The reason this simple page of glossary definitions is ranked so popular with the search engine is because so many people click on our links to these definitions from the content in… the 'Netzarim Quarter' Village web site in Ra•an•an′ â(h), Israel at www.netzarim.co.il
The real content is in the 'Netzarim Quarter'! Click on our logo above for an exciting visit to the 'Netzarim Quarter' where you'll learn about Historical Ribi Yehoshua and his original, Jewish, followers before the great Roman-Hellenist apostasy of 135 C.E.—and even more importantly, how you (whether Jew or non-Jew) can follow the historically true, Judaic, Ribi Yehoshua. In Hebrew, his original followers were called the Netzarim (Hellenized to "Nazarenes").
Until Paqid Yirmeyahu researched the Netzarim name and sect and began publishing about it in 1972 in The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) no one in modern times was even aware of the name Netzarim. It stretches credulity that no one in modern times had heard of the Netzarim until Paqid Yirmeyahu published it in 1972… and then, suddenly, everybody figured it out??? Check (and verify) the dates of the earliest works about the Netzarim by the others and you'll see that they are deceiver-plagiarists. Then insist on the person whom ha-Sheim selected to entrust the knowledge, not imposters who falsely call their continuing practice of Displacement Theology "Nazarene Judaism."
Because we teach and practice the authentic Judaic teachings of Ribi Yehoshua—not Displacement Theology—we are the only group who have restored the Netzarim to be accepted in the legitimate Jewish community in Israel—genuinely like Ribi Yehoshua and the original Netzarim. Consequently, the 'Netzarim Quarter' is the only web site of legitimate Netzarim / Nazarene Judaism.
Give all the friends you've ever known the chance to know about this exciting site; send them our web site address (www.netzarim.co.il) that opens modern eyes for the first time to the Judaic world that Ribi Yehoshua and his original Netzarim knew, practiced and taught.
[Updated: 2008.10.20]As Ei•sâu′ was born of the same mother as Ya•a•qov′ , yet was an Arab, Ei•sâu′ is proof that simply being born of a Jewish mother or having Jewish DNA isn't sufficient to make one a Jew. Rejection of Tor•âh′ excludes even one born of a Jewish mother from Yi•sәr•â•eil′ and being a Jew.
Ancient Ë•dom′ is, today, southwestern Jordan. Today's Ei•dom•im′ are the Arabs of Jordan.
[Updated: 2009.09.29]òÅãåÌú
Eid•ut′ ; evidence, physical evidence, physical proof, which Mosh′ ëh placed in the A•ron′ ha-Qo′ dësh in Shәm•ot′ 40.20 (popularly "Testimony").
òÂãåÉú
Âd•ot′ ; plural, [group of] witnesses; usually inaccurately translated as "community" or "congregation."
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2008.10.21]There is no capitalization in Hebrew. Consequently, the distinction between Ël•oh•im′ and Ël•oh•im′ is unknown in Hebrew and artificial in English. àÁìåÉäÄéí is also used of é--ä
The etymology is uncertain and disputed (Ernest Klein, A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English, p. 28). The most likely etymology seems to be the appending to àÅì of ä (=5 in gi•ma•tri•yâh′ ). While this could designate 'ä or the (5 books of) Tor•âh, either seems anachronous barring a long archetypal tradition. More likely, the appended äÌ is a feminine suffix (though the non-standard pronunciation is problematic), designating a Goddess, which, also irregularly, is pluralized with the masc. pl. ending. This may well be a deliberate grammatical inclusive form meaning "Gods and Goddesses." Popularly, the concept of a Goddess is "smoothly" avoided by describing it as "the feminine aspect of God," lә-hav•dil′ Shәkhin•âh′ in Hebrew.
The English term God derives from the name of the pagan idol of fortune and the uttering of its name is, therefore, the application of one’s tongue, which is supposed to be kept holy, into an idolatrous practice. Uttering the term "God" transgresses Tor•âh′ (Shәm•ot′ 23.13; Dәvâr•im′ 12.3 and Yәho•shu′ a 23.7).
Understanding the meaning of Ëlohim is the key enabling the decoding the Shәm•a′ : "Hearken Yi•sәr•â•eil′ ! 'ä is [note the singular form] our Ëlohim. [Note that this is plual] 'ä is the Singularity." With the Shәm•a′ , the Jews daily declare that, for us, 'ä encapsulates all of the ëlohim.
Rather than denoting a "royal we," as popularly asserted, àÁìåÉäÄéí denotes that, for Israel and the Patriarchs, é--ä is a Singularity; i.e., all of the forces that goy•im′ had reckoned to be àÁìåÉäÄéí, Israel attributed to a Singularity; replacing all of the àÁìåÉäÄéí (Gods) of the goy•im′ .— as recited in the Shәm•a′ .
Scholars differ whether àÁìåÉäÄéí is the plural of àÅì (Eil), usually instantiated as äÈàÅì (hâ-Eil; the Eil), or the rarely used àÁìÀåÉäÌÇ (ël•oh•a′ ) and its variant spelling àÁìÀÉäÌÇ. The Arabic "Allah" developed from the latter. Because àÅì has a different plural form, àÅìÄéí (Eil•im′ ), most scholars consider Ël•oh•im′ to be the plural of ël•oh•a′ .
àÁìåÉäÄéí has been de-Judaized and Hellenized to the pagan âÌÈã (jâd; pronounced God by all but the Tei•mân•im′ ) and anglicized to "Gad" to conceal its pagan origin.
Rakh•eil′ named one of her children Gâd (God, pronounced identically), after one of the idols that she stole from her father's house. (She named another son Ash′ ër, the masc. form of the Goddess from which Easter derives—the other of her idols).
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2009.09.21] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2008.04.15]As Ei•sâu′ was born of the same mother as Ya•a•qov′ , yet was an Arab, Ei•sâu′ is proof that simply being born of a Jewish mother or having Jewish DNA isn't sufficient to make one a Jew. Rejection of Tor•âh′ excludes even one born of a Jewish mother from Yi•sәr•â•eil′ and being a Jew.
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.07.02]The hiph•il′ verb bin•yân′ is äÆàÁîÄéï (hë•ë•min′ ; he trusted, he had faith, he believed).
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27]This name is the same as "Ashtarte", Ashtoret, Ishtar, Esotera and Easter). The name is also likely related to the term "astral," relating to astrology.
The Scroll of Ës′ teir, a book of the Kәtuv•im′ , is last of the five Megilot.
The Nәtzâr•im′ prefer to use her Hebrew name, Ha•das′ ah.
