Remember Shabbat - to Keep It Holy
Some Remarks:
The following study should not be used as a weapon to attack people of other faiths; that is not our calling.
Indeed, in all of our dealings with others we should allow our speech and attitude to be seasoned with grace.
A difference should always be made between those who genuinely love G-d, even if they do not agree with our theology, and the system with which we are in disagreement. People are not systems.
The purpose of the study is to equip us to answer from the Scriptures, both the attacks of others and also the genuine inquiries which some may make concerning our faith as Jews who believe that Yeshua from Nazareth
is the promised Mashiach. May it be received in this manner both by our listeners and those who will listen to them. But, after all is said and done, if it is not, then let us go on with G-d and have love in our hearts towards those who cannot see what we can.
SHABBAT
Given the first place by HaShem, the Master of the Universe, among the festivals of G-d recorded for us in Vayikra (Leviticus) 23; Shabbat has become the subject of intense debate and attack.
Primarily the argument against Shabbat and indeed against all of the feasts of G-d comes from those in the Chri.stian world who most vehemently declare themselves to be Bible believers. By way of contrast, the Roman Catholic Church does not seek to hide the unscriptural nature of Sunday worship, nor how it came about.
According to Rome’s dogma, she has the right to interpret Scripture in accordance with the understanding of the fathers of the faith.
Thus, she boldly proclaims in the Convert’s Catechism of 1957 in Question 50:
“Q. Which is the Sabbath day? A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Q51. Why Do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”
If you need further proof, we have numerous authoritative writings from the Leaders of Roman Catholicism:
Cardinal James Gibbons, in his book The Faith of Our Fathers Published by Ayers Publishing, in 1978: says in section 108:
“But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.”
Chancellor Albert Smith for the Cardinal of Baltimore Archdiocese, in a letter dated February 10, 1920, wrote:
“If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the Sabbath day by God is Saturday. In keeping the Sunday, they are following a law of the Catholic Church.”
These are but three examples out of many in which Rome claims the dubious honour of over-ruling G-d. However corrupt and perverse her reasoning maybe Rome, unlike the Protestants, feels no need to attempt to hide or justify her position on Sunday worship by appealing to the Scriptures.
Rome may claim the “honour” of Sunday worship but in fact its institution among Chri.stians was much earlier (no, as we shall clearly show later, it was not the talmidim (students, disciples) of Mashiach Yeshua, who were each born and remained Jews (Chri.stianity did not come into its own as a separate faith until somewhere between 95 and 150 years after Yeshua returned to the Father, so Acts 2 is not about them) as we shall demonstrate from the Scriptures.
The “honour” goes to the father of “Chri.stianity”, the Emperor Constantine, who was a worshipper of the sun god. Constantine created the earliest Sunday law known in Chri.stian history in 321 C.E (Common Era). It says this:
“On the venerable Day of the sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits: because it often happens that another Day is not so suitable for grain sowing or for vine planting: lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost.” Yes 321 C.E, just 4 years before he convened the Nicaean council at which the Trinity became a dogma of the Chri.stian faith!
So, we have Constantine and Roman Catholicism both vying for the “honour” of over-ruling G-d but, to our surprise and sorrow the people of “Sola Scripture” (Scripture Only) agreeing with them! I realise that some of you listening may struggle with what I am about to say, it is not said with any malice or to offend, I believe that the facts of Scripture and of history warrant me saying it: The truth is that the Reformation was only a cosmetic exercise in reforming a Church which had grown out of the paganisation of Biblical truth; it was a Reformation of error, not a Restoration of truth.
Nevertheless, since such teachings are held by people of genuine love for G-d and since we of all peoples, must establish not only our reason for existing, but also that for which we stand, from Scripture, it is my purpose to examine the issue of Shabbat as well as I am able and to demonstrate to all who are seekers after truth that there is but ONE day which HaShem the only true and living G-d has commanded and holds us as Jews to observe even on pain of death, and the day of the Seventh day, Yom Shabbat.
