JESUS = Rabi?

[Massorite]

In reality when some one is from Nazareth they are called a Nazarite.

No, being from Nazareth made someone a Nazarene.

Being a Nazarite had NOTHING to do with being from the town of Nazareth. The Bible makes no connection between the Nazarite vow, the town of Nazareth or a sect called the Nazarenes.

So here we see that scripture clearly calls Samson a Nazarite who will not use a razer on his hair. Which is one of the qualifications that needed to be fallowed when one becomes a Nazarene. Having Long Hair is part of being in the sect.

Where do you get this information?

IN Amos 2:11-12 God is rebuking Israelites for corrupting and forcing the Nazarite to stop prophesying. From these scriptures we know that Jesus was a Nazarite/Nazarene from Nazareth which was where the sect of the sect of the Nazarenes was based at the time of Jesus.

What is your historical basis for this claim?

There is nothing in Amos 2 to suggest that Jesus was a Nazarite. In fact, we know from the New Testament that Jesus drank wine.

Do you have any historical evidence of the sect of the Nazarenes in pre-New Testament times apart from Scripture? When did the sect begin? Did they produce any literature?

In Acts 24:5 we find the sect of the Nazarenes mentioned again, so by this we know that the sect of the Nazarenes existed in both the new testament and the old testament.

In Acts 24: 5, the "sect of Nazarenes" is referring to Jewish believers. It is another term for Christians.

As always you have twisted, ignored and or purposely misinterpreted what I said. I give you scriptural proof and you act like it doesn't count as good enough proof for you. Calling Jesus a Nazarite or a Nazarene both can be used to speak of His association with the Sect of the Nazarenes according scripture. In Matt.2:23 the word Nazarene is used to speak of Jesus because He lived in Nazareth. In Acts 24:5 the word Nazarenes (meaning more then one Nazarene) is used to speak of Felix who is a ringleader of the SECT of the Nazarenes. In Numbers 6:2, 13, 18, 19, 20, & 21 the word NAZARITE is used to speak of one who belongs to the SECT of the NAZARENES. And we find the same thing in Judges 13:5&7 &16:17. The wine Jesus drank was nonalcoholic ie grape juice. The fact that Jesus was called a Nazarene like Felix (Acts 24:5) was is good enough scriptural proof to me that Jesus was a Nazarene also and Had long hair and there is no scriptural proof that says that Jesus was not a Nazarene from the SECT of the Nazarenes. We should remember that the city Nazareth did not exist in the old testament because it is never mentioned. Nor is it mentioned in the Talmud or by Josephuse

You seem to have forgotten that the reason I don't respond to you is because you are so combative. If scripture isn't good enough for you then maybe you should stop responding to my posts.

[Guest shiloh357]

As always you have twisted, ignored and or purposely misinterpreted what I said.

No, I am just asking you questions. If you really believe you have the truth, then questions should not threaten you or frustrate you.

I give you scriptural proof and you act like it doesn't count as good enough proof for you.

First of all, it is not the scriptues I discount, but rather, your handling of them. I have news for you Masorite. Disagreeing with you does not equate with rejecting the Bible. Seondly, I would not be so free and wild with the word "proof." You have not "proven" anything by any objective standard that exists.

Calling Jesus a Nazarite or a Nazarene both can be used to speak of His association with the Sect of the Nazarenes according scripture. In Matt.2:23 the word Nazarene is used to speak of Jesus because He lived in Nazareth. In Acts 24:5 the word Nazarenes (meaning more then one Nazarene) is used to speak of Felix who is a ringleader of the SECT of the Nazarenes. In Numbers 6:2, 13, 18, 19, 20, & 21 the word NAZARITE is used to speak of one who belongs to the SECT of the NAZARENES. And we find the same thing in Judges 13:5&7 &16:17.

Let's take each of these statements of yours and deal with them separately:

1. "Calling Jesus a Nazarite or a Nazarene both can be used to speak of His association with the Sect of the Nazarenes according scripture. In Matt.2:23 the word Nazarene is used to speak of Jesus because He lived in Nazareth."

In the New Testament. The word Nazarene appears ONE time. It simply states that Jesus was a resident of the town of Nazareth. No connection between the sect of the Nazarenes/Nazarites is made anywhere in the New Testament.

2. "In Acts 24:5 the word Nazarenes (meaning more then one Nazarene) is used to speak of Felix who is a ringleader of the SECT of the Nazarenes." No, if you look again, they are referring to Paul. The "sect of Nazarenes" are Jewish Believers in Jesus, i.e. New Testament Christians. The "ringleader" is Paul. Here is the full text with some highlights to show context:

And after five days Ananias the high priest descended with the elders, and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul. And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him, saying, Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence, We accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness. Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy clemency a few words. For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.

