Yaua, Our Father, Hallowed Be Thy Name! Glorify Thy Name!

1. Give a critical assessment of the book by Aziz Atiya, “History of Eastern Christianity”.

In giving a critical assessment of this book, I have chosen to base it on some questions I have raised. They will help me, I believe to see clearer what are the weaknesses and strengths of this book, and also to understand its purpose and content better.
1) What is A.S. Atiya’s motivation and purpose for writing this book? Is he biased?
2) What is his focus concerning theme? Does the title correspond to this?
3) How does he read history? How does he divide history?
4) How does he outline the chapters? Are the headings understandable and logical?
5) Is the book readable and interesting?
6) Does he fulfill his purpose with the book?

An attempt to answer:
Atiya tells of his purpose, motivation and agenda in the preface and the epilogue of his book. He starts to say that the book is a fulfillment of a lifelong vow. He criticizes other attempts of describing the history of the Eastern Churches for narrowness and lack of understanding. From the start he limited his thesis to the ancient non-Greek family of churches. He says he has tried to see and judge the ‘bare facts’ of the primitive Christianity of the East. He also views his task as a modest work of scholarship and as an act of faith, and says that his ambition has been to establish a base from which others can take over with some measure of confidence. His Hope is that “ the truth and wisdom of the great fathers of the faith are fully revealed to all congregations throughout the world.”[i] He states that he is a member of the Coptic Church by birth and upbringing, and that this may have given him a deeper feeling for the matter he is writing about. And it probably has, but it may also have made him a bit biased. He uses 132 out of 448 pages on the Copts in a history about Eastern Christianity and seem to justify it with: “The place of the Copts in the general history of Christianity has long been minimized…”[ii] Especially since they according to him had led the way for centuries. Though he has a great emphasis on the Coptic Church, he is not negative or particularly critical to the other churches, and he has an ecumenical attitude. The book is printed in 1968 and he praises the current ecumenical movement, the growth of sympathy and understanding of Eastern Christians. In that connection he calls the council of Chalcedon a ‘disaster’, in the sense that it gave the impulse of the deep split between the Catholic-Orthodox and the ancient Eastern churches.

The title of the book could maybe more suitably have been: “The Eastern Christianity in light of the Coptic Church”, since more than ¼ of the book is about the Coptic Church when he is also treating at least 7 other churches. He also seems to use the historic development of the Coptic Church as a model of understanding the development in the other churches.

Atiya is an historian and tries to separate legendary material from scientific material and he seems to have documentation on what he is claiming, even though he’s bibliography is not referring to what he has necessarily used as background for his studies, but are suggestions to the reader for further studies. The divisions he makes of history can generally be described as being in three parts:
1) Origins and development
a) legend, b) founder, c)growth
2) Trials
a) under Islam, b) under persecution (these sometimes coincide).
3) Modern times
a) rediscovery/coming of the missionaries, b) the evolving relationship with other churches and western influence (only treated in the part on the Coptic Church)
In his reading of history he is very positive towards Islam and seem to overlook the great strain of dhimmitude, a slow and subtle way of persecution and oppression. He claims that Christianity in the East was partly ensured by accepting its Islamic environment. This is not right in the case of the Maronite Church who was strengthened and got its very identity from its resistance. Atiya is also against proselytism in the folds of fellow Christians from the ancient Eastern Churches – instead – he argues – the missionaries should strengthen the already existing churches. Another thing is that he sees a strong, seemingly positive link and continuity between the old Pharaonic Egyptian religion and Coptic Christianity.[iii] This might stem from a Coptic pride, in wishing to separate themselves from the Arab Muslims. He does not treat the earlier religions in Iraq, Syria, and the other countries where Christianity took over. Also his claim that monasticism is a purely Egyptian creation[iv] is questionable. Surely there were monastic attempts in other religions, and impulses in other parts of Christianity.

I already mentioned the great emphasis on the Coptic Church in the outlining. Another thing is the lack of emphasis on the Ethiopian Church. In the outlining he has placed it in the part of the Coptic Church, which I’m sure the Etiopians themselves would question. I am not even sure they would agree about how he depicts the Ethiopian Church as a part of the Coptic missionary enterprise. He is also not consequent and systematic in his outlining of content. Sometimes he starts with ‘introduction’ and then goes on to ‘historical background’ or origins and development, and other times he starts directly with the latter. The maps also lacks information on the time they are depicting and who made them.

Atiya has as I mentioned a positive attitude to the Churches he treats, with a hope to restore them. This makes it at times pleasant and interesting to read, though I sometimes loose the big lines in his description of history, because of many details and facts. But if the purpose was to give a richer knowledge and deeper understanding of the Eastern Christianity, and a basis for further research, I believe he has succeeded.


2. “Describe the historic consciousness and the scientific history of a pre-Chalcedonian Church of your own choice.”

The Ethiopian Church

“Any history of the Abyssinian Church must take into account the background of the political history of Ethiopia”.[v] It is therefore important to have an overview of the political landmarks in the history of the nation of Ethiopia to understand the developments within the Church.

First we will deal with the Church’s historical consciousness, their legends and self-understanding in the light of these: secondly we will treat the scientific history of the Church, the history that can be affirmed through documents, archeology and other evidences, and which is firmly established by scholars. I will concentrate on the origins of Christianity in Ethiopia, because that is where most of the legendary material is from.

Time of legend: Little is known scientifically of this area from ancient times, except from some few details from the Egyptian Queen Hatsheput’s expedition in 1520 B.C. At that time it was called the ‘kingdom of Axum’. The legend tells us about a union between King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba in the 10th century B.C. This gave rise to the succession to the throne of Ethiopia from Solomon, as the ‘Lion of Judah’, or the ‘king of kings’. The Arc of the Covenant was also supposedly brought from Jerusalem to Axum by king Menelik I, son of king Solomon and the Queen. On this background we can understand the Ethiopian claim of being monotheistic even before the entrance of Christianity.

The next legend is connected with the Acts[vi] account where the Apostle Philip meets the Ethiopian eunuch in the service of ‘Condace, Queen of the Ethiopians’, probably confused with the Queen of Nubia. However, historic evidence shows us that Ethiopia remained pagan until the 4th century A.D. The Ethiopians see themselves as directly linked with both Judaism and the first Christian apostles, while scholars claim another, later link, to Syria and Egypt.

The scientific history:
According to Rufinius[vii], a 4th century Byzantine theologian, Ethiopia’s conversion began with two Syrian boys, Frumentius and Aedisius. The king’s men picked them up from a shipwreck on the Red Sea Coast, and he took them in to his service: The king[viii] appointed Aedisius his cupbearer and Frumentius his secretary and tutor to the young crown prince, Aeizanas. Frumentius gave him a Christian education and the crown prince was later to convert to Christianity after becoming a king, and from then on Christianity was declared the official religion of the state. The two men were both released and Aedisius went back to Tyre, while Frumentius went to Alexandria to tell the news to Athanasius, the patriarch at that time, presumably between the years 341 and 346. He begged Athanasius to send a bishop to provide pastoral care for the growing numbers of Christians in and around Axum, the capital. Frumentius was chosen for the task and appointed by Athanasius himself who gave him the name Anba Salama, ‘the father of peace’. He studied 4 years in Egypt: liturgy, theology and the customs of the Alexandrine Church, before he went back to Ethiopia, with presbyters to help the evangelization and establishing of churches.

The kingdom of Aksum officially adopted Christianity in the 4th century. Aksum was the first civilization anywhere to use the cross of Christ on its coins (around 330 A.D.). Aezanas, the king, used the coins as propaganda to spread his religion by replacing the crescent symbols with the cross. . But it wasn't before the 12th century (and up until the 15th) that Christianity spread, along with the Christian state, to the highlands of central Ethiopia. A remarkable collection of rock-hewn churches dates from this era. They were associated with monks, who were considered on a level with saints and whose lives were often recorded in writing. These monuments and manuscripts are still very important today as the living memory of Ethiopia's Christians.

