Letter to the Roman Christians (Lecture 6): A Question of Faith & the Faithful

[Rebbe]

PAUL'S LETTER TO THE ROMAN CHRISTIANS [6]

Analytical Commentary on Romans
A Question of Faith & the Faithful

The Audio MP3 of this lecture is available via this link: http://www.bripodcasts.com/Romans/Lecture6.MP3

Copyright © BRI 2016 All Rights Reserved Worldwide by Les Aron Gosling,
Messianic Lecturer (BRI/IMCF)

CAUTION: BRI Yeshiva notes are not available to the general public. They are not for distribution. They are not for reproduction. The notes may also bear little or no resemblance to the actual audio or video recorded BRI Yeshiva lecture.


"The great Rabbi Gamaliel had among his disciples one who, according to a passage in the Talmud, gave his master a good deal of trouble, manifesting 'impudence in matters of learning.' But his name is not given; he is remembered simply as 'that pupil'" (F.F. Bruce, The Spreading Flame, 1958, 81. See also J. Klausner, From Jesus to Paul, 1944, 310f; Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 30b).

By the execution of Christ "the sect of which he was the founder received a blow, which for a time checked the growth of a dangerous superstition; but it broke out again and spread with increased vigour, not only in Judaea, the soil that gave it birth, but even in the city of Rome, the common sewer into which everything infamous and abominable flows like a torrent from all quarters of the world"
(Tacitus, Annals XV, 44 Emphasis mine).

"First, I am persistently thanking my God through Yeshua the Messiah for all of you, because your faith is constantly proclaimed throughout the world. For God, whom I serve in my spirit in announcing the Gospel of his Son, is my witness that without ceasing I remember you always in my prayers, asking that by God's will I may somehow at last succeed in coming to you. For I am longing to see you so that I may share with you some spiritual gift to establish you , or rather so that we may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith, both yours and mine. I want you to know, brethren, that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as I have among the rest of the Gentiles. I am a debtor both to Greeks and to barbarians [Wuest: those who do not possess Greek culture], both to the wise and to the foolish , hence my eagerness to proclaim the gospel to you also who are in Rome. For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. For God's righteousness in it is revealed on the principle of faith to faith; as it is written, "˜And the one who is just, on the principle of faith shall live'" (Romans 1.8-17).

The Letter of Paul to the Roman Christians has a text. Paul is quoting from the prophet Habakkuk. "The just shall live by his faith" (Hab 2.4). Or, as the Greek unfolds, and as I have just quoted, "The one who is just, on the principle of faith shall live." This text also finds its way into Paul's composite Letter to the Galatians in Gal 3.11, with a slightly different stress: "The righteous man shall live by means of faith." And, the unknown author of the circular Letter to the Hebrew Christians in Heb 10.38 also quotes from the prophet: "Now, my righteous person shall live by faith" and as we can appreciate it takes on again a more significantly intense variation of the passage. Slight differences, but a striking affirmation nevertheless.

In Romans the holy Spirit has emphasised the first two words, the just. In Galatians, the Spirit has emphasised the second two, shall live. The Ruach HaKodesh in Hebrews emphasises the last two, by faith. Did you take notice of the fact that Paul in Romans stresses an essential sequence which categorises the daily Christian walk?

First, justification. Secondly, faith. Thirdly, life. And this Pauline expression concerning eternal life (and its constituents) follows through in Romans, Galatians and in the unknown author who penned Hebrews.

So, in the start of our research into Romans we have discovered that the letter has a text: Habakkuk 2.4.

The letter also has a theme. "I am not ashamed of the Gospel of the Messiah" (Romans 1.16).

Alva McClain speaks of this sequence when he states, "Around these two things, the text and the theme, the [letter] is written, and [his] exposition will unfold from these two focal points" (Romans: The Gospel of God's Grace, 1973, 16).