[Updated: 2006.04.27]"…from the late account of Eutychius (PG 111, 1012-13) that, just at this time, the faithful while they were leaving the church on Easter day, were forced to eat pork under pain of death. We know how the [Ëv•yon•im′ and any last remnants of the Nәtzâr•im′ who may have survived 135 C.E. into the 4th century—there was no such thing as the oxymoronic "Judaeo-Christians"] refused this in order not to transgress the Mosaic law to which they held they were bound" (Sa•id Ibn-Batriq in Bellarmino Bagatti, The Church from the Circumcision, Yәru•shâ•lay′ im: Franciscan Press, 1971, p. 13-14ff).
[Updated: 2006.04.27]In Bible Review (Winter 1986, p. 15), George Howard—Emeritus Head of the Department of Religion and Professor of Religion at the University of Georgia—argues that EB reflects the ancient Hebrew ms. Top scholars increasingly agree that, just as Eusebius documented, the original version of Ma•tit•yâh′ u was Hebrew (cf. The Nәtzâr•im′ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•tit•yâh′ u (NHM), note 1.0.1). EB is, as of this writing, the earliest extant complete Hebrew ms. of Ma•tit•yâh′ u. Its integrity within the Hebrew-Ma•tit•yâh′ u tradition remains unresolved (Hellenized to Greek Matthew).
[Updated: 2009.04.30]What little is known about the Ëv•yon•im′ is found in the early Church literature, by Greek-speaking Hellenists, almost exclusively gentile, who had no grasp whatsoever of Hebrew or Judaism. Their knowledge was limited to what was conveyed to them in Greek. Since the Ëv•yon•im′ were Hellenist, they were [a] apostates by definition (as Hellenists) and [b] the first and earliest "Jewish" group with which the earliest Christians could communicate. Eusebius specifically notes (EH III.xxvii.2) that there were a number of groups and he knew no better than to lump all of them together, despite noting that they were distinctly different, under the same name: Ëv•yon•im′ , acknowledging that he didn't know which is which; nor is he clear about the differences between them.
Information about the Nәtzâr•im′ , as contrasted with the Ëv•yon•im′ , must be derived from the description of dër′ ëkh é--ä given in 4Q MMT to determine what constraints unavoidably defined the Nәtzâr•im′ in order for them to have been accepted in the 1st-century Pharaisaic (rabbinic) community in the first place, as well as to remain in the Pharaisaic (rabbinic) community, at enmity with the Christian Church, until the Christian Church extirpated the Nәtzâr•im′ in 333 C.E.
Eusebius constructively calls all of the gentile Church's pre-135 C.E. Jewish precursors sons of Sâ•tân′ :
"But others, the Wicked Demon, when he could not alienate them from
God's plan in Christ, made his own, when he found them by a different snare. The first Christians [sic] gave these the suitable name of Εβιωναιους because they had poor and mean opinions concerning Christ. They held him to be a plain and ordinary man who had achieved righteousness merely by the progress of his character and had been born naturally fromMaryand her husband. They insisted on the complete observation of the Law, and did not think that they would be saved by faith in Christ alone and by a life in accordance with it.""But there were others besides these who have the same name. These escaped the absurd folly of the first mentioned, and did not deny that the Lord was born of a Virgin and the Holy Spirit but nevertheless agreed with them in not confessing his pre-existence as
God, being the Logos and Wisdom. Thus they shared in the impiety of the former class, especially in that they were equally zealous to insist on the literal observance of the Law. They thought that the letters of the Apostle [Paul] ought to be wholly rejected and called him an apostate from the Law. They used only the Gospel called according to the Hebrews [i.e., Hebrew Matityahu] and made little account of the rest. Like the former they used to observe the Sabbath and the rest of the Jewish ceremonial, but onSundays celebrated rites like ours in commemoration of the Saviour's resurrection." (Eusebius, loc. cit.)
Note that this represents, on the one hand, the earliest Hellenist apostate spin-off from the Nәtzâr•im′ known by the Church and, on the other hand, the apostate spin-off prototype of the Christian Church. Thus, this describes the first and earliest hybrid proto-Christian group known by the Church between the Nәtzâr•im′ and the Church.
"The Gospel of the Ebionites (Gos.Eb.) is a gospel harmony preserved in a few quotations in the writings of Epiphanius… the Ebionites rejected the virgin birth… Their gospel makes both John the Baptist and Jesus vegetarians: John's diet is said to consist exclusively of wild honey; and Jesus is made to say that, at the Passover meal with his disciples, he dos not desire to eat meat. In another context, Jesus makes a legal pronouncement in which he states that he has come to abolish sacrifices… A date of composition in the middle of the second century… is most likely. Its provenance is probably Syria-Palistan, where the Ebionites were at home" (Ron Cameron, the Other Gospels, Philadelphia, Westminster, 1982, p. 103f.).
For further information, see also Ebionites in our History Museum.
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27]When prefixed by the specifier, ä (hâ-; "the"), the âÈãåÉì (gâ•dol′ ) receives a dâ•geish′ , which Tei•mân•im′ pronounce "j" rather than "g" (like other Israelis): hâ-Jâ•dol′ .
[Updated: 2006.04.27]
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.05.25]Nâ•si′ of the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ ("Gamaliel, Rabban," EJ 7:295) beginning ca. 20 C.E. (Chronology of the Tan"kh from the 'Big Bang').
Filtering, as far as possible, all Christian redactions and interpretations and translating directly from the earliest extant source documents to reconstruct Hebrew Ma•a•vâr′ 5.34-40:
"And a certain man of the rabbinic-Pәrush•im′ in the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ named Jam•liy•eil′ , a teacher of Tor•âh′ esteemed by all of the kinsmen, rose up and ordered that the [Nәtzâr•im′ ] Shәlikh•im′ be excused from [the proceedings] for a short time. Then he addressed the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ saying,
'Men, Bәn•ei′ -Yi•sәr•â•eil′ , take heed to yourselves what you intend to impose upon these men; for in earlier days [Hellenist Greek] Theudas rose up claiming to be the Mâ•shi′ akh and had a following of about 400 men. He was taken up, and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed and came to nothing. After him, in the days of the census, Yәhud•âh′ of the Gâ•lil′ rose up and incited the am to stray and follow him. But he was finally brought to an end and as many as were persuaded by him dispersed. And now I tell you, Turn aside from these men, tolerate them, because if this counsel or this work is of men it will cease. But if it be of Ël•oh•im′ , then you will not be able to make them cease and, in that case, you would also be found to be fighters against Ël•oh•im′ …'
"So the Pәrush•im′ -dominated Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ was persuaded by him but, having recalled the Shәlikh•im′ , the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ whipped them and conveyed instructions to them that they should not speak in the name of Rib′ i Yәho•shu′ a, and released them."