Aziz S. Atiya describes the winning of Ethiopia for the Gospel ‘a crowning of the labours of the Copts in Africa’. He has also chosen to put Ethiopia under the Coptic Church in the outlining. The Ethiopian Church however, calls itself the ‘Ethiopian Orthodox Tawahedo Church’ on one of their Internet pages.[ix] They tell us that they are often called Coptic from the fact that until the time of Haile Sellaissie in the early fifties, the head of the Church was selected in Alexandria, and it was always an Egyptian. It also says that because of its Orthodox attitude, Ethiopian Christianity never experienced full scale holy wars and coexisted with different rulers and regimes.

Prior to the coming of Islam, Ethiopia experience expansion beyond the Red Sea into Yemen. With Islam, however, the rest of the world knew about Ethiopia only through literary tales. The line of kingship from Solomon was lost, and wasn’t restored again before the end of the 13th century. The Church in Ethiopia was isolated for a very long time, but is now slowly coming out of its isolation, according to Atiya,[x] as it has finally enrolled in the universal family of the World Council of Churches.








3. “Discuss briefly the notions of “heresy” and “orthodoxy in the Early Church on the basis of the article by Rowan Williams, “Does it Make Sense to speak of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy?””

The book Rowan William has placed his article in is called “The Making of Orthodoxy” a title which is “meant to avoid the bland assumption that what we know as orthodox Christianity simply evolves in an uninterrupted movement of inner logic”.[xi] In his preface he goes on to say that orthodoxy is constructed in the process of both theological and political conflict. All of the contributors of the book he has edited, agrees that ‘orthodoxy’ is a problematic concept.

Rowan William asks if it makes sense to speak of a pre-Nicene orthodoxy, and he answers the question through mainly two scholars, Walter Bauer and Henry Chadwick, with different perspective on the subject.

In the article the acknowledged scholar Walter Bauer talks about ‘orthodoxy’ in Christianity as a ‘late growth’[xii], even though there was early a solid majority opposed to Marcionism and other deviations of what was later to be called heresies. The united ‘orthodox’ body was according to him defined by Rome. In Henry Chadwick’s opinion it was Jerusalem that earlier worked towards a unified, if not uniform orthodoxy; and he also asserts a steady movement towards the dogmatic syntheses of the 4th and 5th century.

Bauer is over all hostile to the idea of doctrinal norms, even though he believes that there was something essential about the Christian faith that unified the believers. According to Schneemelcher’s interpretation of him, this ‘something’ is the relationship with the one Lord, Jesus Christ. The institution, doctrine and the cultus are not essentials, but products of a historical process. Bauer claims that because Paul is subtle and balanced in his writings, he gives many seeds of wildly divergent theologies. In Bauer’s view, Paul identifies orthodoxy by what it is not.

Williams says that Henry Chadwick sketched out how to discern and define the self-perception of the first Christian communities. He describes it as a tension between the two models of self-understanding: ‘the circle’ and the ‘ellipse’. The first one being the unified institution with a definable center providing a norm or touchstone for right belief; and the other being the network of communities linked by their common origins in Jerusalem and the events transacted there at the ‘navel of the earth’.[xiii]

Williams attempts to see whether Bauer’s explicit or Chadwick’s implicit scheme better fits the facts, or if new questions need to be asked. The question is if orthodoxy comes as a result of a steady, single and continuous movement, or if it is a result of an historical accident..

Schneemelcher emphasizes the difference between Bauer and Harnack. Harnack’s degeneration theory says that heresies are degenerations of an already existing orthodoxy. Bauer on the other hand sees heresy as a necessary precondition for orthodoxy. In some sense he sees both heresy and orthodoxy as ‘degenerations’, more radically than Harnack, from the essential faith.[xiv]

The anthropologist Jonathan Z. Smith denies all together such essentialism in understanding religion. Like most anthropologists Smith regard religion as structure and form, rather than content and meaning. He believes that religion is defined by different systems and that the context is the source of meaning. Religion is in his vocabulary ‘locative’, linked with a hierarchy that guards the ‘loci’ of holiness and determines access to them. It can also be founded in common experience, as it is clearly expressed in the Gnostic tradition, but for survival reasons the adherents of the faith will pursue the elements that have staying power, such as institutional, narrative and behavioral elements and norms. It is a crisis in this ‘locative’ religion that leads to a radical separation between social and religious meaning, expressed in a ‘utopian’ or ‘diasporic’ religious speech and practice.

Smith asserts that the unity of Christianity is defined negatively by its complex and ambivalent relationship to Judaism, and positively focused in the words, acts and fate of Jesus. Jesus becomes a forerunner of and martyr for a renewed Israel, and the image of the Jewish diaspora was deployed as a model for the self-understanding of Christian communities, constituted by a common baptism. [xv]

Williams writes that the canonical narrative tradition suggest a mode of preaching where the priority is less the communication of principles than the bringing of the hearer into ‘dramatic’ relation with the subject of the story. This demands a canonization of the story, so that the story will not loose its difference or distance, and thereby it’s converting power.[xvi]

I will end this discussion about the different positions on orthodoxy and heresy, with Williams’ assessment on Bauer and Chadwick. Williams agrees with Bauer that there is a problem in supposing that there have been a single, clearly identifiable ‘mainstream’ from the beginning of Christianity, even though some of the raw material for the ‘imperial’ orthodoxy is already there before 300 A.D. He also agrees with Chadwick that there are “features within the most basic activity of communicating about Jesus that make for the precarious evolution of a ‘normative’ Christianity”.[xvii]








4) “Characterize the autocephalous Churches which exist today.”

The autocephalous churches are one of the three categories comprised in the ‘Orthodox Church’[xviii]. The other two are 1) the autonomous churches, having internal autonomy but remaining dependent on an autocephalous church; and 2) the dependent churches.

‘Autocephalaus’ comes from Greek: ‘auto’ means self, and ‘cephalaus’ means ‘head’ or ‘headed’.[xix] It refers to these churches self-governing status, and it means in practical terms that they have the power to appoint their own patriarchs, catholicos, metropolitans and bishops, and the right to resolve their own internal problems. Still they are in communion with the other Orthodox Churches and with the Ecumenical Patriarch[xx] of Constantinople. They all accepted and have maintained the teachings of the Council of Chalcedon and the six other Ecumenical Councils[xxi], and they all hold on to the historic ecclesial and liturgical traditions of Byzantium. The Orthodox Church is thus a family of self-governing Churches. It is held together, not by a centralized organization or by a single prelate wielding absolute power over the whole body, but by the double bond of unity in the faith and communion in the sacraments. This system has been compared with heads gathering around a table, with the Ecumenical Patriarch at the head of the table, while the Catholic system is more like a hierarchical pyramid. This decentralized system is very flexible and adaptable. Local Churches can be created, suppressed and then restored again easily.

There are today 15 autocephalous churches, but the American one is still not recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The Russian Orthodox Church has recognized it, but the Ecumenical Patriarchate insists that the Moscow Patriarchate has no right to grant autocephaly without its agreement. Some of these Churches existed entirely within the boundaries of the state, others within a political structure comprising different nationalities. Their rank was determined by a kind of hierarchy of honor, with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople on the top. The order of the ancient patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem was determined at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. The Patriarchate of Moscow was established on fifth place in 1589. The heads of these Churches are called Patriarchs.
Here are the 15 autocephalous Churches in the order of historic importance:

1) Patriarchate of Constantinople, also called ‘the second Rome’. In 1454 the Turks invaded the city and made it part of the Ottoman Empire. From then on the city was called Istanbul. Exchange and escape of Christians from the 1st World War, resulted in a radical decrease of Christians in the city.
2) Patriarchate of Alexandria. In 451 the Coptic and the Orthodox Church split because of the Council of Chalcedon. The Greek Orthodox minority later changed the old Alexandrine liturgy with the Byzantine. The Ottomans took over in 1517 and they had to go into exile to Constantinople but in 1846 they could move back to Alexandria.
3) Patriarchate of Antioch. They experienced several divisions through Church councils, in 431 with the Nestorians and in 451 the Jacobites, among others. In 1085 the Turks conquered Antioch. Syriac liturgy was then replaced with Byzantine liturgy. In 1268 the Mamluks took over and the Patriarchate was transferred to Damascus where it has resided until today. Since 1898 the Patriarchate has been fully Arabic.
4) Patriarchate of Jerusalem. In 451 it was raised to an independent Patriarchate. From the 7th century Christians experienced great persecution, and for a time the Patriarch was exiled to Constantinople. They were never large in number, but occupied a special position in the Church as guardians of the Holy Places.
5) Patriarchate of Moscow. Also called the ‘third Rome”. When then the Byzantine power faded, the new Churches in the North increased in importance. When Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453, Moscow took over as a protector of the Orthodox world. Under communism part of the Church went into exile: the “white Russian Church”, while the other part: the “Red Russian Church” supported the government.
The Church of Serbia; 7) Romania; 8) Bulgaria; 9) Georgia; 10) Cyprus; 11) Greece; 12) Poland; 13) Albania; 14) Czech Republic and Slovakia[xxii]; 15) America[xxiii].