What the Scriptures Command:
We begin with Torah since it is the first written record of the will of HaShem and since there is no place in the Scripture where Torah is abolished or set apart, quite the opposite.
When Mashiach Yeshua prayed in Yochanan 17v17 He is recorded as saying: “Your word is Truth.”
There was no other word of G-d than the Tenach (Torah, Prophets and Writings) when He prayed these words. Interestingly, as we have often noted, the word “truth” is translated into the Greek aorist voice or tense, equivalent to the preterite or past historic tense, in which an action is perfected or completed (Yochanan’s writings were almost certainly written in Hebrew and translated into Greek); the aorist gives the statement in Yochanan 17v17 the quality of absoluteness, (the difference between the perfect tense and the aorist has been likened to that between braking gently in a car or performing an emergency braking, with the aorist being the emergency brake, it is definite and precise) so the verse should read: “Your Word is THE ONLY Truth!”
If the Tenach is the ONLY truth in the lifetime of Mashiach Yeshua, then nothing can make it not the ONLY truth just a few years or many years later! Thus we begin with the first statement of truth and will show that the later writings of Mashiach’s followers (erroneously named the New Testament or New Covenant or even Renewed Covenant, – some of our synagogues prefer K’tevim B’mesichi'im, Messianic Writings, others prefer Torat Mashiach, the Teachings of Mashiach- However, Yirmeyahu –Jeremiah- 31v31-33, gives us G-d’s definition of the New or Renewed Covenant, it is Torah written within us. The writings of Mashiach’s followers are letters and books written about how this is lived out, but the Renewed Covenant is the TORAH written within, not a collection of writings) agree with that Truth.
B’resheit (Genesis) 2v2-3 give us the first mention of Shabbat: “On the seventh day G-d was finished with His work which He had made, so He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. G-d blessed the seventh day and separated it as holy; because on that day G-d rested from all His work which He had created, so that it itself could produce.”
The word Shavat (שבת), translated as “rested” in this verse is not intended to give any sense of G-d being tired or in need of rest, it is simply the word Shabbat which means cease. G-d ceased from all that He has created. The important thing to note is that He sanctified this seventh day; He sanctified it, not Israel, not Judaism, HaShem sanctified it and that He did so before the creation of the Jewish people is significant, because ORIGINALLY this day was sanctified for all humanity.
The creation of a nation in which the righteous in the earth would dwell, the Jewish people, was in order to preserve the commandments of G-d for humanity; that we might lead our fellow human beings to Him. That is the mission of the Jewish nation; for this reason, anyone may attach himself or herself to the Jewish people and join us, but in doing so he or she takes on the responsibility, which is uniquely laid on Israel, that of keeping the commandments. So, although we are specifically required to keep Shabbat, it was and in the Mashiach’s kingdom it shall be, a commandment for all humanity.
The rest of the seventh day was observed by Israel in the wilderness: Sh’mot (Exodus) 16v26-29. However it is the commandment in the Ten Words which is most remembered, Sh’mot 20v8-11; leaves no one in any doubt as to which day of the week HaShem requires worship and why; the SEVENTH day.
However the nature of the Shabbat is further emphasised for us in Sh’mot 31v12-17; there please note: it is a sign between Israel and HaShem THROUGHOUT our generations (while there is a Jew on the earth there will be a seventh day Shabbat). The word for sign is “ot” אות)) meaning signal or agreement or sign. Contained in this word is the idea of covenant. G-d says that by the Shabbat we know HaShem Who sanctifies us. G-D attaches a death penalty to the violation of Shabbat in verses 14-15 and verse 16 says that it is a “perpetual Covenant”, this is crucial because we might ask what part of perpetual is beyond the understanding of the Church?
Chri.stians will gladly proclaim that their salvation is everlasting, but that is exactly what “perpetual” means, it means unending. Now I ask: would those who tell us that Shabbat is ended; that it is no longer the seventh day but the first, be just as joyful about their salvation if it was only as everlasting as they tell us Shabbat is?
So let us be clear, if unending salvation means everlasting, eternal, then unending Shabbat also must mean everlasting, eternal, they cannot have it both ways, either perpetual means perpetual or it does not.