Until ca. 20 C.E., the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ had been predominated by the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ . It wasn't Pәrush•im′ (predecessors of today's Orthodox rabbis) who defied the explicit instruction of their first, and very own, Pәrush•im′ Nâ•si′ , Jam•liy•eil′ , and the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ to whip the Nәtzâr•im′ or order them to cease.
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2008.11.11] [Updated: 2008.09.14]îÉìÆê is a deliberate dysphemism of îÆìÆê, "the original vowels being changed and patterned after the vocalization of bosh′ ët, 'shame,' which was often used as an intentional substitute for Ba′ al" (ibid.).
There is no "hell" in the Bible. "Hell" is an innovation of Roman Hellenist Christians. The only word mistranslated as "hell" in the King James [per]Version (KJ/V) of 1611 C.E. is ùÑÀàåÉì.
The notion of "hell" arose out of the Biblical principle of tzëd′ ëq, "an eye for an eye" (interpreted and applied by the Bat•ei′ -Din as monetary compensation), implying that punishment should fit the a•veir•âh′ against Tor•âh′ . Therefore, one would reason, just as some crimes and evil is worse than other crimes and evil, so some punishment should, accordingly, be worse than other punishment; there must be degrees of punishment. The rabbis reasoned (mistakenly, as you'll see below) that the same principle must apply in hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ . Hence, death must not be the end for evil people who never suffered appropriate punishment in this life. Such people die deserving more punishment. That's the human view of tzëd′ ëq. Therefore, they reasoned, there must be a "hell" where such punishment is meted out to evil people in the same degree as the evil they perpetrated.
However, this reasoning is not found anywhere in the Bible; nor is there any direct support for this reasoning.
The notion of "the fires of hell" may, perversely, derive from the description of the "Fourth çÅéåÈä" being éÀäÄéáÇú to the holy (by definition) ðÀäÇø ãÌÄé-ðåÌø emanating from the ëÌÈøÀñÅà of the òÇúÌÄé÷ éåÉîÄéï (Dân•i•eil′ 7.9-11).
Appended to this reasoning was the human instinct that fire is probably the most painful and torturous—punishing—death possible; hence, burning alive in fire must be the punishment for the worst crimes and evil.
On the southeast side of Yәru•shâ•la′ yim in ancient times, in the valley called âÅéà áÌÆï-äÄðÌÉí, at a place called úÉôÆú, mәshum•âd•im′ adopted idolatrous rites of passage to adulthood, dedicating them to ba′ al by requiring their sons and their daughters to walk between fires, or jump through hoops of fire or, most likely, walk on fiery coals. Contrary to popular misconceptions, they were dedicated—perhaps "married" to, not sacrificed, to ba′ al. In the Bible, this is called "pass[ing] their sons and their daughters to îÉìÆê. This is how these terms became associated with "hell." Today, in this valley, the last I knew they were selling T-shirts reading "My parents went to hell and all I got was this lousy T-shirt" or "I've been to hell and back."
These passages in Yi•rәmәyâh′ u were cited to support their reasoning: 7.31-32; 19.2, 6 & 32.35.
All of this, however, is human reasoning; not Biblical instruction. If it were such a key principle, it could not have been entirely absent from the Bible. It's even more suspicious that it's found only in Hellenist doctrines.
Its absence in the Bible suggests that, contrary to human reasoning based on a deterrent (and sometimes vengeful) perception of tzëd′ ëq necessary in this world, é--ä appears to deem degrees of punishment unnecessary in the non-dimensional hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ .
The Compassionate ha-Sheim, being Perfect, cannot commune with imperfection. To mingle with imperfection would render Him imperfect, which cannot be permitted.
Thus, a Perfect Singularity could only admit perfection to His eternal, non-dimensional hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ .
While we cannot attain perfection on our own, Tor•âh′ provides that those who do their utmost to keep Tor•âh′ obtain ki•pur′ resulting in perfection by the çÅï of é--ä.
This describes a binary state: 1=Perfect; 0=Not Perfect. The linear, analog "eye for an eye" of this world, where we need training, appears to give way, in the non-dimensional realm beyond this life, to an absolute {0,1} binary outcome. 
Contrary to the linear analog paradigm of degrees of punishment in payment for degrees of transgression of Tor•âh′ , necessary as long as we're in training in this life, every indication in the Bible implies that the operative system in the design of the non-dimensional realm after this world is discrete and binary: 1=life continuing after death for Tor•âh′ -keepers, or 0=not, for all others (goy•im′ ).
Life in the non-dimensional world is solely for those who are compatible with é--ä without need of punishment. Why, then, would punishment exist? The rest seems to be scare tactics of Christian clerics (the teaching of "hell" is virtually absent outside of Hellenist Christianity) trying to motivate people into following their teaching.
There is no Biblical instruction concerning those who are not transitioned to spiritual life in the non-dimensional hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ . However, we may conjecture that it may be like before our own life: simply "not."
Transliterated in LXX as γεεννα (geenna, Hellenized to "gehinna"), the symbolism of the "fires" of "gehenna" (corrupted from Gei-Hi•nom′ ) were associated with "hell" from Yi•rәmәyâh′ u and Mәnor•at′ ha-Mâ•or′ (ö"á) to The Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu (NHM) 5:22, 29, 30; et al. Scholars have shown (cf. "Moloch, Cult of," Ency. Jud. 12.230-3), however, that the "burning" of children was only a symbolic marriage ritual dedicating boys to be priests, or girls to be mistresses, of Mo′ lakh Hadad aka Mithra aka Helios aka Zeus, aka the sun God, Shëm′ ësh, whose consort was Ashtart (aka Ishtar, aka Easter).
The Book of Jubilees (30.7ff) demonstrates that the "burning of children to Mo′ lakh" ritual marriage referred to intermarriage (then a parental decision). "The common denominator of all these traditions is the understanding of [Mo′ lakh] worship as the transfer of Jewish children to paganism either by delivering them directly to pagan priests or by procreation through intercourse with a pagan woman… This is supported by the fact that in some cases it is explicitly specified that the offender will dedicate his sons as priests to [H]adad and his daughters as hierodules to Ishtar" (ibid.).
Thus, the "sin of Mo′ lakh is intermarriage and/or assimilation!