New Catholic Encyclopedia adds the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church to the list.[xxiv] Among these Churches there is an enormous variation in size and age. Still, most of these Churches have in common that they have spent considerable time under non-Christian rule, as under Islam and Communism. They all had different strategies on how to deal with this suppression and survive with their faith intact. The Turkish occupation had for instance two opposite effects upon the intellectual life of the Church: on one hand an immense conservatism; on the other, a certain westernization.[xxv] Geographically the Orthodox world is now in Eastern Europe, in Russia and along the coasts of the Mediterranean. The primary cultural influence has been that of Greek, though also Syriac and Latin Fathers are placed in the tradition.

The Orthodox Church regard Catholicism and Protestantism as to sides of the same coin, since they so much have reacted to each other, and have been influenced more or less by the same historic events. The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Western Churches are these days being brought closer together, partly through Greeks and Slavs who are driven westward by economical reasons or because of persecution. They are bringing their Church with them and have established a network of dioceses, theological colleges and monasteries.

The claim of the Orthodox Church is that of universality. To themselves their Church is much more than a group of local bodies. They regard their Church as teaching and guarding the true faith and giving worship in the right way, as the Church of Christ on earth.[xxvi]



NOTES
[i] Aziz Atiya, A History of Eastern Christianity, Preface, p. xiv
[ii] Ibid., p. 13
[iii] See ibid., p. 52
[iv] See ibid., p. 58
[v] Ibid., p. 147
[vi] See Acts 8:26-40
[vii] Mentioned in A History of Eastern Christianity, Atiya, p. 152
[viii] Probably Ella Amida, according to Atiya, A History of Eastern Christianity, p. 51
[ix] See http://sellassie.ourfamily.com/culture/church.html
[x] See A History of Eastern Christianity, p. 166
[xi] Rowan Williams in the preface of The Making of Orthodoxy, p. viii
[xii] See R. Williams, The Making of Orthodoxy, p. 2
[xiii] See ibid., p. 1
[xiv] See ibid., p 4
[xv] See ibid., p 5-8
[xvi] See ibid., p. 15-16
[xvii] Ibid., p. 18
[xviii] Timothy Ware discussed other titles of the Church in his book The Orthodox Church, p.16
[xix] Blockwell Dictionary of Eastern Christianity, p. 924
[xx] The word ‘Ecumenical’ seems originally to have emerged as a title of honor. Became eventually a formal title, reflecting the status as bishop of the imperial capital, and the seniority among the eastern patriarchs. See Blockwell Dictionary of Eastern Christianity, p. 172
[xxi] Only seven councils have received the universal approval of the entire Orthodox and the Catholic Church. There are other local Church councils that also have received approval of all Orthodox Churches, but these are mostly of a moral or structural character.
[xxii] Was declared autocephalous by Moscow in 1951, but was not recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate before 1998.
[xxiii] Was declared autocephalous by Moscow in 1970, but is still not recognized by Constantinople as far as I know.
[xxiv] See New Catholic Encyclopedia, I got the other information about the different Churches from a lecture with Dr. Petra Heldt.
[xxv] See Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 100
[xxvi] See Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church, p. 16


Bibliography

The Making of Orthodoxy, ed. by Rowan Williams, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989

Atiya, A.S., A History of Eastern Christianity, Methuen & Co Ltd., London, 1968

Ware, Timothy, The Orthodox Church, Richard Clay & Company, Bungay Suffolk, 1963

Internet, http://sellassie.ourfamily.com/culture/church.html

The Blackwell Dictionary of Eastern Christianity, Blackwell Publishers, 1999

The Bible

Dedication Pesach 2003, Day 4 Year 6004 of Creation
Dear Charismatic Church of the nations and of Jerusalem.
Yaua (Yehovah) imaq: Yaua who has chosen you to be his lights in the world and to reflect the ever resplendent glory of his Son among the nations. May these meditations and reflections be a blessing in the life of the Church on earth and in eternity. They go forth from Zion above and Zion here in Jerusalem on earth. Yaua is indeed watching over his Word to fulfill it and the secret of God as he spoke to his servants the prophets is coming to fruition just as Yaua has planned. May you oh Church be enriched in all the graces of Yaua that he has placed in his bride. May Yaua bless you from Zion: May you be among those who are called good and faithful servants when our Mashiach and Lord, Jesus Christ the risen one appears in his glory. May your fruit last into eternity and may you be very fruitful.
The message of this book is influenced by the Spirit of Yaua. If I denied that I would be a lier. And so in it is the striving to uproot all idolatry from the Church of Yeshua the Mashiach. So join with me in prayer to Yaua that he will remove every statue from all Churches in all the earth. Join with me in prayer to Yaua that he will remove the pictures of all men and women from his Church. That all faces of the creature will be removed as objects of veneration and worship, all icons and all works of art as beautiful as they are. Let them be removed from the House of Yaua. Pray Oh Church for only then can our voices be heard on high for this most urgent need. Pray in the name of Yaua Yeshua Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Pray also saints that all Popes and Patrriarches of all Churches will be anointed by the Holy Spirit to carry out this cleansing of the Temple of Yaua. For our God will not share his house with pictures of ordinary men and women, he alone will fill his Temple. The icons in the Churches are not the Cheruvim. He alone is worthy of the praise and the glory, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. With prayer oh saints these things can be accomplished.
Remember saints the Church of Peter and Paul had no icons, no statues, no images but simply the bread and wine and the Holy Spirit and the Word and living people not dead statues and Icons, Statues and Idols. We too have our idolatries to deal with oh saints. We are sinful, iniquitous and rebellious we only live by Yaua’s grace. We are dead men who live because of the grace of Yaua, so pray oh saints that we can be fruitful in the work of faith. That we may enter into the great millennium rest of Yaua Yeshua by his grace and live and breath and walk and talk by his grace. Pray that prayer will all go to the Father in the name of the Son and by the power of the Holy Spirit. Pray that all prayer to all other being in heaven or in earth will stop, who ever or what ever they are.
Yaua is doing a new thing in the earth and we are invited to the banquet Church. Let the dwelling place of Yaua, even the place for his name to dwell, even his Church, be thankful in everything, be full of praise and wonder at the wonderful works of Yaua who alone is worthy. Oh saints join me also in prayer for those outside the Churches, even the Muslims and the Hindus and Sikhs and Buddhists whose father’s have inherited lies. Pray for Yaua to send laborers and pray that Yaua will cause those laborers to be fruitful. Pray for Yaua to raise up prophecy in Zion and praise in Jerusalem. Pray to Yaua that his name will be declared and discussed in all the earth. This is the time. This is the hour. Pray with Jesus “Father glorify you name” And he will glorify it again. Oh saints let your voices be heard on high for this is where we have the solutions to all the worlds distresses and problems. Our voices must be heard on high. And Yaua will be glorified as he answers our prayers. We need to see hundreds of millions of Muslims bowing the knee in the name Jesus and giving glory to Yaua. We need to pray through praise. We need to pray through prophecy. We need to pray through breathing. We need to pray through the desires of our hearts. We need to pray through love. We need to pray in the Spirit by Tongues on all occasions. Use your words oh saints to glorify Yaua and he’ll use your words to change the creation.
Saints take out all the prophecies Yaua has spoken to you or through you over the years. Read them out loud to Yaua. Remind him of what he said and will he not act quickly and fulfill his word? And will not the earth become filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yaua as the waters cover the sea. Look up saints the time is nigh. Reach up and cry out to Yaua. Lift up your hands in his name. Remember our help is in the name Yaua. Remember all nations will be gathered to Jerusalem to the name Yaua. Remember where Yaua causes his name to be recorded he will come there and bless you. Oh Bishops, Mars and Patriarchs restore the name Yaua to your lips even as the Korean church has. And see how the blessing of Yaua will increasing flow through your congregation. Lift up the name Yaua with me even as Jesus manifest his Father’s name. Pray oh saints that Yaua will send many laborers to Israel and to the Jews around the earth, this is imperative for they think they can celebrate Pesach in America and that this is Torah. They forget that they are supposed to appear before Yaua in Jerusalem if they are celebrating his appointed times. And they will die as all sinners die unless they turn to Jesus. For Yaua says they will come to him and his servant David (Beloved Yeshua) in the last days. All glory to the Father Son and the Holy Spirit in the name Yaua, in the name Yahoshua, in the name Yah. Amen.

