Islam & Isa (Jesus)

Pâ•qidꞋ  Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋ u

• Web Café EZine Article 2005.02.25

• Submitted By: Luzita Ball

• Country State: Greater London, UK

Dear Brother,
I appreciate the apparent sincerity of your website and agree whol-heartedly that discussion based on reason and evidence is the best and only constructive way forward. May God always guide us all to the best understanding and application of His true way. I am very curious about the authentic teachings of Yeshuah (or Jesus)(peace be upon him) and wish I could find some of his words- including beliefs and practices translated into English from the earliest, most authentic sources. I would then be interested in comparing these to the Islamic understanding of Yeshuah/Jesus (in Arabic 'Isa') (puh). Did he not use Aramaic as his mother tongue? I know he was well versed in scripture at a young age, according to the New Testament. Has this always been in Hebrew? Did the Jews who followed his example manage to rid their scriptures of any of the errors, additions, corruptions and over-burdensome interpretations which Yeshuah (puh) was critical of? Did they truly get back to the spirit of the religion or 'din' of Moses (puh) (or Musa in Arabic)? Was Yeshuah regarded as the Messiah (Meshiah) by his followers? What does this term mean? Did they believe in his virgin birth and bodily transcension back to God, before death? Was he regarded as the Prophet like Moses or not?

Thank you for the kind words. If I may be allowed some immodesty in order to give a straightforward and informative answer, my The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•ti•tᵊyâhꞋu (NHM) is, to my knowledge, the only work that has compiled the words of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa from all of the earliest extant documents up through the 4^th century C.E.; and follows the Hebrew tradition beyond that up through the ËvꞋën Bo•khanꞋ. I know of nothing even remotely similar – and I've looked.

The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ have demonstrated the polar opposite natures between RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the Christian Jesus syncretized into Hellenism by "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate, which you'll find in NQ and our Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ (distance learning course). (NHM, by the way, is part of our Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ.) It's essential, therefore, not to confuse these two polar and arch-antithetical opposites.

We're also troubled by the origin of the English term god, which derives from the name of the ancient Hellenist Zeus. Thus, we use י‑‑ה ("the Name"), Ël•oh•imꞋ and I often use the Creator, the Almighty or the Singularity.

Both the Muslim practice of praying in Arabic regardless of one's conversational language and the Catholic practice of praying in Latin regardless of one's conversational language derive from the Judaic paradigm, corroborated in DSS (the Dead Sea Scrolls) of praying in Hebrew regardless of one's conversational language. RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's conversational language in the Gâ•lilꞋ (Galilee) was Aramaic. But his religious language, like that of all other religious Jews (which excluded Hellenists, who were dependent upon Greek), was Hebrew.

We'll have a little difficulty with terminology but hopefully we can get over that hurdle. The name "New Testament," first of all, begs the question. Begging this question is logically unacceptable. It was never a "New Testament" and I reject the name. Moreover, Ta•na"khꞋ explicitly prohibits any supersessory book – "New Testament," Quran or any other (Dᵊvâr•imꞋ 13.1-6).

I use Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) because it's a well recognized abbreviation and, to me, it stands for "Null Testament." Despite manifesting many underlying Judaic concepts, and even some highly corrupted Hebrew-isms, Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) was originally written in Greek; possibly including a few contributions, early on, by Hellenists (Jews) but, in the main, by "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate and subsequent gentile Hellenist Romans after 135 C.E. In either case, the Greek text derived from their conversations with Hellenists.

Eusebius noted that the original followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa (the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ) rejected the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), relying solely on the Jewish Ta•na"khꞋ as Scripture and solely on NHM for the authentic words and teachings of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa.

RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa criticized sanctimony and estrangement from Tor•âhꞋ and Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ among Hellenist Jews. He didn't criticize Tor•âhꞋ or Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ (Pᵊrush•iꞋ / Pharisee Oral Law) per se. That's a misconception. I'm just as critical of the sanctimony and estrangement from Tor•âhꞋ and Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ I see in many Jews today as RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa was in his day. Also like in RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa's day, other Jews and rabbis are equally as disgusted as I am with the sanctimony and estrangement from Tor•âhꞋ and Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ in many Jews today. RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa wasn't alone in his condemnation of sanctimony and estrangement from Tor•âhꞋ and Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ . He was, however, the scapegoat.

I can only give my opinion concerning whether RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ restored the pristine and authentic Oral Law (Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ) faithful to Har Sin•aiꞋ; and my opinion is that they did so more than anyone else from that time to today.

The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ did, and do, regard RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa as the Mâ•shiꞋakh, the "anointed." The implications of the term are extensive and complex and require an in-depth study of Ta•na"khꞋ advanced well beyond our basic Kha•vᵊr•utꞋâ (Distance Learning course).

The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ didn't, and don't, believe in the Hellenist Christian doctrines of god mating with a mortal virgin to produce a man-god or bodily transcension back to the Creator. Nor was he regarded a Tor•âhꞋ-giver like Mosh•ëhꞋ, though he was regarded as a greater Nâ•viꞋ than Mosh•ëhꞋ. The term nâ•viꞋ, however, has led to great misconceptions. Originally, nâ•viꞋ meant "forthteller," one who "told forth" (i.e., instructed in) Tor•âhꞋ, not "foreteller," a connotation that was added later. In the original sense of this Hebrew term, both Mosh•ëhꞋ and RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa were nᵊviy•imꞋ (plural), but only Mosh•ëhꞋ was a giver of Tor•âhꞋ.

Hope this answers your questions without being offensive. Sometimes it's difficult to be straightforward without being offensive. I'd never make it as a diplomat. I'm a logician. Straightforward education is a higher priority to me than the fuzzy, often ambiguous and confusing, world of diplomacy.

Thanks for your inquiry. May י‑‑ה, indeed, grant us all the understanding to grasp His pristine Truth and the courage and determination to implement it in practice.

It will be a few days before I can get to posting this in our 'Arab & Islam' blog. I'm in the midst of a computer technical upgrade to the site and a couple of other projects that have me under a lot of paperwork. I notice you forwarded it as an eZine article and I do want to post it as soon as I can get to it.

Postscript 2005.03.02 — Since the authentic Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ were displaced in 135 C.E., the last recognizable remnants annihilated in 333 C.E. and Islam wasn't conceived until three centuries later, the only record of 'Isa' in Islam relates exclusively to the Christian Jesus of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate then known, NOT to the authentic RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, whom the Hellenist Romans had expunged from all then-known records centuries earlier.

© 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Google+ registered author & publisher