Paul is peculiarly single-minded in the aim and intention of his letter to the Christians in Rome. Recall that he is not writing to an ekklesia. He is penning his communication to Christians known to each other, and who form a loose communal-association. But it is in no way an organised community or assembly. Peter did not found the so-called Roman church! It was not as yet established as Paul admits in his letter, and it is Paul who desires to establish the community in an organisational sense as dictated to by the Ruach HaKodesh with apostles, prophets, teachers, etc (Romans 1.11).  Note again what he wrote in his conclusion in Romans 16.25: "Now to him who is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Yeshua the Messiah...."

So the great apostle is set to reach Rome in person, but first has taken occasion to communicate with them. But in so doing he inadvertently alerts Caesar to them by including in his letter the identities of those prominent believers in the Roman city. This, with a little thought, was not one of his most remarkable, intelligent moments. Even John, writing to Christians about the same time-frame, confided "I had many things to write but I will not with ink and pen write unto you: But I trust I shall shortly see you, and shall speak face to face. Shalom be to you. Our friends salute you. Greet the friends by name" (3 John 13,14).

John was, as usual, more circumspect than was a rather impulsively headstrong and in some ways , naive , Paul. The shadow of impending persecution hung heavily in the air. This intensified as the Jews began to clamour for a severance of the Jewish province from the Pax Romana.

As I pointed out in the last lecture, Paul was viewed as a "pestilent revolutionary" and a "mover of sedition among the Jews" being a "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes" (Acts 24.5) who in his opening announcement in his Letter to the Roman Christians had all but stated that Nero was no longer qualified to rule the Roman empire. There was only one Emperor and that was the Jewish Messiah, Yeshua. And, Paul was not alone in his assessment of Yeshua as the emperor of the world. His view was quickly adopted by the priestly John and in his Apocalypse Yeshua is called emperor or "King of kings" which is what an emperor actually is! This expression is repeated in the Pauline communication to his disciple Timothy (1 Timothy 6.15).

Needless to say, the Roman authorities were on constant alert, especially during this period of instability and Jewish agitation, for any communiques that made reference to this new "superstition" regarding a new emperor emanating from the vicinity of Jerusalem (cf Acts 17.6,7). The Romans considered the Messianists as intent on overthrowing the ordered system of things (Acts 17.6) with their proclamation (kerygma) that the newly appointed Jewish emperor would soon reappear and bring with him a New World Order. They insisted that it was high time allegiance was transferred from the Imperial Cult of emperor worship to that of the rightful emperor the resurrected Davidic Pretender, Yeshua the Nazarene. As expected, the Romans were prompt to curtail such matters where they located them with the use of immediate swift and violent measures.

COULD YOU IDENTIFY THE ORIGINAL CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY?

When I was attached to the world's largest missionary radio organisation, taking "Christ to the World by Radio," I had the privilege of visiting with many churches and denominations raising finance for missionary endeavours. I was their "token Jew." In any event, on one such occasion I was scheduled to preach in an Anglican church in an "outback" town in NSW. Over the ensuing week I was invited to an interdenominational Bible Study which was overseen by a lay preacher from the local Baptists. About fifty people were in attendance, mostly young folk. This for a country town was especially remarkable, as far as interested Christian numbers are concerned. Still, the point to which I am leading is that the subject matter that evening revolved around the rise of the early church as recounted by Luke in the Acts. Skillfully, the lay preacher manipulated his audience with a step-by-step correlation of similarities between the congregations of the first century and those of today's age. Bottom line: the churches of the late Second Temple period were united in doctrine, Sunday observant in commemoration of the Lord's Sunday resurrection, with a wonderful exulting appreciation of "special Christian days" such as Xmas, Easter, and other special significant periods in the "sacred Christian calendar."

I was especially mortified. None of this was true, yet all those gathered in that place were enthusiastic about his deliverance and powerful analysis of Scripture. That his delivery was filled with blatant distortions and traditional Christian drivel, and potted here and there with what I would call "religious sentimental slobberdrool" escaped them all. But I was not there to differ in my opinions , even if based upon historic facts , with these sincere people, but to raise finance for the furtherance of Christian radio ministry to the "lost and unsaved."

