Is it possible to live a totally sinless life? What’s the difference between OT law and Muslim honor killings? Should we give our business to a store that refuses to remove indecent magazines from the checkout counters?
Watch what Wild Bill for America has to say about abortion with this video.
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: God has called us to holiness. God has broken the power of sin over our lives so that we can live as new creations in Jesus. We are still in these bodies, still in this world, and our mind needs to be renewed, but let us demonstrate, explore, and find out what God can do with our life.
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Love overcomes hatred. Goodness overcomes evil. Light overcomes darkness. Life overcomes death. We in Jesus are overcomers!
A Queer Thing Happened to America by Dr. Brown: A Queer Thing Happened to America chronicles the amazing transformation of America over the last forty years, literally, from Stonewall Inn to the White House, and addresses the question head-on: Is there really a gay agenda, or is it a fiction of the religious right? Written in a lively and compelling style, but backed with massive research and extensive interaction with the GLBT community, this forthright and yet compassionate book looks at the extraordinary impact gay activism has had on American society.
Foundations of Prayer [mp3 CD]
Foundations of Intercession [mp3 CD]
Pedophilia is condemned in the new testament…
1 Co 7:36 But if any man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter, IF SHE BE PAST THE FLOWER OF HER AGE, and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry.
Plants “bear fruit”; every “fruit” was a “flower”, first; and plants do not “flower” until they reach a certain stage of maturity: I think what this is saying (as discreetly as I can say it) is,
“Before a human marries their daughter off, the daughter must have reached the stage at which she is ‘flowering’, whereby she might be capable of ‘bearing fruit'”.
Shalom Dr Michael Brown,
I saw these quotes, do you know them. Are they credible; blessings to you:
Fourth Century Church Father, Epiphanius; Panarion 29.
“We shall now especially consider heretics who call themselves Nazarenes (Netzarim); they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way the Old Testament of the Jews; for they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings… so that they are approved of by the Jews, from whom the Nazarenes do not differ in anything, and they profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and to the customs of the Rabbis, except they believe in [Messiah]… They preach that there is but one G-d, and his son. But they are very learned in the Hebrew language; for they, like the Jews, read the whole Law, then the Prophets…They differ from the Jews because they believe in Messiah, and from the Christians in that they are to this day bound to the Jewish rites, such as circumcision, the Sabbath, and other ceremonies.”
“Let those who are not yet acquainted with them, please note how perverse their belief and doctrine are. First, they teach that we should obey the Law of Moses according to the letter – the Sabbath, and circumcision, and the legal precepts still being in force. Furthermore, to increase their error, they condemn and reject all the Church Fathers, and the whole Roman Church.”
Gregorius, of Bergamo, about A,.D. 1250, against the Pasaginians (Netzarim):
“There still remains the sect of the Pasagini (Netzari). They teach Christ to be the first and pure creature; that the Old Testament festivals are to be observed– circumcision, distinction of foods, and in nearly all other matters, save the sacrifices, the Old Testament is to be observed as literally as the New– circumcision is to be kept according to the letter. They say that no good person before the advent of Christ descended into the lower regions; and that there is no one in the lower regions and in paradise until now, nor will there be until sentence has been rendered on the day of Judgement.”
There’s a lot of debate about the accuracy of these descriptions, simply because most of those writing are relying on second-hand reports (or worse), and there was also some level of misunderstanding among the Church leaders about some of the Jewish groups. That being said, the best analysis (Ray Pritz and others; I have a book that lists every relevant quote as well, by Klijn and Rejnick) is that the Nazarenes were true followers of Yeshua who continued to live as Jews (but not as rabbinic Jews) whereas the Ebionites and Cerinithians and other groups were heretical in terms of their beliefs but also living as Jews.
Of course, the modern day Netzarim movement is a real mixture and, as far as I can tell, on a very dangerous, unbiblical path.
Correct me if I am wrong:
Some modern Bible translations began using ‘Nazirite’ insyead of KJV ‘Nazarite’ because of this ‘Nazarene’ controversy.
But ‘Nazi-Rite’ describes the current fascist-communist charges of the extreme left and right wings of our political system, even if Church leaders refuse to talk about it. I watched the documentary on Jack Abramoff the other night on cable television; what started as idealism turned into corruption. If we were transparent about our own sin before the world exposed it, we would be much closer to true repentance that could go beyond the prayer closet to genuine corporate renewal.
The humble don’t usually become leaders because “the violent take the kingdom by force”, and this thrust toward money, beauty, and fame most often wins over (e.g.) taking Oswald Chmabers seriously, in the short run. The world knows what it is doing; often we just pretend.
Whitney Houston reminded me of Elvis Presley in this respect; this becomes our best witness because we continue to sweep so much under the rug. What about Zachary Tims? Most say “Who?” and I say “exactly”. I hear what Jabez and others are saying; but until we begin discussing the reality of Church leadership, of the agony of taking up our cross daily, and the many escapes mortals use to escape the pain, we can’t begin to truly share the good news gospel of Love, Joy, and Peace.