But let us look at some other Scriptures: Work is forbidden on this day on pain of death; Sh’mot 35v2-3; Vayikra (Leviticus) 23v3 names the weekly Shabbat as being the first in the list of the Shabbats (sanctified days of the festivals of HaShem); Shabbat is linked to our deliverance from Egypt in D’varim (Deuteronomy) 5v14-15; the stranger who joins himself to HaShem will be known by his keeping of Shabbat, Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 56v6; and the one who honours Shabbat is honoured by HaShem, Yeshayahu 58v13.
Yeshayahu 66v23 is interesting because there are those who say that the Shabbat was in operation until the Mashiach came but now it has been transferred to Sunday, yet in this place HaShem is speaking of the end of days and he says that from one Shabbat to another ALL flesh shall come to worship before Him. This is the realisation of the mission of Israel when all things are restored as they should have been from the beginning. Indeed Yehezikel (Ezekiel) 46v1-12 speaks of the Shabbat being observed when the Prince, the Mashiach will return to rule the earth!
So these Scriptures establish the day, the reason, the endurance, the penalty, and the meaning of Shabbat and they also establish that although it was originally for all humanity and will be kept by all humanity when the Mashiach is here, it has been entrusted to Israel until that time when all the earth will worship HaShem and as such we are covenanted to keep it forever.
BUT WHAT ABOUT.....?
Let us turn our attention then to some of the arguments against the continuation of Shabbat in this era. In so doing, I want to issue this challenge: If these arguments are valid then G-d is at best confused, or at worst a liar (G-d forbid that either of these be thought to be true). The reason I say this is that it is HE and not man, who says that the seventh day Shabbat is everlasting and covenantal.
I want to deal with the easiest argument to answer first:
Sunday is HaShem’s day (The L-rd’s Day)
This type of statement is usually linked with an appeal to Hitgalut (Revelation) 1v10 “I was in the Spirit on HaShem’s day.” It is claimed that this is a reference to Sunday; that Rabbi Yochanan was worshipping in the Spirit and it was Sunday, HaShem’s day.
The pagan Romans had a day dedicated to the sun, the sun was thought to be embodied in the Emperor, or Caesar;
in fact they had inherited this sun/emperor worship from the Greeks who had it from the Egyptians, who in fact inherited it from Babylon, where Semiramus, the wife of Nimrod, and her son Tammuz (incidentally it is from his name that they got the cross, so beloved of Chri.stians c.f “The Two Babylons“by Rev Alexander Hyslop. Pub. Destiny Publishers) were worshipped
as the Queen of Heaven and the sun god reborn (according to Babylonian records she had her husband Nimrod murdered in the New Year celebrations and then claimed that her son was the sun god reborn, his birthday was on the day which in the Gregorian calendar is December 25th).
1. All the Oriental nations called the sun "lord." The Persians called their god Mithra (the sun), i.e., the lord Mithra. The Syrians called it Adonis, which is from the Hebrew HaShemi, lord. The Hebrews called it Baal (which means lord) and Moloch. Porphyry, in a prayer to the sun, calls him "Dominus Sol." The Romans kept the Pagan name, Dies Dominica (the day of the lord sun), for the first day of the week; but called the others by the names of the moon and planets to which they were dedicated. Thus we have Dies Lunae (day of the moon), Dies Martis (day of Mars), Dies Mercurii (day of Mercury), Dies Jovis (day of Jupiter), Dies Veneris (day of Venus), Dies Saturnii (day of Saturn).
In fact, there is no other mention of the term the “L-rd’s day” as Sunday in the Scriptures. Nor was it mentioned in Chri.stian writings, until about the year 112 C.E about the time when those non-Jewish believers in Mashiach Yeshua wanted to distance themselves from Judaism because of the Fiscus Judaicus (the Jewish Tax imposed on all Jews, until 95 C.E. This applied also to the non-ethnic Jews who believed in Yeshua as Mashiach, in 95 C.E their leaders wrote to the Emperor dissociating themselves Jews). This is in keeping with the historic timeline for the emergence of Chri.stianity as a separate religious faith from Judaism.