International Service Evangeliehuset Prayer Builds Communities Initiative

In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ brothers and sisters you are invited to join in the international services prayer initiative “Prayer Builds Communities” .
You Belong Here!
Our Lord Jesus Christ left three major weapons with which his Church could build and grow. These were praise, prayer and agreement. When we pray in line with the plan of the Father there is no force which can stop the answer to those prayers. Jahuah (the LORD) reigns. As the psalmists love to proclaim. Remember!
1 Jahuah (the LORD) inhabits the praises of his people (Ps 22). (As we praise he comes
to us in a new way)
2 Ask and it shall be given to you (Matt 5-7). Ask of me and I will give you the nations.
(Ps 2)
3 Have the faith of God, whosoever says to this mountain be lifted up and cast into the sea and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says is coming to pass, he shall have whatsoever he says. (Mark 11)
4 The effective fervent prayer of a righteous man achieves much (James 5).
5 Whatsoever you ask for in pray believe that you have received it and you shall have it (Mark 11).
6 Be anxious about nothing but in all things with prayer, supplication and thanksgiving present your requests to God and the peace of God which transcends understanding will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus our Lord (Phil 4).
7 Where ever two of you (disciples) agree anything on earth, it will be done by my Father in heaven (Matt 18).
We pray we will be in accordance with the will of the Father in our prayers.

International Service Prayer Objectives:

1 We pray and agree in Jesus name that we will be a 70 strong community by
December 31st 2006.
2 We pray and agree in Jesus name that Evangeliehuset will be a 2010 strong community by the year 2010.
3 We pray Heavenly Father that you will anoint the preacher Tim Vierk so that he may preach and live the gospel with power and clearly as he ought. We pray you will give us wisdom and understanding to facilitate the International Service’s growth and functioning as a believing community.
4 We pray Lord of the Harvest that you would send labourers to preach the gospel in Porsgrunn, Skien, Telemark and Norway and to the ends of the earth.
5 We pray your prayer Lord Jesus “Our Father, Who art in Heaven…
6 We pray you will grant us one new person we can bring to each international service.
7 We pray that through the international service your name Father, will be glorified.

The Bible says
Trust in Jahuah (the LORD) with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge him and he will direct your paths.
We suggest each one who is willing set apart up to 15 minutes a day (more if you please) and
pray to the Father on behalf of the international service. If you have other prayers to add go
ahead and add them. The most important thing is that we pray faithfully, with faith and in
unity. This kind of prayer has changed communities and moved mountains.
The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all!

The Kingdom of God Education System.

(1) The first stage for an adult in this system is to “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand”. Examples of repentance can be seen in Zaccheus whose attitudes and relationship to material things changed. Another maybe seen in the disciples who started to be disciples of Yeshua. Zaccheus became in some sense obedient to the Torah, the disciples to Yeshua
(2) To see how the Kingdom’s education system developed we need to look the beginning of the gospel among the people of Israel with Peter and the Apostles on Shavuot 30 AD. And also with the introduction of the Gentiles to the system again under Peter in Acts 10.
(3) To see the various authoritative positions in the Kingdom of God society we will need to look the New Testament in the light of the Tanakh and specicifically at the teaching of Yeshua because he laid the foundation of the Kingdom of God system but he also left much to be done by the Holy Spirit, indicating there was but yet to be taught to the disciples yet at the time of Yeshua’s physical presence they were not able to bear.
(4) A danger in developing the Kingdom of God system is the temptation to analyse the sytems which already are present on earth and to seek imitate them and then to see how the Kingdom of God (Malchut Elohim) excels and superscedes these systems. However, this methodology and approach will produce a mixture and offspring, rather than a new and original creation.
(5) The Kingdom of God administration, is specifically not a child of the Babylon to Rome, or Gold to Clay Iron system. The Kingdom of system as its origin above with God, where as the other education systems and governmental administrations sprung from each other and are from below, either from the world, the flesh or the devil.
(6) Up until the coming of Mashiach Yeshua the kingdoms of this world and their glory were under the control of the evil one. There were elements of righteousness within them but not the righteousness of God as revealed in the New Covenant in Mashiach Yeshua.
(7) We will to take special care to notice the contrasts Mashiach Yeshua and the Apostles and Prophets make between the prevailing systems of their times and the systems of the Kingdom of God which was being introduced at the time of Yeshua. The pre Mashiach prophets and righteous must be seen as forerunners to fully revealed Kingdom of God which began to be opened up at the time of the Yeshua.
(8) We must seek revelation as to how to deal with the universities of the present age. The universities of the present need to be seen in kingdom context. Paul had a high level in his culture and customs, however when the Kingdom of the Son of God’s love was revealed in him his relationship to the education system he was brought up under changed. We know that many the great men of God , as we perceive them, were trained in the universities of their day. The academic systems of their were absorbed and excelled. We need to ask the question, in that necessary in our day? Need our children be educated in the way of the education of the world? Is this necessary or is their an alternative new creation complete education. How valuable is what young people are taught in this education systems of the present world?
(9) We need to take into account that the Kingdom of God as revealed until the time of the Apostles and prophets included in a clause which covered the necessity of the Kingdom of God coexisting with the world’s systems. The main ones at the times of the apostles were that of the Medes and the Persians in the East, the Greeks and Romans in the West and the Jewish systems spread out among the Jews. The kingdom of God was continually confronting alternative systems of governments, which were from below and had to deal with them.
(10) The teaching of the Kingdom of God regarding these systems of government and education included a number of principles : EG (a) “Render to Caeser what belongs to Caeser and render to God what belongs to God. This was said by Mashiach specifically in relation to taxes. (b) Submit to the authorities (c) Pray for all Kings and those in places of authorities for God desires that all men come to a knowledge of the truth. (d) However even when a person came to the knowledge of the truth it was still possible for that person at times to retain his position of authority in the society he was in, unless of call he received a call to the ministry which would take up his whole time. Now this aspect of entering the Kingdom of God and yet retaining your calling in society, tells us something about the present place of the Kingdom of God on earth.
(11) If it is possible to enter the Kingdom of God and yet retain your position in the culture and society, government and authority structure you are in, this shows that the reign of the Kingdom of God is not yet complete. For the very structures and systems of the society lived in are not structures of the righteousness of God but are structures of this world. ( The entrance is by baptism for the forgiveness of sins in the name of Mashiach Yeshua, this baptism being a crucifixion of the old man and a beginning of a new creation in Mashiach)
(12) This gives rise to the Hope aspect of the Kingdom of God. Those who enter it are awaiting the appearance of the Son of God from heaven. He will appear and will judge those who do not know God and those who refuse to obey the gospel. Included in the hope of the gospel is the redemption of the body and the deliverance of the entire creation from its bondage to decay. So we can join with Paul and the apostles and begin to see the limitations of the present education systems which are born from this world and not from above, nay not only this but were born of this present creation, whereas its essential constitution is bound to decay. We can say of the present education systems even if they are helpful in training our young people in taking their place in society:
(13) (a) They are all in bondage to decay, they do not have the eternity of God in them. (b) If they are based on this present heaven and earth they are bound to pass away. As Paul says “Knowledge will pass away”. And as the Mashiach Yeshua said “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my word will never pass way” (c) If they do not emphasis the weightier matters of the torah, Justice, righteousness and mercy, they are unbalanced and will not in any sense help a man through.
(14) Many of the weaknesses of this world education systems are apparent to those who partake in the systems themselves. Man was created in the images of God, therefore to be fully educated, to fulfill his role as man he will need to be educated as the image of God. If he is being educated with man made systems and man made philosophies he will get a lot of knowledge and even get a lot of wisdom, but he will not reach what he was intended to be, the image of Elohim. The Greek systems of Education train them to look for wisdom. However the Kingdom says we preach Mashiach and him Crucified. At the time of Paul the Jewish system of education taught them to look for signs. However again the Kingdoms answer was Mashiach and him Crucified. Now we see that education can lead to wisdom, especially in the academic disciplines. It can lead to power in the practical disciplines. Or to look at it another the wisdom covers the theory side of a subject and the power the application side. However Paul suggest for both Jew and Greek systems an alternative. Mashiach and him Crucified. He sees that to the Jewish search for power, power to rule the world under a humanly conceived idea of Mashiach, Mashiach fine, but him crucified, this is a stumbling. The Jewish system missed the sufferings of the Mashiach. The Greek look at this education systems and says foolishness. “All this stuff about resurrection from the dead” what are you talking about? But to those being save Mashiach the wisdom of God and Mashiach the power of God.
(15) So what can we conclude from this? That the Kingdom of God education system is based on Mashiach and him Crucified. All the essential academic subjects are comprehended in the Mashiach as wisdom and all the application of these are comprehended in Mashiach the power of God. This is in no way comprehensive for Mashiach is revealed in a lot more glory than the what the Greek and the Jews looked for in Pauls day. He is revealed a one way to the Barbarian and in another to the Romans, another to those without Law and another to the under Torah. Mashiach comprehends all aspects of education and the education of the Kingdom of God needs to take place with in Mashiach, not in the space of atheism or secularism, as it is done in the western world. Mashiach, when he ascended on high filled out the entire universe. When Mashiach ascended on high a change took place in the constitution of the universe and an education which doesn’t take this into account, will be like studying how the garden of Eden looked like after Adam and Eve tended but pretending they were never in there, it leaves more secrets and mysteries uncovered that it does explain the Garden.
(16) The Kingdom of God came to earth in an at hand way in 27 AD. When Yeshua started casting out demons, the Kingdom of God came with power. When Yeshua rose from the dead a change took place in the order of the universe. Death no longer had so much inevitability about it for it was now superceded by a greater inevitability, resurrection. A fundamental part of the education in the Kingdom of God is Hope. The Hope of the glory of God in the resurrection and the redemption of the body. Even as the trees and plants bear a new crop every year so it will be that in the time to come the earth will give birth to the dead. The Mashiach Yeshua, through his resurrection came into liberty which no one had experienced before. However the whole creation hopes for this liberty. This liberty has already begun in the spirits of the Sons of God who have the Spirit of God. In their inner man they have liberty as temples of the Holy Spirit. In the present that liberty is spreading to their minds and to their lives, in many different areas. They are free in many ways that the people of the old creation are not free. And finally they will be free also in their bodies. The whole creation longs for this liberty and it will be set free at the revelation of the sons of God in the future and the return of the already free son their head and Lord Yeshua their Mashiach. The Kingdom of God’s education includes the redemption of the children of God as a fundamental part of the curriculum.
(17) The Kingdom of God education is for every body who by God’s grace enters God Kingdom. Actually it is the education systems which education the children of God to take their place in God’s eternal Kingdom, when fully revealed. The education systems of this world educates children of this world to take their place in this material world and creation. As can be seen the goals of the two educational systems are fundamentally different. To be fully equipped in the education system of this world in no way qualifies you to take a place in the Kingdom of God and in the Body of Mashiach. The overseer who decided who takes which place in the Body of Mashiach is the Holy Spirit. It was the Holy Spirit who said set apart Paul and Barnabus for the work which I have assigned them.
(18) Now it is very possible that the Holy Spirit in deciding to place a child of God into a particular roles in the Body of Mashiach may send him to a university of this world to get an education in a certain subject, for the children of God have this liberty, to go in all places in this creation and to take their place in the new creation. A university of this world may teach a child of God, how accurately, to mine gold. Gold is part of God’s creation and belongs to God and since he has endowed all mankind will ability to gain knowledge of this creation, and how to apply that knowledge, but the child of God would only go that path because the Spirit of God lead him. However it is not the opposite case in general. A man who has no knowledge of God and is not born again can never see the Kingdom of God and mostly not enter it. It is spiritual and from above he is unspiritual and from below. He might climb over the fence and get in to the sheep fold but the Sheep of Mashiach will not follow the voice of a stranger and such a man is called a robber.

