a plague, a creator of dissension among all the Jews throughout the world,
and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.
But this I confess to
you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of
my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the
Prophets.
Here we can see Paul making his claim as part of the
Nazarenes. Later I will give evidence that these Nazarenes not only kept the
Old Testament Laws, but also believed that Jesus was the Messiah. But first, something that I would really like
to point out is Deuteronomy 13. In this chapter the Jews are directed to test
every proclaiming prophet to this test. If you believe
2 Timothy 3: 16
All Scripture is given
by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness
Then performing the Deuteronomy test would only make sense
when looking for a false prophet.
Deuteronomy 13: 1-4
“If there arises among
you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and
the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us
go after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’ you
shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for
the Lord your God is testing you to know
whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
You shall walk after the Lord your God
and fear Him, and keep His
commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him.
According to this, if Jesus, Paul or any other person came
and tried to change Gods Law, they would have to be considered a false prophet.
That being said, there is no way that Paul would have ever been convinced to
preach something contrary to God Law.
All these men that were falsely accused were being accused because
they challenged the traditions of men, the elders and Pharisees. They
contradicted something that the teachers and leaders of that day loved and this
got them into trouble. As I have stated in multiple other blogs, we
unfortunately, do this in multiple aspects of Christianity today. We also still
accuse Paul, Jesus, and the others that had a part in writing the New Testament
of breaking the Deuteronomy 13 test, without even knowing it. So the only two
conclusions we can come to are the following
1.
They did not preach against the Law of God and
therefore are true prophets and we should continue to observe the Law of God to
this day including everything written in the Law and Prophets
2.
They did preach against the Law of God and
should be considered heretics and false prophets
It is up to you to decide what you want to believe. From
everything I have studied, I find no hard evidence that makes any sense to
prove that Jesus, Paul, or any other writer of the New Testament taught or kept
anything other than the Torah.
We read earlier that Paul was considered the Ringleader of
the Nazoreans. Now, here is parts of a letter written by the fourth century Church
father Epiphanius concerning the Nazoreans.
Epiphanius; Panarion 29
7.1
But these sectarians whom I am now sketching disregarded the
name of Jesus, and did not call themselves Jessaeans, keep the name of Jews, or
term themselves Christians-but "Nazoraeans,'' from the place-name,
"Nazareth," if you please! However they are simply complete Jews.
7.2-3
They use not only the New Testament but the Old Testament as
well,: as the Jews do. For unlike the previous sectarians, they do not repudiate
the legislation, the prophets, and the books Jews call ''Writings.'' They have
no different ideas, but confess everything exactly as the Law proclaims it and
in the Jewish fashion-except for their belief in Christ, if you please! (3) For
they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and the divine creation of
all things, and declare that God is one, and that his Son is Jesus Christ.
7.4-6
They are trained to a nicety in Hebrew. For among them the
en- tire Law, the prophets, and the so-called Writings-I mean the poetic books,
Kings, Chronicles, Esther and all the rest-are read in Hebrew, as they surely
are by Jews. (5) They are different from Jews, and different from Christians,
only in the following. They disagree with Jews because they have come to faith
in Christ; but since they are still fettered by the Law-circumcision, the
Sabbath, and the rest -they are not in accord with Christians. (6) As to Christ,
I cannot say whether they too are captives of the wickedness of Cerinthus and
Merinthus, and regard him as a mere man-or whether, as the truth is, they
affirm his birth of Mary by the Holy Spirit.
9.4
They have the Gospel according to Matthew in its entirety in
Hebrew. For it is clear that they still preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet,
as it was originally written.
As we can see from the letter, the church father admits to
not following the Way of the Nazorean. Remember, this is the Way that Paul
taught. He strays from this way because it is too Jewish for him. These fathers
intentionally moved away from the teachings of Paul, this makes sense
considering that we now have teachers that claim Paul taught against keeping
the Old Testament. This is clearly not the case, not in the Bible, and not
according to the 4th century church fathers. The Nazarenes, not only
including but lead by Paul, kept the whole word of God, including the Law and
they also believe that Jesus is the Messiah.
I understand that stating outright that Paul did not teach against
the Old Testament Law causes issues for a lot of people. However, we are warned
that Paul’s writings are difficult to understand.
2 Peter 3: 14-16
Therefore, beloved,
looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace,
without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is
salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to
him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these
things, in which are some things hard to
understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction,
as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
According to this, Peter tells us that Paul is difficult to understand.
If this is true, we must take this into consideration when reading his writings.
Considering that reading his writings without any prior knowledge would seem to
promote lawlessness, shouldn’t we try to understand what was so difficult to
understand? If we really know the Old Testament and take into consideration
what all the other writers of the New Testament claim, it would seem that Paul
is the only one claiming anything other than keeping the Law.
We also see that it is the untaught people that twist his
letters to their destruction, which always comes from those that neglect to follow
the Commands of God. So we can say then, these men were twisting Paul’s words
in order to promote lawlessness, or promoting the neglect of God’s
commandments.
Here is another early church father’s writing on Paul and
the law of God.
Jerome Letter 75 chapter 4 :13
The matter in debate, therefore, or I should rather say your
opinion regarding it, is summed up in this: that since the preaching of the
gospel of Christ, the believing Jews do well in observing the precepts of the
law, i.e. in offering sacrifices as Paul
did, in circumcising their children,
as Paul did in the case of Timothy, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath, as all the Jews have been accustomed to
do. If this be true, we fall into the heresy of Cerinthus and Ebion, who,
though believing in Christ, were anathematized by the fathers for this one error
that they mixed up the ceremonies of the law with the gospel of Christ, and
professed their faith in that which was new, without letting go what was old.
Why do I speak of the Ebionites, who make pretensions to the name of Christian?
In our own day there exists a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues
of the East, which is called the sect of the Minei, and is even now condemned
by the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes;
they believe in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary; and they say
that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the
one in whom we believe. But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians,
they are neither the one nor the other. I therefore beseech you, who think that
you are called upon to heal my slight wound, which is no more, so to speak,
than a prick or scratch from a needle, to devote your skill in the healing art
to this grievous wound, which has been opened by a spear driven home with the
impetus of a javelin. For there is surely no proportion between the culpability
of him who exhibits the various opinions held by the fathers in a commentary on
Scripture, and the guilt of him who reintroduces within the Church a most
pestilential heresy. If, however, there is for us no alternative but to receive
the Jews into the Church, along with the usages prescribed by their law; if, in
short, it shall be declared lawful for them to continue in the Churches of
Christ what they have been accustomed to practice in the synagogues of Satan, I
will tell you my opinion of the matter: they will not become Christians, but
they will make us Jews.
This should really open your eyes as to why Christianity is
what it has become. There should be no arguments over whether the law is still
good because the law was given by God to Moses and it is and always has been
perfect. As we can see from this letter, even the early church fathers stated
that Paul did in fact keep the Sabbaths, feast days, circumcision, and offerings.
If Paul did these things, but preached against them, that
would make him a hypocrite. That is one of the biggest reasons I cannot believe
that he preached against the law of God. Paul kept every word in the Old
Testament, we must remember, there was no New Testament when Paul wrote,
therefore, everything he said had to align with the Old Testament word of God.