So, it is possible that Rabbi Yochanan was referring to the first day of the week, but if so he used a pagan term for it, how strange! He could not possibly have been identifying with the pagan rites of the day, so the possibility exists that he was
saying that on the “lord’s day”, i.e the day of the lord the sun god, when the pagans were worshipping their god, he was
in the Spirit.
Let me explore and suggest a more plausible explanation: The only time that the term “L-rd’s Day” is used in the Torat Mashiach in our ENGLISH language Bibles is in Hitgalut 1v10, but the Hitgalut is written from a Jewish perspective; most scholars are struck by the similarities between the Hitgalut and the prophecy of Yechezikel and they are similar because they deal with the same theme. That theme is the “Day of HaShem.” Given that Rabbi Yochanan was probably writing in Hebrew and certainly the imagery in the Hitgalut is Jewish, we should take note of the fact that the term, “L-rd’s Day” in Hebrew can only be properly expressed as either “HaYom shel HaShem”, or “HaYom HaShem” (the construct of HaYom shel HaShem). Literally, “the day belonging to, or of the HaShem.” It is a term familiar to students of the Prophets and refers to that time when HaShem will reveal His power and authority and both judge the world and set up His kingdom on earth. In other words, HaShem’s Day is the time when He will Rule mankind again.
These are not innovative suggestions, the Scriptures are clear on the matter, consider the following Scriptures: Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 2v12; 13v6 and 9; Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) 46v10; Yehezikel (Ezekiel) 13v5; 30v3; Yoel 1v15; 2v1; 2v11; Amos 5v18;Ovadyah v15; Z’khariyah 14v1. This use of the term “Day of HaShem” continues into the Torat Mashiach: 1Corinthians 5v5- Emeira tou Kuriou; 2 Corinthians 1v14- Tei emeira tou Kuriou; 1Thessalonians 5v2- Emeira Kuriou; 2Kefa (Peter) 3v10- Emeira Kuriou.
All these references use the same Greek words, so in fact, Hitgalut 1v10 is NOT the only place that the Torat Mashiach uses the term, but the translators choose to word it differently from all the other places in which it is used. I wonder why! As we shall see this is not the only place where they have done so.
In fact, The Day of HaShem, or HaShem’s Day is, as we said, a reference to the End of Days, and there is more to this. Recall that there are significant similarities between Yechezikel and Hitgalut. Recall how Rabbi Yochanan describes what happened to him on Patmos? Hitgalut 1v9-10 and 1v11-17. Now consider Yechezikel 1v24-28 and 2v2 and 9 and 3v12-14, the events in Hitgalut are a repetition of Yechezikel, even down to the being in exile.What did Yechezikel see? He saw what Rabbi Yochanan saw, the end of this period of world history and he saw into the world which is to come in the day of HaShem. Both men were there is the Spirit as the many references to the Spirit carrying Yechezikel make clear, he also was in the Spirit in HaShem’s Day.
I suggest that this is the true meaning of the term being used in Hitgalut 1v10, it is consistent with its use both in the Tenach and the Torat Mashiach, Yochanan was in exile on Patmos and the Spirit of G-d brought him into the Day of HaShem.
However, even if one does not accept this explanation, there is NO evidence whatsoever that he was worshipping on the first day of the week, here or anywhere else, not does he claim that the day on which believers in Mashiach Yeshua ought to worship is Sunday, that is an interpolation added by the theologians of Chri.stendom.
So, did not the Talmidim (Disciples) meet on the first day of the week?
The short answer is NO; let me explore this with you. It is one of the issues which most clearly shows that millions of sincere believers in this world have been wilfully lied to and the Word of G-d terrible “mangled”, in the attempt to obliterate the Jewishness of Mashiach, His followers and His faith; indeed I have been appalled by the wickedness which I believe this particular issue exposes in the translators of the English Bible.
I am ignoring for the moment the texts which deal with the resurrection of the Mashiach, but they cover a related objection, and I will shortly come to them.