(Acts 24:1-6)

3. In Numbers 6:2, 13, 18, 19, 20, & 21 the word NAZARITE is used to speak of one who belongs to the SECT of the NAZARENES. And we find the same thing in Judges 13:5&7 &16:17. The problem is that the terms "Nazarene" or "Nazarenes" do not appear anywhere in those texts. Furthermore, the word Nazareth does not appear in any OT text. It is first mentioned in the New Testament.

There is not nothing in the text of Scripture that makes any mention of a Old Testament sect called "Nazarenes" and certainly no mention of Jesus belonging to such sect nor of Jesus being a Nazarite.

This is just poor theology. I don't know what you are reading or buying into, but there is abosolutely nothing in the Bible that makes your case.

The wine Jesus drank was nonalcoholic ie grape juice.

That is pure conjecture. Wine means wine. The Biblical writers were smart enough to know the difference between unfermented grape juice and wine.

The fact that Jesus was called a Nazarene like Felix (Acts 24:5) was is good enough scriptural proof to me that Jesus was a Nazarene also and Had long hair...

Jesus was called a Nazarene because of his residency in Nazareth. No where does the Bible ever make any other reference. I challenge you to show otherwise from the Bible and from credible history.

...and there is no scriptural proof that says that Jesus was not a Nazarene from the SECT of the Nazarenes

The thing is, Massorite, I don't have to "prove" anything. I certainly I don't have to prove that Jesus was not a member of a sect of Nazarites.

You are claiming He is. For that reason the burden of proof is on you to show the connection. I don't have to prove a connection that doesn't exist. You are making assertions that heretofore, not anywhere supported in the Bible.

We should remember that the city Nazareth did not exist in the old testament because it is never mentioned.

Just because it is not mentioned in the OT does not mean it did not exist. That is basically circular reasoning.

You seem to have forgotten that the reason I don't respond to you is because you are so combative.

I just ask you questions that you don't want to answer. I know Jewish history and I am very well acquainted with 1st Century Israelite history. I am Jew and have made it my passion to study these things. I am very well qualifed to challenge your historically fallacious information.

If scripture isn't good enough for you then maybe you should stop responding to my posts.

So far, you are batting zero where the Scriptures are concerned. You have not provided ONE reference that is actually material to one point you have made. It isn't Scripture that is the problem, but your mishandling of it.

If you don't like being challenged, then maybe you should stop posting this psueudo Messianic nonsense.

[Botz]

Hi Massorite ... part proof that the L-rd did indeed drink alcoholic wine

19"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'..."

They are hardly going to call Him a drunkard if they knew He belonged to a teetotal sect...how foolish would that sound!

Your explanation of Jesus belonging to the sect of Nazarenes is truely remarkable, and totally fallacious...I can't believe anyone can honestly try and make such a connection from Scripture, let alone try to teach others of its veracity.

[Massorite]

Hi Massorite ... part proof that the L-rd did indeed drink alcoholic wine

19"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'..."

They are hardly going to call Him a drunkard if they knew He belonged to a teetotal sect...how foolish would that sound!

Your explanation of Jesus belonging to the sect of Nazarenes is truely remarkable, and totally fallacious...I can't believe anyone can honestly try and make such a connection from Scripture, let alone try to teach others of its veracity.

[Massorite]

Hi Massorite ... part proof that the L-rd did indeed drink alcoholic wine

19"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'..."

They are hardly going to call Him a drunkard if they knew He belonged to a teetotal sect...how foolish would that sound!

Your explanation of Jesus belonging to the sect of Nazarenes is truly remarkable, and totally fallacious...I can't believe anyone can honestly try and make such a connection from Scripture, let alone try to teach others of its veracity.

Couldn't they have lied about Jesus? Since they called Him a gluttonous man does that make Him a Gluttonous man? If He was a drunkard or at the very least some one who drank alcoholic wine and they accused Him of being a drunkard then He was also a gluttonous man. And we all know that He was not a glutton since He was perfect in all of His ways.

Who said anything about teaching? I was simply expressing my opinion just like you are now. Does that mean that you are teaching that Jesus was a drunkard and a gluttonous man?

Of course not. If you believe that the scripture you quoted is proof that Jesus at the very least was a drinker of alcoholic wine. Then you need to believe that the same verse carries enough weight to believe that Jesus was also a glutton.

[Massorite]

Calling Jesus a Nazarite or a Nazarene both can be used to speak of His association with the Sect of the Nazarenes according scripture. In Matt.2:23 the word Nazarene is used to speak of Jesus because He lived in Nazareth.

where is the scripture to show that Jesus was from the sect and not just the town?

The wine Jesus drank was nonalcoholic ie grape juice.

scriptural reference please.

The fact that Jesus was called a Nazarene like Felix (Acts 24:5) was is good enough scriptural proof to me that Jesus was a Nazarene also and Had long hair and there is no scriptural proof that says that Jesus was not a Nazarene from the SECT of the Nazarenes.