Letter on the Nature of the Torah and what Yaua requires 30/06 2001

The Jewish community has in every synagogue on earth, a special cupboard called an ark. In this Ark is kept a book called a torah scroll. Three times a weeks this scroll is taken out and read with great honor. Over a period of a year the whole scroll is read and a celebration is done at the end of the period over the fact that the Torah has been read one more time and in thanksgiving to Yaua that he granted the Jewish people his Torah. The purpose of this paper is to look at the nature of the Torah Yaua gave to his people Israel and to try to see the Torah through the eyes of the prophets who gave it, instead of the eyes of Jewish and Christian tradition. This is important because it will help equip the peoples of Yaua, Jewish and Gentile (see Amos) to deal with the faith destroying liberal critics who shake peoples faith because they have been taught unbiblical traditions as part of their faith. When these unbiblical traditions are challenged in ignorant academia, they fall, but some of the peoples faith in Yaua and his word is shaken also as a result of the mixture. So by speaking out on how the Biblical writers use and see the bible we will take away the main weapons of the liberal scholars which is the ignorance of their students.


In the Bible the Torah is not only the five books of Moses.
If we read the Bible Old and New Testament, nowhere is it taught that Moses wrote five books. Nor for that matter are quotations from the work of Moses ever referred as a quote from Genesis/Bereshit, Exodus/Shmot, Leviticus/Vayikra, Numbers/ Bamidbar, Deuteronomy/Dvarim. These titles are placed on these writings by traditions. When a writer in the Bible quotes another part of the Bible he will use various statements but never “As it says in Genesis”. Now these five books are described as usually as Scripture, the scriptures also contain the Torah. The Torah appears to go under various titles, including, Torah, Torah of Moshe, Torah of Yaua and Torah of Elohim. The Torah is made up of various kinds of instructions. For in truth the word Torah itself means instruction. It is used in the plural torot, meaning instructions. However it is also used as a proper noun to describe a body of writing granted to Israel on Mount Sinai by Yaua, partly directly to the people of Israel and partly to Moshe and through him to the sons of Israel.
If we read Paul in Galatians he says the Torah came 430 years after Abraham received promises from Elohim that “All the Goyim shall be blessed in you” Now according to Jewish tradition this statement is written in the Torah. But according to Paul who wrote 150 years before the oral tradition was written down this statement was written in the Scripture. “And the Scripture foreseeing that Elohim would justify the Goyim by faith preached the Gospel beforehand to Abraham saying All the nations shall be blessed in you” So what Paul calls Scripture, present Tradition calls Torah or Genesis or Bereshit. So to see with Paul’s eyes we need to recognize that to him this statement was not part of the Torah. Also to him the Torah did not appear on the scene for another 430 years. The promises were spoken to Abraham and “The Torah which came four hundred and thirty years later , does not invalidate the Covenant previously ratified by Elohim”

So we see we have two sets of writing here. The Scripture and the Torah. However we need to be clear, the Torah is that which came 430 years later. According to the Prophets there would be at least one other Torah. For the Torah was given according to the calculations of Eugene Faustlich and his computer in 1461 BC. This would place the date of the promise as approximately 1891 BC. If we are using Solar years. (We should really use lunar years , but since the biblical years has to follow the seasons the solar and lunar calendars will in the end give us the same year.) Most importantly for our point is the fact that in the 8th century BC, about 700 years after the Torah of Mount Sinai Yaua promises through Isaiah “A Torah will go forth from me, and I will set my justice as a light for the Goyim”. And the persons we are too look to for this Torah are Abraham our father and Sarah who gave us birth in pain, and no where else. So we are looking at the seed of Isaac for this future Torah. The plain words of Isaiah make clear this is a future Torah not the Torah which went out 700 years before Isaiah wrote and which was present with Isaiah when he wrote.