[Updated: 2008.11.06]"It was only during the later [Beit ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Shein•i′ ] period that a sharp distinction and a barrier of separation was erected between the Jew and the gentile… In addition to that [idolatry] the low moral, social, and ethical standards of the surrounding gentiles were continually emphasized, and social contact with them was regarded as being a pernicious social and moral influence… Only considerations of humanity, such as relief of their poor, visiting the sick, affording them last rites (Ma•sëk′ ët Git•in′ 61a) and discretion… were reasons for breaking the otherwise impenetrable barrier" ("Gentile," EJ, 7.410-412).
Unlike Bәn•ei′ -No′ akh, geir•im′ are authorized to interface with the Jewish community for continuing progress in Tor•âh′ study and observance , for business purposes, etc. A geir is one who has distinguished himself from the Bәn•ei′ -No′ akh (i.e., Goy•im′ ) before the Beit-Din, but has not converted and, therefore, has not become a Jew(ess). Ha•lâkh•âh′ maintains certain distinctions between geir•im′ and Jews (e.g., relative to the Pës′ akh Sei′ dër, geir•im′ are not called to Tor•âh′ , intermarriage is prohibited, etc.). While preserving such distinctions, geir•im′ should especially note that, unlike any Bәn•ei′ -No′ akh, geir•im′ are subsumed in the Jewish community and included in its portion in hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ .
âÅø úÌåÉùÑÈá (geir to•shâv′ ; a resident-alien) refers to an alien who is resident in the Jewish community—a resident-alien. The geir to•shâv′ is a non-Jew who has met the minimum halakhic standards (the Noakhide laws; q.v. p. 78), required to permit him or her to interact, and reside, in the Jewish community.
âÅø öÆãÆ÷ (Geir Tzëd′ ëq; an alien, i.e. non-Jew, who has been recognized by a Beit-Din as Tzëd′ ëq); i.e., a geir who has attained a level of Tor•âh′ -observance equivalent to those who qualify for conversion but, usually because of a marital entanglement with a spouse who rejects Tor•âh′ , cannot convert. In ancient times, fear of circumcision was another reason.
äÄúÀâÌÇéÌÀøåÌú (hit•gai•yәr•ut′ ; completing the geir process)—i.e. converting. Upon completing the geir toshav training, if one cannot convert—whether due to marital ineligibility or refusal of Orthodox rabbis—we promote the geir toshav to the status of (non-Jewish) geir tzëd′ëq.
âÌÄéÌåÌø (gi•yur′; completion of the geir process)—i.e. conversion.
Geir is often confused with the inaccurately translated title "God-fearers," which included both Jews and (non-Jew) geir•im′ .
The definition of geir and its two counterpart Greek terms has become misunderstood in modern times.
In Biblical through Talmudic Hebrew, geir referred to an unconverted, non-Jew who had been recognized by a beit din as a novitiate engaged to learn—and apply as he or she learns—to become non-selectively observant of all of Tor•âh′ , with the goal of converting (except when circumstances prohibit conversion). In Biblical through Talmudic times, this recognition by a beit din was required in order to interact in the Jewish community, which was, otherwise, prohibited from interacting with gentiles.
The scholar who has come closest to the correct definitions is Louis H. Feldman (see "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers," Biblical Archeology Review, 86.09-10, pp. 58-69 and Jew & Gentile in the Ancient World, see the General Judaica Shoppe in our Mall). Feldman extrapolates from pagan religions of the period to suggest the existence of an intermediate status between a "sympathizer" and coreligionist. However, as even Feldman noted, Judaism is proactively unlike pagan religions. Hence, those of Feldman's conclusions that depend on this premise are non sequitur.
Still, like the candidate who demanded it of Hi•leil′ , it's unreasonable to expect anyone to teach him everything that is needed in order to be Tor•âh′ -observant "while standing on one foot." Yet, in Biblical and Talmudic times, gentiles weren't permitted to interact with Jews in order to study. The sheer time required to learn implies a period of transition and at least one status that acts as a visa authorizing him or her to study in the Jewish community.
The following definitions assume one has absorbed the relevant information in both James Parkes (The Conflict of the Church and the Synagogue, see the General Judaica Shoppe in our Mall)) and Feldman (see "The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers," Biblical Archeology Review, 86.09-10, pp. 58-69 and Jew & Gentile in the Ancient World, see the General Judaica Shoppe in our Mall).
"God-fearer" was the umbrella term that included both Jews and novitiates (i.e. pre-initiates, pre-proselytes, pre-converts). Feldman rightly describes novitiates to Judaism as "sympathizers" to Tor•âh′ (i.e. Judaism) / Jews. Unlike pagan religions, novitiates who converted were thereafter prohibited by Oral Law (documented in Tal•mud′ ) from being labelled as converts! After conversion, novitiates became Jews, NOT "proselytes"—which causes confusion since the Greek προσηλυτος (prosælutos) was the closest Greek term the ancients knew to describe "near Jew" observers of Tor•âh′ . Despite this confusion, in Judaism, there is no such thing as a "convert." There are only
Also unlike pagan religions, in Tor•âh′ , circumstances can (and did) arise in which candidates can become Tor•âh′ -observant but still not qualify to convert. (Inability to qualify for conversion was usually due either to fear of circumcision, by males, or to marriage to a spouse unwilling to convert, since conversion would, in such case, create in an intermarriage.) There arose, therefore, not only an intermediate (and, therefore, temporary) status as Feldman suggested, but also a permanent, non-Jewish, status we might call a "Tor•âh′ -observant non-convert."
The term describing the temporary status of an ordinary novitiate was âÅø úÌåÉùÑÈá (geir to•shâv′ ; resident alien). When the geir to•shâv′ attained the level of observance required to convert, he or she converted if possible. However, in cases where conversion was impossible, upon attaining the level of Tor•âh′ -observance required of a convert the geir to•shâv′ was promoted to geir Tzëd′ ëq (just, or "righteous," alien). Both the geir to•shâv′ and the geir Tzëd′ ëq are non-Jews. It can then be easily understood why, in Tal•mud′ , the geir to•shâv′ is variously described in different levels of observance—as the individual progressed from his or her former paganism to become Tor•âh′ -observant.