So, we begin at Acts 20v7 and 1Corinthians 16v2 the Greek is informative in both places; in Acts it reads: “en de tei mia ton sabbaton”; in 1Corinthians it reads: “kata mian sabbaton”; you will notice that both texts read essentially the same, allowing for the rules of Greek grammar, they are identical. Acts 20v7 literally translates as “in the one of the Shabbats” and 1Corinthians 16v2 as “upon one of the Shabbats”; yes, that is correct, the word Sabbaton means Shabbat.
Indeed the translators have seen fit to preserve that translation when it suited their anti-Jewish/anti-Shabbat agenda, for example in Mattityahu 12v1-sabbasi, v2-sabbato, v5-sabbasin, v8-sabbatou, v10-sabbasi, v11-sabbasin, v12-sabbasi; again allowing for the rules of Greek grammar where endings are sometimes different due to the various Greek cases applying to the sentence, the word is the same word as in acts and 1Corinthians!
So why the difference? There is no “day of the week” in the Greek text of either Acts or 1Corinthians, simply the “Shabbat”.
Well, in Mattityahu 12 Yeshua demonstrated that the Son of Man is Master or Lord also of the Shabbat. In Chri.stian theology this lays the foundation for the change of day from seventh to the first day, after all they argue Yeshua had the right to do so! Thus, to preserve the correct translation in Mattityahu suits them fine.
However, Mattityahu 12 is not about the Mashiach’s right to change anything. In the first place not even the Mashiach could change G-d’s Word and in the second place HE DID NOT!
However, let us return to our texts in Acts and 1Corinthians, if it is not “the first day of the week”, then from where do I get the alternative “one of the Shabbats” and to what does it refer? The answer is that the word mia or mian means “one” and as I have shown, Sabbaton means “Shabbats”.
However, in case anyone needs to check please do: the same word is used and translated Shabbat in the following places: Mattityahu 24v20-sabbato; 28v1-sabbaton; Mark 1v21-sabbasin; 2v23-24-sabbasi and sabbasin; v27-28-sabbaton and sabbatou; 3v2 and 4-sabbasi and sabbasin; 6v2-sabbatou; 15v42-parasabbaton (before Shabbat); 16v1-sabbatou; Luke 4v16 and 31; 6v1-2;5-7;9;13v10;14-16;14v1,3,5;23v54,56; Yochanan 5v9-10;16;18;7v22-23;9v14,16,31; Acts 1v12;13v14;27,42,44; 15v21; 16v13; 17v12; 18v4. I have not supplied the word for these last texts, but it is the same word, or a derivative of it, in each.
So many places where the word Shabbat has been preserved, but on those two occasions which touch on the day of worship, the translators have hidden the true translation and inserted another word which is NOT in the text!
Moreover, in a number of the above texts the word Sabbaton appears twice, but it is translated in two very different ways! Take Mattityahu 28v1 as an example, there sabbaton is first translated as Shabbat, but then, in the same verse it is given the translation first day of the week! I have chosen top quote from the King James Bible, but if one compares the NIV, NKJV, ESV, RSB and so on, the same method of translation is used: “In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.”
This brings us to the heart of a powerful argument used against the seventh day Shabbat: Sunday is the day of the resurrection!
This has to be one of the most iniquitous arguments against Shabbat, because it is built on two lies:
- That Mashiach rose from the dead ON the first day of the week
- That the text actually says that.
The claim that the Mashiach rose from the dead on the first day of the week is made on the basis of Mattityahu 28v1 where, as we noted, the same word is translated in two different ways, it reads: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre” (KJV). Some other translations read: “Now after the Sabbath...”