The Scripture Paul refers to is no ordinary book. It has powers. (1) Firstly it has the power to foresee or see the future. For Paul says “the Scripture foreseeing” (Gal 3:8).(2) Secondly the Scripture has the power to preach or proclaim the gospel “the Scripture… preached the gospel before hand to Abraham saying “All nations shall be blessed in you”. (3) Thirdly the Scripture has the power to shut men up or lock them up. “The Scripture has shut up all men under sin”. (4) Fourthly the Scripture has authority to say or give commands. “But what does the Scripture say “Cast out the Bondwoman and her son” Gal 4:30.

As we can see this scripture or graphe ( a document) has some interesting powers. To Paul these are some of the powers of the graphe. Now if we look more closely at these scriptures we find this. Under the power to preach the gospel we find in Genesis where these words are recorded “All the nations of the earth shall be blessed in you” And the speaking is none other than Yaua himself in the Angel of Yaua. “By myself I have sworn”, declares Yaua. If we now turn to the third power which is ‘to shut up’. We find that whereas in Galatians it is the graphe that has shut men under sin, in Romans 11:32 it says “Elohim has shut up all in disobedience” a very similar power and activity. If we turn to the fourth power to say or command we find the words are Sarah’s. However immediately Yaua confirms to Abraham that Sarah’s counsel is Yaua’s counsel. “whatever Sarah tells you listen to her”. So we find that the powers the Scripture, which we now call Genesis and the Jewish tradition calls Torah, were powers being exercised or confirmed by Yaua himself. We must then see the nature of Scripture as Paul sees it. It is living and powerful and is Elohim speaking and doing.

Let us now see how Paul sees the Torah. Firstly like the Rabbis Paul sees the more than one Torah. He see the Torah that came in 1461 BC. Where as he generally quoted the Scripture as saying, proclaiming or preaching when he is quoting the Torah, he usually uses the clause “It is written”. The two Torahs Paul refers to are (1) The Torah received 430 years after the Covenant with Abraham.(Gal3:17) (2) The Torah of Mashiach (Gal 6:2)

The Rabbis agree that there is a new Torah after the Torah of Moshe and they also agree that this Torah will be expounded by Mashiach. The Midrash Talpiyot teaches “And the Holy one blessed be he will sit and expound the new Torah which he will give through the Messiah”. Paul is talking to the uncircumcised Gentiles in his letter to Galatians. He states that it was recognized by the Jerusalem Apostles and Elders, that “he who effectually worked worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Goyim” Gal 2:6. In other words Paul is expounding this Torah of Mashiach to the Goyim. Some Rabbinical traditions agree with this also regarding the New Torah, Genesis Rabbah states “Rabbi Hanina said ‘Israel will
not need the teachings of King Messiah in the future to come, for it is said, Unto him the Goyim will seek (Is 11:10) (the nations but not Israel) .’ If so, why will King Messiah come, and to do what will he come? To gather the exiles of Israel, and to give them 30 mitzvoth (Gen rabbah 98:9).

The Rabbis also agree with Paul when he teaches that the New Torah is not identical to the Torah of Sinai. For Rabbis Pinchas and R. Levi Yohanan in the name of R. Menahem of Galya: “In the World to Come all the sacrifices will be abolished, but thank offerings will not be abolished. All prayers will be abolished, but thanksgiving prayers will not be abolished” Lev Rab (9:7). As we can see that that part of the traditional Torah now called Leviticus will be seriously curtailed and half abolished after these words come into effect. We all know the teaching of the Apostle Paul on thanksgiving. “Give thanks in everything for this is the will of Elohim for you in Mashiach Yeshua”.

Regarding the obligation or requirements of the Torah, Paul states that regarding the Torah that anyone who gets circumcised is obligated to keep the whole Torah. However he also says “those who are circumcised do not keep Torah themselves”(Gal 6). This assessment agrees with Mashiach Yeshua who said to the Jews, “Did not Moshe give you the Torah and yet none of you carries out the Torah”(John 7) So although there is a big performance in getting people circumcised it is clear the Torah is not really being kept by anyman.

Paul states that the Apostles knew that “man is not made righteous or justified by the works of Torah (rather by faith in Mashiach)