Together, the geir to•shâv′ and the geir Tzëd′ ëq comprise the category Feldman lumped into the single category of "sympathizers."
| Hebrew | Greek | Description |
|---|---|---|
éÄøÀàÅé äÇùÌÑÅí, éÄøÀàÅé ùÑÈîÇéÄí & éÄøÀàÅé àÁìåÉäÄéí |
φοβουμενοι τον θεον; also σεβομενων προσηλυτων | The entire Tor•âh′ community; includes all categories below, all of which qualify as doing one's "utmost" to be Tor•âh′ -observant and, therefore, beneficiaries of Tor•âh′ 's promise of a place in hâ-o•lâm′ ha-bâ′ . |
| âÅø úÌåÉùÑÈá | θεσσεβεις | One category of Feldman's "sympathizers" |
| âÅø öÆãÆ÷ | προσηλυτος | Second category of Feldman's "sympathizers" |
| éÀäåÌãÄéí | Ιουδαιος | Subsumes those who converted |
Note the differences between a geir and a Bën No′ akh):
By contrast, the Bën No′ akh
Except their lack of commitment before a legitimate beit din to learn (and apply as they learn, over time) Tor•âh′ -observance non-selectively, as well as their consequent lack of recognition by a beit din and integration into the Jewish community, today's "Bën-No′ akh" are otherwise similar to the Biblical and Talmudic geir.
Contrary to the historical definition, the modern understanding of the term "geir" evolved to refer to a convert to Judaism. However, one who converts to Judaism according to Ha•lâkh•âh′ is a Jew, no longer a geir.
As noted in the Encyclopedia Judaica, of the earliest extant references to the Noakhide Laws applying to non-Jews: "This latter list ["Acts" 15:20] is the only one that bears any systematic relationship to the set of religious laws which the Pentateuch makes obligatory upon resident aliens"—Hebrew geir•im′ ("Noachide Laws," Ency. Jud., 12.1190). What some rabbis today are calling "B'nai Noah" was first formally defined and stated by the Nәtzâr•im′ beit din, under our first Pâ•qid′ , Ya•a•qov′ 'ha-Tza•diq′ ' Bën-Dâ•wid′ !!!
The quickest and easiest way to understand geir is to relate the geir to the modern definition of "Bnai Noah." The geir, then, differs in two ways:
While the modern understanding of geir is "a convert to Judaism," the Biblical definition was slightly different. Students are directed to read "God-fearers," [sic] by Louis H. Feldman in Biblical Archaeology Review magazine (BAR; 86.09-10, pp. 58-69). BAR states: "There is simply no one in the world who has a better grasp of Hellenistic Jewish literature than Louis Feldman" (p. 45). Feldman's article is a MUST read.
It's clearly impossible for a non-Jews to come to learn Tor•âh′ already knowing Tor•âh′ . Neither could non-Jews learn Tor•âh′ in one day, "while standing on one foot," in order to become fully Tor•âh′ -observant that evening. When non-Jews became interested in learning about Judaism they required a special status to distinguish them above the Bәn•ei′ No′ akh and give the opportunity and time to study in the Jewish community so that they could make the transition to full and non-selective Tor•âh′ -observance.
These novitiates to Judaism were granted the status of geir to•shâv′ (fem. geir•âh′ to•shëv′ ët) by
These requirements remain—unchanged—the requirements for being recognized by our beit din as a geir to•shâv′ Nәtzâr•im′ .
Tal•mud′ documents that becoming a geir to•shâv′ enables the non-Jew to be counted within Israel, though it isn't the same as converting and the geir ISN'T a Jew (for which conversion is required.)
The Nәtzâr•im′ neither require, nor perform, conversions. Conversion is left entirely to Orthodox rabbis.
In the time of the Beit-ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Shein•i′ , most geir•im′ converted, which is why the term geir eventually blurred with "convert." However, when the geir converts, Orthodox Ha•lâkh•âh′ then recognizes him or her as a Jew(ess). The Jew(ess)—whom Orthodox Ha•lâkh•âh′ prohibits from even being reminded of their non-Jewish past—is then no longer a geir(âh).
Geir Tzëd′ ëq
There were also many geir•im′ who never converted, either because they feared circumcision or because they were married to a non-Jew who didn't want to convert (and for whom conversion was prohibited because it would have created a prohibited intermarriage).
Upon becoming conversant with, and observant of, all of the Mitz•wot′ of Tor•âh′ like a Jew, the geir to•shâv′ who didn't convert was then instead recognized as a geir Tzëd′ ëq (who was still not a Jew). Except for a short-list of explicit exceptions for non-Jews, the geir Tzëd′ ëq's practice of Tor•âh′ is identical to that of the Jew's practice. With the exceptions of the afrementioned short-list, when the geir Tzëd′ ëq interfaces in the Orthodox Jewish community, his or her practice must be identical (or corrected to become identical) to that of Orthodox Tei•mân•im′ and Nәtzâr•im′ Jews. (These sometimes differ from Ash•kәnaz′ im Jews.)
Therefore, it is inaccurate to confuse the geir, an unconverted non-Jew, with the (converted) Jew. A geir to•shâv′ is a non-Jew novitiate, who has come before a legitimate Beit Din (i.e. in the legitimate Jewish community, as opposed to a phony 'beit din' of Christian Jews and Christian (Hellenist) pseudo-Judaism, recognized by no one in the legitimate Jewish community) and been recognized as a non-Jew, with probationary status in the Jewish community, committed to learning Tor•âh′ and keeping it non-selectively (see Shәma), step-by-step as they learn.
Being non-Jews, geir•im′ are not permitted to intermarry with Jews.
It is essential to understand that the status of geir to•shâv′ is both provisional and temporary. One cannot remain a geir to•shâv′ .
The status of geir to•shâv′ is designed to enable the non-Jew to learn Tor•âh′ and become Tor•âh′ -observant within a reasonable period of time. If the geir to•shâv′ doesn't progress to full and non-selective observance of the 613 Mitz•wot′ his or her status as geir to•shâv′ must be terminated.
Cf. also The Nәtzâr•im′ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•tit•yâh′ u (NHM) note 23.15.2.
[Updated: 2007.03.07] [Updated: 2007.03.07] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27]|
à (âl′ ëph) =1 á (beit) = 2 â (gi′ mël) = 3 ã (dâl′ ët) = 4 ä (hei) = 5 å (wâw (vâv)) = 6 æ (zay′ in) = 7 ç (kheit) = 8 |
è (teit) = 9 é (yud) = 10 ë/ê (kaph/kaph soph•it′ ) = 20 ì (lâm′ ëd) = 30 î/í (mëm/mëm soph•it′ ) = 40 ð/ï (nun/nun soph•it′ ) = 50 ñ (sâm′ ëkh) = 60 |
ò (ay′ in) = 70 ô/ó (pei/pei soph•it′ ) = 80 ö/õ (tzâd′ ëh/tzadëh soph•it′ ) = 90 ÷ (quph) = 100 ø (rësh) = 200 ù (shin/sin) = 300 ú (tâw (tâv)) = 400 |
See also Si•mân′ .