5"We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect

this verse is not about Felix. This verse is speaking of Paul

There is no scripture that shows that Jesus belonged to the sect of the Nazarenes just like there is no scripture that shows that Jesus was not a member of the sect of the Nazarenes. There is also no scripture that tells us that the wine that Jesus drank was not alcoholic just like there is no scriptural proof that the wine was alcoholic. However since I believe that Jesus was a member of the sect of the Nazarenes. Go figure.

The bible does call Him a Nazarene and since the word Nazarene can be and is used in scripture to speak both of a member of the sect of the Nazarenes and of some one who is from the city of Nazareth I believe that Jesus was both from the city of the Nazareth and a member of the sect of the Nazarenes.

Thank you for pointing that out to me. I stand corrected. Paul being a member of the Nazarenes is even better.

[Ovedya]

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite (Numb. 6:1-27), then He could neither have eaten nor drunk any product of the vine. Thererfore, whether the wine that He drank was alcoholic or not, He still would not have drunk it.

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite he would never have cut his hair. The Bible neither affirms nor denies whether Jesus' hair was long or short. So that point is moot.

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite He would never have touched nor gone near a dead body. However, Jesus called Lazarus, who was dead, from the tomb and later even sat at a table with him.

Jesus did not take the vow of the Nazarite. He was born in a town called "Nazareth" and He was called a "Nazarine." Nazarine is simply the title given to someone who was born in the town of Nazareth.

[Guest shiloh357]

Okay, I was holding off on sharing this, but I think it needs to said, since some people cannot be reasoned with from the Scriptures.

The ancient "sect of the Nazarenes" is not the same "sect" referred to in Acts 24:5. In Acts 24:5 it is a deragatory reference to followers of Christ, and is a play on words given Jesus' as a long time resident of Nazareth and because the "Nazarenes" were a hated group and considered by Jews of the day to be a cult.

The ancient sect of the "Nazarenes" was a gnostc cult that began during the Hasmoneon dynasty. It has nothing to do with Torah observance and in fact, they were considered "minim" by the Pharisees prior to the coming of Christ.

The sect of the Nazarenes or "Nasorean" have absolutely NO relationship to the Nazarites, as they considered themselves above the Priestly traditions (which is connected to the Nazarite sacrifices). Therefore, no "Nazarene" was ever under the Nazarite vow.

The ancient Nazarene sect, was basically a heretical, gnostic cult and neither Jesus nor John the Baptist were members of it.

Massorite is assuming a connection between "nazarite," "Nazareth," "Nazarene" and "Nazarenes" that simply does not exist.

The Bible NEVER claims that nazarites were ever called nazarenes. The words look similar but have no relationship. It would be like trying force a relationship betwen the words "bell" and "ball"

[Botz]

Hi Massorite ... part proof that the L-rd did indeed drink alcoholic wine

19"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'..."

They are hardly going to call Him a drunkard if they knew He belonged to a teetotal sect...how foolish would that sound!

Your explanation of Jesus belonging to the sect of Nazarenes is truly remarkable, and totally fallacious...I can't believe anyone can honestly try and make such a connection from Scripture, let alone try to teach others of its veracity.

Couldn't they have lied about Jesus? Since they called Him a gluttonous man does that make Him a Gluttonous man? If He was a drunkard or at the very least some one who drank alcoholic wine and they accused Him of being a drunkard then He was also a gluttonous man. And we all know that He was not a glutton since He was perfect in all of His ways.

Who said anything about teaching? I was simply expressing my opinion just like you are now. Does that mean that you are teaching that Jesus was a drunkard and a gluttonous man?

Of course not. If you believe that the scripture you quoted is proof that Jesus at the very least was a drinker of alcoholic wine. Then you need to believe that the same verse carries enough weight to believe that Jesus was also a glutton.

I was going to reply that to be called a glutton , at least you had to be seen eating food, and therefore to be called a drunkard, one assumes you would have to be seen drinking alcohol...the expressions are quantative and about excess/over-indulgence... but Ovedya has given a much more precise and biblically based answer that should seal all our lips on the matter. I retract my comment about you teaching...apologies.

[sheya joie]

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite (Numb. 6:1-27), then He could neither have eaten nor drunk any product of the vine. Thererfore, whether the wine that He drank was alcoholic or not, He still would not have drunk it.

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite he would never have cut his hair. The Bible neither affirms nor denies whether Jesus' hair was long or short. So that point is moot.

If Jesus had taken the vow of the Nazarite He would never have touched nor gone near a dead body. However, Jesus called Lazarus, who was dead, from the tomb and later even sat at a table with him.

Jesus did not take the vow of the Nazarite. He was born in a town called "Nazareth" and He was called a "Nazarine." Nazarine is simply the title given to someone who was born in the town of Nazareth.

Minor quibble: of course, we know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem; He was raised in Nazareth after His family returned from Egypt.