Through Torah I died to Torah, that I might live to Elohim”. Paul understands that when he was under the Torah, he really should have been dead, because of not keeping the whole Torah. The sentence for disobedience to the Torah, for Israel, included death. Paul had been doing enough to deserve death. Therefore if he was really under the death sentence, how can he try to achieve, righteousness through that Torah which sentenced him to death, with no power to redeem him from that death sentence. He could not, he was convicted of sin and deserving of death. Paul explains this in Romans 1, where he lists a whole catalogue of sins and consequences coming from the suppression of the truth about Elohim. However the conclusion of the list is that the ungodly and unrighteous men are accused of knowing “the (dikaioma) judgement of Elohim, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, thay not only do the same, but alos give hearty approval to those who practice them”. The list of practices which Paul expounded could be found both Inside and outside of Israel. Indicating that all men and all communities, including Israel were found guilty under this justice of Elohim.” Paul in Romans states later on in chap 3:9 says “We have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; and goes on to give a list of biblical witnesses to this fact . He quotes Psalm 14;1-3, 53:1-3, 5:9, 140:3, 10:7,Is 59,7, Ps 36:1. So he quotes 6 Psalms and one prophet to confirm the sinfulness of all men and specifically at that time Jews and Greeks. He intorduces his quote with “It is written” and doesn not tell us where he is quoting from. The conclusion is they are all “under sin”. We know from Rom 6 that the Wages of sin is death”. If then all are under sin that will all receive their just wages, sin. The alternative Paul lays out is the free gift of Elohim that is eternal life in Mashiach Yeshua.
If righteousness comes through Torah, then Mashiach died needlessly. Which in fact means that Mashiach’s death was necessary to produce righteousness. The way the righteousness is received is by faith in Mashiach.
The works of the Torah do not help us to receive the Spirit (Gal 3), rather the hearing of faith. An example of a work of Torah is circumcision of the flesh. This means that although a Jew or a Gentiles were fulfilling many many of the 613 mitzvoth, or the 7 mitzvoth for the Gentiles it would not meaning they would now be qualified to receive the Holy Spirit. So you could have a Jews who kept Shabbat every week and attended the three pilgrim fesitvals. He keeps Kosher every, even Pesach Kosher and wears Tzitiziot and Tefillin. But all of this would not qualify to receive the Spirit. And it is only with the Spirit of Elohim that one can life forever and enter Yaua’s Kingdom since his Kingdom is Spiritual. On the other side you could have a non Torah observant secular Jew or a Goy. Neither keep Shabbat, neither attend Pesach, Shavuot and Sukkot, nor do they keep Kosher. And yet this would not disqualify them from recieveing the Holy Spirit, who is a guarantee of the future inheritance in Elohims Kingdom. The reason the Torah observant is not qualified by his works of Torah and the Secular Jew and Goy are not disqualified by their non observance, is because Torah observance in not the criteria Elohim has assigned for receiving the gift of the Spirit. We can give a parable to this effect. A student once turned up on time to his English exam. He filled in all the administration details correctly in perfect English. He did not cheat and get disqualified. He did not disturb the exam and get thrown out. However when he wrote the exam he wrote everything in French. He wrote the composition in French and the Comprehension questions he answered perfectly in french. Indeed it was a very easy exam for him and he was an A student. He went away very excited. He awaited the result and lo and behold he got zero. In fact his score was so low it was not even classified as a failure. It was called unclassified. So we see being brilliant in French does qualify you to pass and English exam. In the same way being brilliant in Torah Observance does not qualify you to receive the Holy Spirit, for the criteria Yaua has used to decide who gets the Holy Spirit is the hearing of faith. Hearing the good news of the redemption in Mashiach Yeshua and believing is the qualifying criteria for receiving the Holy Spirit and eternal life. In this life a Jew can observe Torah very well, and benefit from this. But this will not make him eternally righteous nor will it qualify him for eternal life.
The works of Torah deal with the perfection of the flesh, the hearing of faith and the Spirit address the perfection of the Spirit
The Works of the Torah do not produce the provision of the Spirit or works of power these come from the hearing of faith. Many Jews keep many mitzvot. Now I am not even saying that the mitzvot they keep really are fulfilling the Torah Elohim gave Moshe and Joshua. But with all this Torah observance, it still does not mean they have the Holy Spirit or see works of power happening in their lives. Whole communities have kept Torah and yet not been warned when danger was coming. Some communities keep Torah and yet are arrogant towards Goyim and hate Christians. This the Spirit of Elohim does not allow. Torah observance, does not produce Spiritual power, the hearing of faith does. You do not need to keep 300 mitzvot in a year to receive the Holy Spirit. But if you follow one instruction, Beleive on Yah Yeshua the Mashiach, you can receive the Holy Spirit.
Those who are of the works (ergon) of Torah are under a curse. For it is written in the Torah Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the Torah to perform them” (Due 27:26) If this reading is correct, and we have every reason to believe it is so, then even if you kept all the mitzvot due you status and lacked one, you would come under the curse of the Torah. This was the state of first century Jewry. No one kept the whole Torah. The Romans were in charge in Judea, which was a clear indicator that the Jews were still under the curses of the Torah, which stated “The Alien who is among you shall rise aqbove you higher and higher, but you shall go down lower and lower…He shall be the head , and you shall be the tail..So all these curses shall come on you and pursue and overtake you until you are destroyed, because you would not obey Yaua your Elohim by keeping his mitzvot and chuqqim which he commanded you” Deu 28 When the New covenant community was born these conditions were already in play. From around 60 BC the Romans had entered Judea. And they were , at the time of Yeshua, administering Israel. So they were under the curse of the Torah, at that time. Most of Israel was also in exile, out among, the nations another sign of the curse of the Torah. “Moreover, Yaua, will scatter you among all peoples , from one end of the to the otherend of the earth; and there you shall serve other gods, wood and stone, which you and you fathers have not known. And among these Goyim you shall find no rest, and there shall be no resting place for the sole of your foot; but there Yaua will give you a trembling heart, failing of eyes, and despair of soul” When Yeshua came much of Israel was already in dispersion. But as Mashiach Yeshua had the power to restore the desolate heritages and to gather in the outcast of Israel. When the exilic government of Israel refused the Mashiach, then the curse completed itself. Yeshua warned them and explained to his disciples in Luke 21 “There will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people, and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the Goyim; and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Goyim until the times of the Goyim be fulfilled” Yeshua spok in 30 AD. From 66 to 70, exactly forty years after Yeshua warnings, the Romans came and destroyed Jerusalem. Great wrtah was on the people then, for thousands were crucified. And hundreds committed suicide. Two generations late, Bar Kochba led a revolt and failed. The people were scattered from the land. Jerusalem was emptied of Jews as was the land. From that time to AD !948 there was not Jewish control in Israel. This is all part of the curse of the Torah. And even now with a government is Israel. They live on the loans and military gifts of America. The policies are affected greatly by the finances received from America. They are still borrowing from the Goyim which is a sign of the Curse of the Torah. It is this curse which Mashiach Yeshua redeemed the believer from.
Paul explains no one is made righteous by Torah before Elohim and the witness he gives is Habukuk 2 “The righteous man shall live by faith.” The witness of a prophet. Rabbi Simlai in one place teaches that Habukuk reduced the 613 Mitzvoth to one in this statement. Hence he agreed with Pauls understanding of the importance of Habukuks vision. Righteousness is the goal in Pauls mind, and whereas the gospel produces that the works of Torah do not. So Paul clearly reveals that Habukuk is saying all righteous men live the same way, by faith. And faith is not doing but believing, in line with Abraham believing Yaua and receiving righteousness.
(1.1) The Torah is not of emunah, faith. On the contrary “He who practices them shall live by them.” So to live by the practices of the Torah is not faith (Lev 18:5). Now Paul quotes from Leviticus as opposed to Deuteronomy this time. The passage Paul quotes is an important one.
(1.2) Speak to the Sons of Israel and say to them, I am Yaua your Elohim. Do not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their chuqqim. You are to perform my mishpatim and keep my chuqqim to live in accord with them; I am Yaua your Elohim. So you shall keep my chuqqim and my mispatim, by which a man may live if he does them; I am Yaua”. The plan is clear these chuqqim and mishpatim are to be lived by. However it says noting here about being made righteous.
(1.3) And Paul is dealing with the issue of being made righteous. To Paul the source of righteousness and its perpetuation is faith, not the Chuqqim or Mishaptim. However it is clear that Paul is not saying the Torah will not be fulfilled. For he states in Gal 5 “For the whole Torah is fulfilled in one word, in the statement You shall love your neighbour as yourself” Here Paul again quotes Torah. It is from Lev 19:18. So to fulfill the Torah Paul is referring to, you need to fulfill one mitzvah from it. Lev 18:19. However it would appear that to be made righteous is one thing and to fulfill Torah another thing completely, and fulfilling Torah is desireable although not obligatory for the Goyim. It is also clear that Paul is dealing with the Torah regarding relationships of a man to his brother. He does not mention the Love of Yaua, which we know is the greatest Mitzvah. The basis of the Torah mention is to do and live. However the condition of living is the doing. If a man does not do the chuqqim, he comes under a curse. Ultimately he will die from the curse. However the first death is that of the relationship to the land of Israel. When Israel refuses to fulfill Torah in the land, the land after a time vomits them out. When they are vomited out a new set of conditions arise. They can know longer , in any sense whatsoever, keep the land based Mitzvoth. This puts them under the continual curse of the Torah, until they are redeemed from exile by the Mashiach. However this curse does not means they can not live a level of righteousness hwere they are, for the prophets gave specific instruction for the Jews to keep when they are in Exile. This is the exilic relationship of Israel to their Elohim. It is not a Torah relationship. They can, in exile call themselves Torah observant, but the truth of Paul and Yeshua, and the clear evidence of the practices themselves stands clearly, “Not one of you keep the Torah, In America in France, in Italy, you can not keep Torah. You can call what you are doing keeping Torah, but it is most certainly not keeping the Torah Yhawah gave through Moshe. For Moshe said to Israel in Deu 6 “Now this is the Mitzvah , the chuqqim and the mispatim which Yaua your Elohim has commanded me to teach you, that you might do them in the land where you are going over to possess it”. We see then from this point in the Torah Jews or Israel can only completely fulfil these mitzvot, which Moshe will teach them, in the land they were going over to possess. If they are living in Amrica or Russia, they simply can not fulfil these Chuqqim and Mishpatim, completely. The 10 sayings or commandments were given before the land based commandments and were spoken by the voice of Yaua to the nations of Israel directly. They were spoken outside the land, in the wilderness and were to be kept immediately. This was evidenced by the fact that, when the people made the golden calf, Moshe came down and executed justice on the community. Those who refused to repent at that time were cut down by the levites. This shows us that these mitvoth are not land based but universal. Of these mitzvoth a Shabbat was taught before the covenant of the 10 commandments was given. Also before the covenant Yaua taught them about assigning judges and policeman in all their communities, to ensure justice was done. The highest authority in the relationship was also laid down, This was the very ground of them being the people of Yaua. That was obedience to the voice of Yaua. This is higher than all the commandments of the covenants and underlay their authority. The 10 commandments had authority because they were spoken by Yaua, not because they made sense. Their authority stands whether a Jews live in America or Spain. However the highest authority obeying the voice, is also the authority upon which the New Covenant is based. That is why the New Covenant and the New Torah can free a amn from the curse of the Torah, because it is Elohims voice which is believed and Elohims voice which obeyes. And the New Covenant was given in exilic conditions where all the Jews were under the curse of the Torah, so it came proclaiming freedom from the curse and freedom from bondage and being made righteous from all the things that the Torah of Moshe did not have the authority or power to make a man righteous from. For example if a man committed a capital crime like murder or adultery, he had to die according to the Torah. If you are dead you under not under the authority of the Torah any more. The final sentence has been excecuted. If Israel does not have the authority to execute the sentence, it does not change the sentence. But it tells us that Yaua was so displeased with the behaviour of the Jewish people, that he withdrew their authority to execute people condemned in their courts. To Yaua judgements is based on truth and if the judges are as guilty as the judged, better to remove the authority to execute justice. So the death sentece stands but the man does not die. However as John says “the wrath of Elohim abides on him” It is this judgement of the Torah sin and death which Yeshua came to redeem man from. They died with him in immersion and came out new creations under the New Torah. The torah of the Spirit of life in Mashiach Yeshua. In this torah there is no curse, and it is the Torah of faith.
We have seen that there are at least two sets of mitzvoth or relations to Elohim. The unifying point and the highest authority behind these is the obedience to the voice of Yaua or the bvelieving of the voice of Yaua. This is witnessed to by the Scripture, the Torah and the Prophets and the Psalms. In Exodus 19 the essential principal is laid out “You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles wings, and brought you to myself. Now then if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, then you shall by my own segulah among all the peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” These words were given by Yaua to Moshe to speak to the sons of Israel. Moshe only spoke the words to the elders of the people. It is clear then that the elders of the people are taken to represent the people them selves. We can leanr a lesson from this. When all nations flock to Jerusalem in the future, surely it will be the elders of the peoples who will comes. Those in authority and who are considered by Yaua as the representative of their particular people.
The authority of the voice then is laid down as the ground of all authority, in the kingdom of priests and in the set apart nation. But the whole thing is a process. If they obey the voice and keep the covenant, then they will be a Special treasure and a Kingdom of Priests. We do well then to ask the question, how does the voice come? This is answered in to parts. Firstly the voice came audibly from the mountain. The people heard the voice of Yaua himself. Yaua’s intention in this was so that the people would fear Moshe for ever. In understanding how to relate to Torah and Scripture we will do well to look at this word forever or Olam. One method the liberal theologians use to under mine faith is to show that what Scripture says it doesn’t fulfill. By this means they can undermine faith in the Scripture and faith in Yaua. We can answer them very simply. When Yaua speaks he fulfils just as he intends not as translators or man imagine he intends. So when Yaua here says to Moshe, That they may believe in you forever (leolam)” some one might argue that forever means for all eternity and then try to show that it didn’t happen that way. Then they might say so you see the Scripture is not true. So we will look at this word forever in this context and see how false concepts can give strength to the false arguments of the liberal theologians. I contribute this as part of the destruction of liberal theology in the future. Firstly if we look at the was le olam is used in the context it is absolutely clear that it can not mean forever, as in for all eternity. For it is referring to the people who were alive at the time when Yaua Spoke. They were the only ones who heard the voice. But we know already from scripture that at this point they were subject to death. And the scripture is quite free with its use of death. So the Scripture says those who hear will believe in Moshe le olam. It is clear then they will believe in Moshe to the end of their time. Not forever to all eternity, for they will die and he will die. Secondly the word Olam has a plural form. So if it is supposed to mean for all eternity, that is forever, how can you have more than one eternity? So it is clear it does not mean what those who read the word forever perceive it to mean. The word itself comes from the word alam (5956 strongs) meaning “to veil” or cover or conceal. It itself is said to mean to the vanishing point (Strongs 5769) or “It is what is hidden , concealed; time immemorial , time past, antiquity; eternity; distant furture; duration; perpetuity; duration; without end” The Hebrew Greek Study Bible gives many more words to translate this word. /However as I have pointed out, some meanings are not consistent with one another. You can not have two lots of unending eternity running together. Eternity is forever without end, it can not begin again at some point in the future. So to argue that David was promised he would have someone on the throne leolam and then to show there was a gap and a ending, does not prove anything. Le olam does not mean what you think it means it means what Yaua meant it to mean. And even if we go along with your intellectual grammatical lines we find “ There are four hundred and forty occurrences of olam in the Hebrew OT. More than 300 hundred of these instances indicated indefinite continuance into the very near future” However, the meaning of the word is not confined to the future. There are at least twenty instances where olam refers to the past, though rarely the limitless past” So we see Yaua said he would speak to the people so that they would believe in Moshe to the vanishing point to the concealed point. Not necessarily to eternity. And the same goes for all the promises of Yaua based on this word.
We return to the question how does the c voice of Yaua come.
Mashiach redeemed from the Curse (qalal) of the Torah. The Messianic redemption of Yeshua buys men back from having to walk under the curse written in the Torah. For the Torah is clear on the matter. If you keep it you are blessed. If not you are cursed. It is the negative side of the curse that Yeshua bore for us. He paid for us so that we no longer fall under the curses for disobedience. Since no man living in those days kept the Torah. But Yeshua became a curse for us. “Cursed is every one who hangs on wood” Because Yeshua took the judgment
So having been redeemed from the curse of Torah the blessing of Abraham can go to the Goyim. When the Blessing goes then we can receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.