[Updated: 2009.05.26]âåÉàÅì derives from the verb âÈàÇì (ga•al′ ; he requited, avenged or redeemed). âåÉàÅì äÇãÌÈí (jo•eil′ ha-dâm) means "requiter (i.e. avenger) of blood." âåÉàÅì éÄùÒÀøÈàÅì (jo•eil′ Yi•sәr•â•eil′ ) means "requiter (i.e. avenger) of Yi•sәr•â•eil′ ."
âÀàåÌìÈä ( jә•ul•âh′ ), a fem. noun, means vengeance, especially the Vengeance of é--ä, on behalf of His kindred Israel, against the Goy•im′ , i.e. the 'Day of é--ä,' the 'Last Day' and the Great Day of His mi•shәpât′ —which is the definition of Israel's redemption. Over centuries of persecution by the Church, translators have been cowed into neutralizing the translation âÀàåÌìÈä to the misleading "Day of Redemption" rather than the correct 'Day of the Vengeance of é--ä' against the Goy•im′ .
See also pâd•âh′ redeem(er) / ransom(er).
[Updated: 2009.05.11]Tor•âh′ refers to Yi•sәr•â•eil′ as a goy in bә-Reish•it′ 35.11-12 et al.) Nevertheless, the usual term for the Jewish people is òÇí.
Meaning "people," not a person, no individual can properly be called a goy (a people). Accordingly, a goy equates to "a people," not "a gentile." Hebrew doesn't even have a word for gentile (which is why goy•im′—"the [other] peoples" is used). The closest Hebrew translation for "a gentile" would be a ìÉà éÀäåÌãÄé (lo Yәhud•i′; a non-Jew) and the plural, "gentiles," would be the plural in Hebrew: ìÉà éÀäåÌãÄéí (lo Yәhud•im′; non-Jews).
Generally used in the plural, although goy•im′ (the peoples) includes Yәhud•im′ as a goy, the term is generally used by Yәhud•im′ referring to "the [other] peoples" (in contrast to Yәhud•im′ as a goy). Hence, the popular connotation.
âÌåÉé probably derives from âÌÅå (geiv, Tei•mân•im′ jeiv; back, as the posterior part of a body from the neck to the end of the spine and, by extension, the body (although the proper word for body is âÌåÌó). Accordingly, âÌåÉé connotes "an ethnic body."
The use of âÌåÉéÈä (goy•âh′ or joy•âh′) for a gentile woman is a modern Hebrew innovation unknown in earlier Hebrew.
Also related and similarly derived from âÌÅå, is âÌÀåÄéÌÈä (gәwi•yâh′ or jәwi•yâh′); a dead body, corpse or cadaver—probably deriving from the image of many backs littering a battlefield or after a plague.
The only correct term for "gentile" is documented from the ñÉøÆâ warning stone and is non-Hebrew, a warning in Greek barring αλλογενης (allogeneis; another species, kind; i.e. gentiles) from approaching any closer to the Beit-ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ ha-Shein•i′ . Αλλογενης, mentioned only once in the entire NT, refers there to an "almost-Jew" (Samaritan, Lu. 17:18). English translators injected "gentiles" and "Greeks" into the NT as part of their displacement theology where even the Hellenist Romans didn't (see Ελλενης (elleneis) and Εθνος (ethnos).
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2007.07.09] [Updated: 2006.06.18]The import of Ha•lâkh•âh′ cannot be grasped apart from the Judaic definition of Tor•âh′ which has remained unchanged for millennia—and which differs dramatically from the non-Judaic perception. Since Har Sin•ai′ , Oral Law—Tor•âh′ shë-bә•al pëh′ —has always been paired with Tor•âh′ shë-bi•khәtâv′ in the Judaic definition of Tor•âh′ . (Tor•âh′ shë-bә•al pëh′ is documented as preceding Tor•âh′ shë-bi•khәtâv′ from the earliest times ("Ha•lâkh•âh′ ," EJ, 7.1156). Before Har Sin•ai′ , there was only Oral Law, which had deteriorated into twelve tribal versions, creating schisms between the tribes.)
Tor•âh′ shë-bә•al pëh′ comprises two Biblical components extensively ordained and required by Tor•âh′ shë-bi•khәtâv′ (in over 450 passages, see Atonement In the Biblical 'New Covenant' Live-Link (ABNC Live-Link)):
Both forms issue only from a legitimate Beit-Din with an unbroken Pәrush•im′ -heritage succession, which was ordained by Mosh′ ëh (Shәm•ot′ 18.25-26). Since the time of Mosh′ ëh, Mi•shәpât′ and Khoq have always comprised Tor•âh′ shë-bә•al pëh′ , defining the legitimate guidelines for interpreting and implementing Tor•âh′ shë-bi•khәtâv′ .
Ha•lâkh•âh′ is the Pәrush•im′ interpretation of Tor•âh′ shë-bә•al pëh′ .
In the 1st century there were three, and only three, interpretations of Oral Law recognized by the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ —which was the ultimate and undisputed earthly Judaic authority:
There are two levels of authority for Ha•lâkh•âh′ :
and carries the same authority as Tor•âh′ shë-bikh•tâv′ .See also box in The Nәtzâr•im′ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•tit•yâh′ u (NHM) note 7.1.1. To get even the most elementary handle on historical Rib′ i Yәho•shu′ a's relationship to Ha•lâkh•âh′ requires completing our Khav•rut•a′ .
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27]äÇø àÁãåÉí (Har Ë•dom′, See Har Ei•sau′ .
äÇø òÅùÒÈå (Har Ei•sau′ , Mount[ain of] Ei•sau′ , popularly Hellenized to "Esau"). Ei•sau′ was also known as Ë•dom′ , who settled the region to the south of Yәhud•âh′ (Hellenized to "Judah," i.e. land of the Yәhud•im′ /Jews), in the region previously occupied by the Khor•im′ (hence, äÉø äÈäÈø, Hâr ha-Hâr, may originally have been çÉø äÈäÈø, Khor hâ-Hâr and identical with this mountain as well) fathering the people who became known as the "Edomites" (and, later, Idumeans).
In the second century B.C.E., John Hyrcanus forcibly converted the "Edomites," by then known as Idumeans, to Judaism. The inhabitants of Edom-Idumea "soon became an inseparable part of the Jewish nation" (Ency. Jud., 8.632). However, just as Herod was regarded as a false convert, other forced-convert Idumeans, especially after 70 C.E., reverted to their previous Arab heritage and culture.
The region of "Edom" included Beit Lëkh′ ëm and Khë•vәr•on′ —today's Palistan (pseudo-Palestinians). More generally, however, Har Ei•sau′ symbolizes all non-Jews, especially those proximate to Tor•âh′ and Israel (the legitimate Jewish community).