On the week of Pesach (and the execution of Mashiach Yeshua was at Pesach, not the pagan festival of Easter which was added by the Church authorities later – about the 4th century - as a means of diluting the influence of Judaism on their new religion), there are three Shabbats, the first and last days of Pesach and Hag (feast) Matza are Shabbats (Holy days) and there is also the weekly Shabbat. We know that Rebbe Yeshua was buried just before the evening of the first day of Matza, the 15th of the month, Yochanan 19v31. Three days and three nights were required as Mashiach specified in Mattityahu 12v39-40, we divide our 24 hours strictly into night light and day time (our days begin at sundown and continue until next sundown C.f B’resheit 1v5, “the evening and the morning were the first day”). Daylight starts just before the sunrise, when the Morning star appears and night time starts at twilight just before darkness comes, with the evening preceding the daylight hours, so a good Friday does not fit the required time of three nights.
Remember that although Day of Shabbat is actually in the day light, we begin our preparation on the evening before the day light, this is referred to as the lighting up, when we light the candles to sanctify the Shabbat; our 24 hour periods begin with the darkness and end with the arrival of darkness 24 hours later.
The Shabbat of Pesach had passed, but there occur seven weekly Shabbats between Pesach and the feast of Shavuot (this is the importance of the word sabbaton or its various derivatives being plural), Vayikra 23v15-16 instruct us to count seven weeks, 49 days plus one and then keep the feast of weeks or Shavuot (Pentecost). When we read Mattityahu 28v1 it can be read: “opse de sabbaton” “now it is the evening of the Shabbats. At the lighting up into one of the Shabbats...”. It is referring to one of the seven weekly Shabbats between Pesach and Shavuot. It is interesting in this context that both in Acts 20 and in 1Corinthians 16, the passages tell us that Pesach had just passed. Thus, they were referring to these weekly Shabbats between the two festivals too!
Let us examine these verses we ignored before:
Mark 16v2, Luke 24v1, Yochanan 20v1 in each, the Greek translated as “the first day of the week” is: “mia ton sabbaton”.
We will break it down as we did for Acts and 1Corinthians; mia means “one”; ton means “of the” and sabbaton means “Shabbats”, so the literal translation in each of these texts is: “one of the Shabbats”.
Mattityahu 28v1: the Greek is: “eis mian sabbaton”, eis is a preposition meaning “to”, “in”, “at”, “into”, “upon”, or “on”. Mian is a form of mia and means “one” and sabbaton is Shabbats, so it literally says: “on one (of the) Shabbats”.
Mark 16v9: the Greek here is “proti sabbatou”, proti comes from the root word proto meaning first, sabbatou is the singular form of sabbaton and means Shabbat. So, the Greek here is “first Shabbat”.
Ancient Greek had words for first, day, and week, so that it could have rendered first day of the week simply as “proti (h)emera tes ebdomas”, that is “first day of the week”. So, the translation of mia ton sabbaton or any of the other “gospel” references or Acts and Corinthians, as anything but “one or first of the Shabbats” is deliberate.
Let us read these texts in the corrected translation:
Mattityahu 28v1: “Now it was the evening of the Shabbats. At the lighting up into or on one of the Shabbats Miryam of Magdala and the other Miryam went to see the grave.”
Mark16v2: “and on the very morning of one of the Shabbats, just after sunrise, they went to the tomb.”
Mark 16v9: “When Yeshua rose early on the first Shabbat, He appeared first to Miryam of Magdala, from whom he had expelled seven demons.
Luke 24v1:”and on one of the Shabbats, while it was still very early, they took the spices they had prepared, went to the tomb”.
Yochanan 20v1:” Early on one of the Shabbats while it was still dark, Miryam from Magdala went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb.”
It therefore appears that Mashiach Yeshua rose from the dead on the first of the weekly Shabbats between Pesach and Shavuot and NOT on Sunday at all.
Some have suggested that in fact it was erev Shabbat (Friday evening) and the references to morning and it being very early are in fact simply a reference to that period of lighting up into Shabbat, when the candles are lit. I personally doubt that to be so, the bulk of the evidence seems rather to suggest that we are talking very early, just before sun rise on Yom Shabbat itself. How we reconcile that with the women carrying spices is I think very simple; the followers of Yeshua did not always hold with the practice of the P’rushim (Pharisees) and it was they who stipulated what carrying a burden on Shabbat meant in the Oral tradition. However, not all the branches of Judaism in the 1st Century accepted their tradition. The women were about to carry out a mitzvah and what is more the day light hours of Shabbat had not yet begun. Moreover, we know from current custom in Eretz Israel, that the whole Land is to be regarded as our “home”, thus it is not uncommon to see religious Jews, who are Shomer Shabbat, observant of Shabbat, carrying “burdens” that are forbidden in the Galut (Exile).