In Jesus’ love and name, Ron David Metcalf
Certainly not. It’s just a matter of different spelling conventions between different versions, not a controversy about “Nazarenes,” which is utterly inconsequential to 99% of all Bible translators.
As for Nazi-Rite, you’re kidding, right?
Dear Dr. Brown,
I was discussing the word “Nazarene” with a friend, earlier today. It’s interesting you are talking about it now. I am currently studying Arabic and Hebrew and since this is right in your field, could you give me the proper etymology of the word?
In the Qur’an when Muhammad refereed to Christians he called them “Nasara” (نصارى) which looks like it shares a root with Notzrim (נצרים). Were these Nazarenes all over the Middle East? I mean it looks like they existed in Arabia during the time of Muhammad. I’d be really curious to know the origin of the word and if it sort of took on a colloquial meaning and lost it’s origins as time went on. I’m curious to see what you have to say.
God bless you!
Just to clarify what I meant by “lost it’s origins as time went on.” perhaps I worded badly. I meant to say “if it lost it’s original meaning over time”.
No, this is presumably from the Hebrew notzrim, which is the way Christians in general became known, as you understand. The word is still used in modern Hebrew today (notzrim) for “Christians,” and many Jewish believers don’t use it because it connotes a non-Jew in the ears of most Israelis. Those who claim to be modern day Nazarenes — but really are not — call themselves netzarim. I will, however, check my Arabic lexicons when I’m back home to see if I can find out more about the origins of the term for sure, since I do not remember studying it in the past.
Yes, thanks for clearing that up. Thank you very much Dr. Brown, I appreciate your comments and I’m looking forward to finding out what your lexicons say about this term.
One more thing. The long a (with aliph) in the Arabic word does not point to notzrim but rather to a form related to netzarim, although there too the correspondence is not direct. So, I’m more than curious, and again, I’m sure the answer is quite obvious but I’ve never looked at it as far as I can recall.
Am I kidding about ‘Queen Esther’ and the ‘manifest sons of destiny’ joining with the New Moral Majority and Catholicism to fulfill post- or anamillennium theology by ruling the earth? No. The term was just a red flag as to what is going on.
I ‘saw’ Istanbul as the meeting place between Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Islam a few years ago, but was puzzled as to how they possibly could merge.
A few months ago, I learned about the Chicago-based CFR, and began connecting a few dots:
‘cross-town rivals’ hate each other viciously, but are usually the most like each other (as sibling rivalry). This picture explains how the extremes are more alike than the middle (two wings attached to the breast) and how the unholy marriage of Ahab and Jezebel can operate freely within the Church; and also why the electorate is so cynical about how any change whatsoever will occur because of their vote. While Arabs are dying for the right to vote, we are losing our rights through any real choice: the rich and powerful have much more in common than us ‘99%’. This is not a revised manifesto, but an appeal to the Church to shed BOTH the fascist and socialist model for Biblical principles, which inevitably must become closer to Jewish law than Gentile lawlessness BECAUSE the Law is written on our heart. Yhe infernal model, by contrast, is to bow to (some type of) the Pope for favor and privilege, or else be subject to sharia law. See how there is little talk of expanding our Constitution to the nations these days: it is either cower in isolation, or join with the European and Far Eastern models: that is the choice the media is presenting. We have a very small window of opportunity to present the Scriptural view that truly is the Voice of Revolution in these last days. I suggest this is much more important for this hour than repeating what 4th century Catholics said (though this tree of knowledge profession always appears impressive).
In Him, Ron M.
Yes, that’s a good point. I’m excited to see what the lexicons say! 🙂
A while ago I had a discussion with an Israeli who is not a believer but we were discussing the New Testament together, we started to discuss what Matthew may have meant by “Nazarene” in Mat. 2:23. He was thinking because it mentions how Matthew said it was spoken by the prophets it may be “netser david” because the prophets ultimately pointed to the descendant of David as Messiah. I’m not sure if this is a popular existing interpretation, but I’ve never heard it prior to that discussion I referenced. But, what do you think of that interpretation? Is it plausible?
Isa 11:1 is the most likely reference.
I agree. I thought that was a neat interpretation though.
Does anyone know the way the modern “notzree” or “netzree”(I’m not sure that’s the spelling but something like that) came to be used for Christians? We are still called after the Nazarene?
I was made aware of that term by a friend of mine and I feel certain that it wasn’t used in a derogatory way. If it is from that etymology it’s interesting that it stuck for 2000 years.
Although I don’t see why Christians would have been called by the ancient term for “branch.”
Nazarene/Nazareth/Nazarite all have similar hebrew roots; so the etymology must be seen over the centuries as somehow being related. Perhaps the recent ‘Essene’ controversy (was Jesus part of a rabbinical offshoot, etc.) contributed to some modifications in 20th century translations.