FOUR

The Final return of Israel to their God, Yaua and there Messiah Yeshua, son of David.
Men of Israel and the nations listen to the word of the prophet Hosea
“The sons of Israel will remain for many days without king or prince without sacrifice or pillar and without ephod or teraphim”
Afterwards the sons of Israel will return and Seek Yaua their God and David their king; and they will come trembling to Yaua and to his goodness in the last days”


We have two returns mentioned in the prophecy which we can expect in Israel in the (bacherit ha yamim ) latter days.
The first return is to Yaua their God. Now all Israel understands this return. A return to the covenant which took place on Sinai. That is essentially a return to the 10 sayings and the Mishpatim which are mentioned in Shmot or Exodus 20-24. This was the basis of the initial marriage between Israel and Yaua. Their leaving of this Brit and these Mishpatim (judgements) is seen by Yaua as adultery and harlotry. They went after other gods and other kings or Messiah’s instead of Yaua’s the true king and his Messiah son of David.
So Sons of Israel know and understand this you are called in these days to return to Yaua in his covenant where you love Yaua your God and have no god’s besides him. Gold and silver coins money, is not to be the reason you serve. These are not your God. As it says among the mishpatim “You shall not make elohim besides me, elohim of silver and elohim of gold, you shall not make for yourselves”. You are not to be ruled by money as the Mashiach said
“No one can serve two masters for wither he will hate the one and love the other or he will hold to one and despise the other. You can not serve God and mammon.

The final or ultimate return in Israel, will be that which is to take place in the last days. Hosea saw this. The ultimate restoration will be the restoration of the knowledge of God and the restoration of the Mashiach of Israel the son of David, to be king and ruler of Israel by their choice.
This final return is prophesied by Hosea in chapter three and refers to these days. We can expect a massive turning in Israel to the Mashiach and to the knowledge of God in these last days.

Introductory Ramble

It's the twenty second of Tishrei in the year 6003. Probably about 3403 years since Joshua entered the land and the people of Israel celebrating their first ever Sukkot. I woke up with a meditation which I would like to share with you.
I am Yaua your Elohim, thou shalt have no elohim acherim (other gods) before my face
In looking at this word of Yaua we do well to remember that Jesus in agreement with Moses when he said:
Man does not live by bread alone
but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of Yaua
We can add to this the admonition of the Apostle Paul and Habukuk
The Tzaddik shall live by his faith
And notice the source of faith:
Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God
And we can realize that this word of Yaua is a source of faith and hence life for us.

Yaua is looking to see you, not your elohim acherim (other gods). Yaua wants a face to face encounter with his bride and joy. Elohim Acherim basically get in the way of this face to face relationship. If we want to see Yaua faces to faces the gods of Machmad past and present, the god Mammon and the elohim of hinduism must we put out of the way. Such sights are an ugly abomination to Yaua and cause him to turn his face away from us. He says: Anoki Yaua which brought you out of Egypt” He brought us out from our houses of bondage; he brings us out from bondage, so we can see his face.
Face to face is the relationship Yaua wants not the disgrace of elohim acherim. If you don’t want Yaua to turn his face away then remove, remove all those elohim you appear to love so dearly, completely out of the way. And Yaua will show his face and his grace will shine upon us. If you want to see him and not a euphemism, if you want to see him and not an imitation, turn to him in whose face Yaua shines, to Yeshua (Jesus) the Messiah, the Almighty God sublime.
Was it not said
Not so many years ago
Where the Spirit of Yaua is
There there is liberty
We all with open face beholding
As in a mirror
The glory of Yaua

Are transformed from glory to glory
Even as by the Spirit, Yaua
Yeshua is not elohim acherim
For he says “I and the Father are one”
And Yaua the Father says
This is my beloved son
In whom I am well pleased
Listen to him

Listen then to him
The beloved of YauaFor when we hear and believe the Father