Even if we were to reverse all of this and say “yes, it was early on Sunday, when it was still dark” When they arrived at the tomb Yeshua was already alive, so a Sunday resurrection is still out of the question!
Finally, what was the practice of Yeshua and His talmidim?
Chri.stians love to think of Mashiach Yeshua and His followers as the first Chri.stians. They were not. Chri.stianity took over 150 years to develop into a separate and distinct religious group set apart from Judaism.
Despite the claim that they were first called “Chri.stians” at Antioch, that certainly is not the case. The word “Chri.stian” was unknown to the Greek language, and the Greek speakers of Antioch would have been unable to call them “Chri.stians” because the word did not exist.
In fact, Chri.stos, from which the word “Chri.st” comes, was a word invented by the translators of the Septuagint version of the Tenach, commonly called the LXX because 70 Jewish scholars were involved in its compilation. Both they and later Jewish writers, such as Rabbi Sha’ul, wrote in what is called Yevanic (Judeo-Greek). When they came to translate the word “Mashiach”, the Anointed One, they met a problem, the Greeks had no concept of such a person. The writers of the LXX were trying to convey Jewish concepts to a non-Jewish and non-Hebraic mindset. They took the Greek verb “to polish” because the Greeks used oil in polishing their weapons, and made it into a verbal noun, “Chri.stos” which literally means “the polished one”.
In Antioch we are speaking about Greek speaking Jews who both knew Hebrew and were familiar with the concept of a Mashiach. The followers of Mashiach there were called “mesichi'im” “Messianics or Messianists”; those who believe that the Mashiach had come and who followed His teachings on the Torah. The same term is used today of those in Lubavitch-Chabad who believe that the Rebbe (Rebbe Schneerson) was the Mashiach. It was not a term of honour but of dishonour, although to suffer because one is a follower of Mashiach is honourable as Rabbi Shimon Kefa pointed out in 1 Kefa 4v16.
What we do know is what the talmidim considered themselves to be: Acts 10v28; 19v34; 21v20,39; 22v3; 23v6;26v5 (note “OUR religion”); Galatians 2v14-15; Philippians 3v5. The talmidim as reflected in the writings of Rabbi Shaul and other places, considered themselves to be Jews, Hebrews, even Pharisees.
They were certainly NOT Chri.stians. Even Chri.stian scholars who speak in terms of Acts 2 as being about the “early church” acknowledge what they call a “transitional period” between Judaism and Chri.stianity as a full-fledged religion, what we disagree on is the length of that period. A study of the history of Chri.stian/Jewish relations confirms that it took at least 100 years (I side with those who on the basis of historical events in Jewish history, such as the Bar Kochva revolt, claim that it was somewhere between 136-150 years) before the “break” took place, by which time all the talmidim who lived and learned in Yeshua’s earthly life-time were dead, so it is disingenuous to refer to them as “Chri.stians”, whatever they were, they were not that.
The Practice of their lives was Jewish:
While they did not exalt the Oral tradition to the same level as Torah, both Mashiach Yeshua and Rabbi Shaul testified that they kept all the traditions.
In Yochanan 7v37-38 Yeshua was present at the last great day of the feast of Sukkot (Yochanan 7v2) at which the libation ceremony took place as set down, not in Torah but by the Oral tradition, c.f Midrash Sukkot 4:9; Yeshua said that this was prophetically about Him.
He was present at Hanukkah in Yochanan 10v22, this is a non-Torah and traditional feast, which Yeshua observed!