Words de-scribe more than surface glimpses (“treasures old and new” as Jesus said). Messianic Jews tend toward ‘Joshua’; Arab Christians toward ‘Esau’ as the proper name of Yeshua Messiah. So what seems minor may actually become a key of understanding how to unite believers in Israel, that has been discarded because of fighting over the last dozen years. Meanwhile, because of replacement theology, I think the majority of the U.S. Church still isn’t convinced that what happens in Israel has anything whatsoever to do with America. Many clergy still don’t want any authority on earth higher than their own position. This is the old wineskin.
In Him, Ron M.
Dear ron david metcalf,
With all due respect I must correct some things that you said. Arab Christians absolutely do not refer to Jesus as “Esau”. You are confusing the Qur’anic corruption of the name of Jesus which most likely comes from Esau. Muslims refer to Jesus as “Isa” (عيسى). As Dr. Michael Brown notes: “First, in the Koran, Yeshua is incorrectly referred to as ‘isa, which should most probably be traced to the Hebrew name Esau, rather than the expected name yesu’. This is apparently due to the fact that when Mohammed heard the Gospel story from Arabic-speaking Jews, he did not realize that they disparagingly referred to Yeshua as Esau, thinking instead that was His real name.” (‘What Do Jewish People Think about Jesus?’, P. 165)
Arab Christians refer to Jesus as “Yasua” (يسوع) which is exactly what we would expect, as Jesus’ original Hebrew/Aramaic name is “Yeshua” (ישוע). Normally the “sh” in Hebrew turns into “s” in Arabic, Salam – Shalom, For example.
Another thing, I am not sure if you are talking about Messianic Jews referring to Jesus as Yeshua or if you’re saying that you actually hear people calling him “Joshua”?
Clerical exactness is important; but also the perception this implies to the masses (this controversy has been cited at every translation step as to why only the ‘clergy’ should be able to understand the Bible or Koran,or the opposing view; and the authority this conveys).
Jesus also became embroiled in this debate: why should His and His cousin John’s prophetic voice be better than the High Priesthood Jewish elders? In this respect, the court was correct in testing Him to the limit for declaring Himself GOD; but they condemned themselves in refusing to examine the evidence of Yeshua’s resurrection in the face of many witnesses (some did convert, of course).
So the ‘common’ Arab perception of Jesus as ‘Esau’ is indeed important; but also the similarities of Yeshua and Joshua (very slight Hebrew differences) are important as to whether Jesus should be viewed as a Jewish conqueror (of a Spiritual Promised Land) or the Gentile Savior usurping the established Law position; or both (the avenue of reconciliation).
In Him, Ron M.
ron david metcalf,
I do not understand a lot of what you said, but just to reiterate what I said earlier: Arab Christians do not refer to Jesus as Esau. The name ‘Isa is a corrupted form of the name Yeshua/Yasoua which most likely comes from Esau.
Messianic Jews (which I cannot speak for all) may or may not refer to Jesus as Yeshua. It has nothing to do with Jesus being a Gentile Savior or not, it has to do with, in most cases just maintaining/restoring the Jewish roots of our faith and the fact our Messiah is Jewish and His name is Yeshua.
Jeepers, I see I got myself mixed up in post #16. I asked, “Does anyone know the way the modern “notzree” or “netzree”…came to be used for Christians?”
I meant to ask how the modern name for Christian, notzree, came to mean “watchman”?
When I googled it that was the answer I got and I couldn’t find where that could have come from in my Hebrew lexicon. This is what the lexicon has:
Lexicon Results for “watchman” – Strong’s H6822 –
Tsaphah does look or sound like it could be related at all.
It’s not really important, it’s just that my new friend and neighbor used it and when google brought back watchman I thought it was neat if it really did mean that–as in watchman on the wall, but I can’t find it in the lexicons as even remotely related to watchman.
BTW, Dr. Brown,
You’ll have a new live listener tomorrow for Jewish Thursday, so make it a really good show! I hope she can be here for both shows, I’m not sure yet!
A piece of mail delivered to the wrong mailbox–coincidence? I DON’T THINK SO!! 🙂
“Tsaphah does [not] look or sound like it could be related at all.”
multitudes, multitudes, in the Valley of Decision…
set believers apart- what about the world?
Will JOSHUA (bear with me, ‘see’ it, get past the ‘precept’, catch the vision) return shortly to judge and rule the earth? How many have heard the sound? But we also want a Brother (Esau)- not to squabble over ancient inheritances, or declare himself superior- but someone most-like-ourselves: willing to help, willing to covenant to-the-death, like David and Jonathan. Yeshua Messiah is both, and much more. So why do we angrily stake our position around the empty tomb in Old Jerusalem? How has satan managed to keep us so divided? Either the Jewish nation will weep for their Firstborn, or GOD is a liar. Waiting is the hardest part; faith sometimes gets down to that last little seed. This is Abraham, this is Job, as good as dead; & you know, sometimes I hurt so bad I don’t even want to confess it.
In Him, Ron M.
The Hebrew Lexion states:צפה tsâphâh
A primitive root; properly to lean forward, that is, to peer into the distance; by implication to observe, await
KJV Usage: behold, espy, look up (well), wait for, (keep the) watch (-man). It means watchman.
Comments are closed.