äÇø ëÌÇøëÌÉí (Har Kar•kom′ ; Mount[ain of] Saffron), in the Israeli Nëg′ ëv
äÇø îÀâÄãÌåÉ or äÇø îÀâÄéãÌåÉ (Har Mәgid•o′ ; Mount[ain of] Mәgid•o′ ; meaning uncertain, perhaps "his choice" or "his announcing"), Hellenized to "Armageddon"; ancient Kәna•an•i′ and Yisrâ•eil•i′ city on the southern side of Ei′ mëq (large, low-lying plain between mountainous areas) Yiz•rә•ël′ approx. 35 km (22 mi.) S.E. of Haifa.
äÉø äÈäÈø, Hâr ha-Hâr, see Har Ei•sau′ .
äÇø ùÒÅòÄéø (Har Sei•ir′; Hairy Mountain, or Mountain of the Hairy One), see Har Ei•sau′
Arab-occupied äÇø äÇîÌåÉøÄéÌÈä (Har Mor•i•yah′ (Mount[ain of the] Teaching of é--ä), usually referred to as äÇø äÇáÌÇéÄú (Har ha-Bay′ it: (Mount[ain of the] House) in Hebrew, is paganized to "Temple Mount." Arabs are now trying to rewrite history (again), portraying this mount as a Moslem shrine lacking authentic Jewish history. Readers should always insert "Arab-occupied" before the phrase "Temple Mount" to help safeguard the historical correctness of Har ha-Bay′ it.
äÇø ñÄéðÇé (Har Sin•ai′ ; Mount[ain of] Chinese?), meaning uncertain. Scholars agree that Har Sin•ai′ is certainly NOT Mt. St. Catherines in the southern Sinai. I concur with archeologist Anati that Har Sin•ai′ is present-day Har Kar•kom′ (above).
äÇø öÄéÌåÉï (Har Tzi•yon′ ; Mount[ain of] Noteworthy). In Biblical times, Har Tzi•yon′ referred to Har Mor•i•yah′ (see above). Later, Har Tzi•yon′ came to refer to the next mountain across the valley (now across the Ko′tël Plaza) to the west, where most of the Ko•han•im′ lived. Today, Har Tzi•yon′ refers to the SW Gate area of Ir-Dâ•wid′.
[Updated: 2008.11.06]'ãÌÆøÆêÀ ä, also ãÌÆøÆêÀ äÂìÈëÈä — original names for Judaism.
'éÄøÀàÅé ä – see geir.
[Updated: 2007.12.24]The liturgy concluding Shab•ât′ that differentiates between Shab•ât′ and the profane (ordinary) days of the week.
Based on wa-Yi•qrâ′ 10.10; 11.47, et al., the cognate ìÀäÇáãÄéì (lә-Hav•dil′ ; to differentiate) often used to differentiate holy discussion from profane matters.
Mix ingredients. Makes about 1/2 cup
More likely, Hegesippus was a gentile. In any case, he was perhaps the earliest Hellenist Roman Christian. His works, however, are lost excepting some passages quoted by Eusebius and known to Jerome. ("Hegesippus (1)," Smith & Wace, "A Dictionary of Christian Biography," II:875ff.)
[Updated: 2006.04.27]Check properly, then grind the seeds to a very fine powder. Add boiling water to ground fenugreek seed and cover; let it sit until thickened, at least for 3 hours. Drain well. Then beat with a wire whisk
To conserve the hilbe for a few days, warm it over fire, stirring continuously, bring to a boil, remove scum and cool.
Add lemon juice, salt, lots of garlic to taste, grated tomato puree, either red or green skhug to taste and mix well. For green hilbe, use green skhug and leave out the tomato puree.
[Updated: 2006.04.27]The founding Rib′ i of the tolerant, reluctant-to-build-fences Pәrush•im′ school of interpreting Oral Law (Ha•lâkh•âh′ ), in contrast to the strict, eager-fence-building Pәrush•im′ school founded by Sham•ai′ .
Hi•leil′ was one of the leaders of the Pәrush•im′ contingent in the Beit-Din ha-Jâ•dol′ , which, until 20 C.E. was controlled by the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ . During the tenure of the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ the stricter views of Sham•ai′ prevailed (within the Pәrush•im′ community only; not among the Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ ). By the time of the destruction in 70 C.E., however, the more lenient views of Hi•leil′ came to prevail.
Hi•leil′ is related to Ha•leil′ and the root of äÇìÀìåÌéÈä (Ha•lәl•u•yâh′ ; praise é--ä!).
[Updated: 2008.05.14]The term has become so strongly a metonym for death among Qabâlist Jews that its primary meaning—a wedding banquet—has become lost to most Jews, who now see no connection between äÄìÌåÌìÈà and a wedding.
[Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2007.03.08]äåÉùÑÇòðÈà øÇáÌÈä (Ho•sha′ -nâ Rabâh; "the Great 'Save, prithee!' "), the seventh day of Suk•ot′ , a special Shab•ât′ .
äåÉùÑÇòðåÉú (Ho•shan•ot′ ; "save-prithee"s [plural]; specifically, the circuits around the bim•âh′ chanting Tәhil•im′ containing the phrase äåÉùÑÇòðÈà).
[Updated: 2006.04.27]Therefore, Ignatius is both the first proper Roman Catholic Christian and "inventor" of the concept of a Catholic pope (the "papal succession" not existing until later, when retroactively fabricated by Hegesippus in the 3rd century C.E.). These earliest Christians retained their Sun-God-day worship, merely transforming it from worshipping the sun to worshipping the Hellenist man-God patterned after Zeus ("Ignatius (1)," Smith & Wace, "A Dictionary of Christian Biography," III:209ff.)
[Updated: 2006.07.14] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2006.04.27] [Updated: 2007.02.26]
Jakh•nun′ (borrowed from Arabic). Yemenite Shab•ât′ bread Basic recipe (refine over time):
Place 4 ajin in a well-buttered pan. Push one egg between each ajin, plus one more egg in the center
Bake at low heat, 120° C (250° F) all night (6 to 8 hrs).
Remove from the oven and serve at room temperature
[Updated: 2007.02.26]As in Yemen, at Beit ha-Kәnës′ ët they serve nuts, dried fruits and fresh fruits of the season. Here in Israel, this additionally includes at least khumus in pita with beverages accompanied by Tei•mân•i′ æÀîÄéøåÉú (Zәmir•ot′ ; songs of Shab•ât′ ) and Di•vәr•ei′ -Tor•âh′ . Often the Jal′ ëh is more elaborate, including jakhnun with hilbe and sometimes Ma•la′ wakh garnished with a sauce made of tomato paste, skhug and zaatar.