In Mattityahu 23v35 Mashiach Yeshua again appeals to the tradition when He speaks of Z’khariyah ben Berekhyah. The first is an Oral Torah tradition concerning the murder of Hevel (Able)that understands the plural word “bloods” crying out from the ground in B’resheet (Genesis) 4v10 to signify that whoever kills one person is guilty of killing everyone; Tractate Sanhedrin 4:5 says: “it says “the bloods of your brother”, it does not say “blood”, but “the bloods of your brother cries”; his blood and the blood of all those who were destined to be born from him. Another matter, the bloods of your brother, for his blood was splattered on trees and stones... whoever destroys a single soul is deemed in Scripture as if he had destroyed the whole world and whoever saves a single soul by Scripture it is as if he had saved the whole world.”
The second Oral tradition concerns Z’khariyah ben Yehoyada in “Divrei Hayamim Bet (2 Chronicles)24v20-21, although Mattityahu 23v35 reads “ben Berekhyah”, it seems likely to be a scribal error, where the son of Yehoyada and the son of Berekhyah who in Z’khariyah 1v1 delivered a similar message to that of ben Yehoyada are confused, because Ben Yehoyada’s killing is recorded and no mention is made of a killing of Ben Z’khariayh.
Mashiach Yeshua employs the oral tradition’s record of the events in His own teaching. Tractate Sanhedrin 96b records: “Nebuzaradan, (the official in the court of Nebuchadnetzer who oversaw the destruction of Yerushalayim in 586 BCE) after he saw the blood of Z’khariyah seething cried out: “What is this?” They answered: “it is the blood of the sacrifices, which has been spilled.” He said: “then bring some (animal blood) and we will compare them.” So, he slaughtered animals and compared them, but they were dissimilar. He threatened: “Disclose (the secret) to me or I will tear your flesh with iron combs.” They replied: “This is (the blood) of a Priest and a prophet who foretold the destruction of Jerusalem to the Israelites and they killed him.” He said: “I will appease him (make amends).” So, he brought the scholars and slew them over him, yet it (the blood) did not cease (to boil). He brought school children and slew them over him, still it did not rest; he brought the young Priests and slew them over him and still it did not rest, until he had slain nearly 94000 and still it did not rest.
Whereupon he approached and cried out: “Z’khariyah, Z’khariayah, I have destroyed the flower of them, do you desire me to massacre them all?” Straightway it rested. Thoughts of repentance came into his mind: if they who killed one person only, have been so (severly punished) what will be my fate? So, he fled, sent his testament to his house and became a convert.”
In the Jerusalem Talmud it specifies that he was killed in the court of the Cohanim which was between the altar and the Temple itself. This information is not given in the Tanakh, but it is in the Oral tradition and Mashiach Yeshua quoted it exactly: ”between the Temple and the altar.” Thus, while Mashiach Yeshua did not regard the Oral tradition as Torah and criticised the P’rushim for doing so concerning ritual washing, in Mark 7 where He makes the point that not to perform N’tilat Yadayim (ritual hand washing) cannot make Kosher food unclean, because it is what comes out from a person that makes him/her unclean (this is a study for another time). He accepted the tradition in its proper place and also lived it!
The same is true of Rabbi Shaul, his writings are showered with references to and quotations from the Oral tradition, so much so that when he appeared before Festus in Acts 25 he says in verse 8 that he had not offended even against the Torah to which the Judeans hold, this is a reference to the Oral tradition since the Judeans already held it to be on a par with Torah.
However, in the context of our study, note what the habit of Mashiach Yeshua was on Shabbat: Luke 4v16 alone will suffice.
Some will say, ”yes, but that was before He died.” Very well what was the habit of His talmidim after He died and rose again?
Acts 13v14; 16v13; 17v2;18v4. It is also true that they continued to go up to the Temple to pray while it stood, Acts 3v1 describes just such an occasion; these were not men rejecting the Torah, they were men who had discovered the Living Torah and thus lived the Torah more fully!
I trust that this study will equip and challenge us to follow the ways of G-d more perfectly by Remembering the day of Shabbat, to Keep it holy. Let the last word be HaShem’s: Vayikra 19v30: “You shall keep My Shabbats and honour My Sanctuary. I am HaShem!"
Print 