[Updated: 2006.05.05]Corroborating his Hellenist pseudo-Tzәdoq•im′ orientation, Yo•seiph′ relied on LXX rather than MT. Like Shâ•ul′ , who, subsequent to his kâ•reit′ was called exclusively by his Hellenist name (Paul); similarly, Yo•seiph′ Bën-Ma•tit•yâh′ u ha-Ko•hein′ is known almost solely by his Hellenized name: 'Flavius Josephus.'
Josephus authored "Wars of the Jews" ca. 78-79 C.E. and "Antiquities of the Jews" ca. 94 C.E. (in foreward to William Sanford LaSor in William Whiston, Josephus, Grand Rapids, MI, Kregel Publications, 1960, p. ix-x.) and widely acknowledged to have been redacted by No•tzәr•im′
"Josephus gives the impression that the sects were primarily divided over theological questions… He was concerned to produce an explanation that would make sense to his Greek (and Hellenist Roman) readers [and, perhaps, his own secular nature; ybd]. But the fact that only matters of practice are mentioned in MMT confirms the view that it was not dogma, but law that was apt to produce lasting schisms in Judaism." (Ëlish•â′ Qim•ron′ and John Strugnell, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert x, Qumran Cave 4.v, Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah, in consultation with Y. Sussmann and with contributions by Y. Sussman and A. Yardeni, Oxford,at the Clarendon Press, 1994, p. 176).
"The term Judaism is first found among the Greek-speaking [i.e. Hellenist] Jews of the first century C.E… Its Hebrew equivalent, [éÇäÂãåÌú] Ya•had•ut′ , found only occasionally in medieval literature…, but used frequently in modern times, has parallels neither in the Bible (but see Ës•teir′ 8.17, [îÄúéÇäÂãÄéí] mit•ya•had•im′ , "became Jews" [joined the tribe of Yәhud•âh′ specifically?]) nor in the rabbinic literature." (Judaism, EJ 7.383). The ancient, Biblically authentic, name was most likely dër′ ëkh é--ä.
éÀäåÌãÄé(ú) (Yәhud•i(t)′ ; masc./fem., respectively) native of Yәhud•âh′ one who is born of a Jewess, or converted to Judaism (see below) according to Ha•lâkh•âh′ and does not practice another religion. (For exceptions, however, see Pishtah Keihah; The Flickering-Out Wick of Yәsha•yâh′ u 42.1-4)
Originally, this people of the Ta•na"kh′ were called éÄùÒÀøÈàÅì (Yi•sәr•â•eil′ ), designating all twelve tribes of Yi•sәr•â•eil′ .
These terms were applied to the entire people only after the destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Yi•sәr•â•eil′ (B.C.E. 722). "However, while the name 'Jew' became common usage outside the Land of Israel, the Hebrew-speaking Jews within the land were particular to call themselves 'Yi•sәr•â•eil′ ' (de-Judaized to "Israelites")…
Long before the advent of the term "Judaism," the original name of the Biblical religion of Israel was Derekh ha-Sheim (See entry for Dër′ ëkh ha-Sheim). In the time of the Beit-ha-Mi•qәdâsh′ , Hellenist Romans applied the term "Judaeanism" (in Greek) to "the religion of the Judeans." Judaeanism was contracted to Judaism. Similarly, Judeans was contracted to "Jews."
Like "Sanhedrin," Judaism and Jew were originally external terms applied by Goy•im′ . Christians early conflated the word 'Judaeus' with the name of the villain of the gospel story, Judas Iscariot, whom they stereotyped as the typical Jew. Judas was linked with the devil (Lu. 22:3), and the result, in Hellenist Greek, was devil-Ιουδας (Ioudas; Judas = Judah = Judea—deriving from a single Hebrew term, éÀäåÌãÈä [Yәhud•âh′ ], differences in the Greek and English terms are artificial)." Further, while Sâ•tân′ is often transliterated into Greek letters in the NT, it is also translated in other passages into Greek: διαβολος (diabolos, which is frequently translated into English as "devil" and is equivalent to Sâ•tân′ ; see, in this regard, Jn. 8.44.) Thus, via Lu. 22.3, Ioudas = Judas = Judah = Judea was equated to diabolos = Sâ•tân′ . This relationship established the pejorative meaning of the word 'Jew' in the earliest Christian Church. ("Jew," Encyclopedia Judaica, 10:21-2.)
The Hellenist orientation of the original (post-135 C.E.) Christian Church is typified in Justin's listing of the Patriarchs of "the Word of God"—"Socrates, and Heraclitus, Abraham and Elias"—as well as his defense of Christianity: "We alone are hated, even though we hold the same as the Greeks."
The antinomianism and misojudaism of the original (post-135 C.E.) Christian Church is also evidenced by Justin, who equates gentile Romans with Christians, declaring that the Romans' enemy—the Jews—"had tortured and slain Christians without pity under Bar-Kokh′ vâ, and made Jews everywhere the most violent and remorseless of the church's slanderers and persecutors (ch. 108, § 335)." Justin believes in "the new Israel, the abandonment of the old Israel, the sons of Abraham, unless they will accept the new covenant." Already in contrast to the , Nәtzâr•im′ keeping of the Judaic festivals, "this the main body of Christians repudiated, so that it was by most treated as a criminal heresy [emphasis added] to keep the Sabbath, and they refused to hold communion with those [Nәtzâr•im′ ] who still held to these Jewish customs" (Justinus Martyr, St., A Dictionary of Christian Biography, Smith & Wace, III.560ff).
"It was for you Jews alone that it was necessary; because you forgot Him, He had to decree your Sabbaths; because you fell away to idols, He had to demand of you sacrifices (Dialog. 19, § 236, E). He ordered you a temple, lest you should worship images. All was done to dinstinguish the Jewish race from the heathen; and this, not on account of the race's virtue, so much as for its proneness to evil… It is foretold all along that the Gentiles are the children of prophecy, the true Israel, the perfect proselytes; it is of them that all the good promises are spoken… We realize in Justin the complete Gentilism of the Christianity of 140 [C.E.]. He regards the Law rather as an evidence of peculiar evil… in the Jews; so he even says in scorn that circumcision only serves to mark them out for condemnation, as the accursed who are forbidden to enter Jerusalem." Justin regards Plato as the highest authority and is entirely ignorant of Hebrew. (Smith & Wace).
 |
|
|
 980x1427.jpg){kind=link}