The truth is Paul was called a ringleader of the Nazarenes. The Nazarenes were the first Christian believers, and Christians today in Arabic-speaking populations around the Near East (and Middle East) are still referred to by this appellation. Today, however, the universal Christian church is entirely unrelated to any identification with the original Nazarenes.

What do scholars share with us concerning the Nazarenes, with whom Paul was attached? It is a sad fact that very early ecclesiastical history is basically ignored in modern church history exploration.

To begin with Dr Jesse Lyman Hurlbut (1843-1930), an American Methodist Episcopal minister, in his The Story of the Christian Church (1918) tells his readers accurately:

"We name the last generation of the first century, from 68 to 100 AD, 'The Age of Shadows.'... For fifty years after St. Paul's life, a curtain hangs over the church, through which we strive vainly to look; and when at last it rises about 120 AD with the writings of the earliest church fathers, we find a church in many aspects very different from that in the days of St. Peter and St. Paul" (42. Emphasis mine).

We are reliably informed by Edward Gibbon in the fifteenth chapter of his The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that there was indeed "a dark cloud" that hung over the original church age. In his own words, "The scanty and suspicious materials of ecclesiastical history seldom enable us to dispel the dark cloud that hangs over the first age of the church" (Decline and Fall Vol. II.,93 The Folio Society 1984 edition).

Gibbon continues with a short version of what he understood about the Nazarenes. "The Jewish converts, or, as they were afterwards called, the Nazarenes, who had laid the foundations of the church, soon found themselves overwhelmed by the increasing multitudes that from all the various religions of polytheism enlisted under the banner of Christ: and the Gentiles, who, with the approbation of their peculiar apostle, had rejected the intolerable weight of Mosaic ceremonies, at length refused to their more scrupulous brethren the same toleration which at first they had humbly solicited for their own practice. The ruin of the temple, of the city [of Jerusalem], and of the public religion of the Jews, was severely felt by the Nazarenes; as in their manners, though not in their faith, they maintained so intimate a connection with their impious countrymen, whose misfortunes were attributed by the Pagans to the contempt, and more justly ascribed by the Christians to the wrath, of the Supreme Deity. The Nazarenes retired from the ruins of Jerusalem to the little town of Pella beyond the Jordan, where that ancient church languished above sixty years in solitude and obscurity."

At this juncture in his retelling of the largely correct account of the Nazarenes, Gibbon speaks about Hadrian (more correctly, Adrian) and his erection of the new city named after him that grew out of the ruins of Jerusalem. Rapidly he mentions in passing the second (really, the third) revolt of the Jews against Rome (132-135 CE) under the false Messiah Bar Kokhba and the subsequent forced distancing of the Jews from the city under penalty of instant death before taking up again his account of the Nazarenes.

"The Nazarenes had only one way left to escape the common proscription, and the force of truth was on this occasion assisted by the influence of temporal advantages. They elected Marcus for their bishop, a prelate of the race of the Gentiles, and most probably a native either of Italy or of some of the Latin provinces. At his persuasion the most considerable part of the congregation renounced the Mosaic law, in the practice of which they had persevered above a century. By this sacrifice of their habits and prejudices they purchased a free admission into the colony of Hadrian" , the new city erected by Hadrian above the ruins of Jerusalem, Aelia Capitolina, which was a combination of his name (Publius Aelius Hadrianus) and that of his god Jupiter Capitolinus ,  "and more firmly cemented their union with the [primitive] Catholic church" (emphasis mine).

Gibbon is right in his assessment that the Nazarenes were the original Jewish Christians, an item essentially ignored by Christian historians, and that the Catholic church was an aberrant sect that early apostated from the ekklesia which Yeshua built. "I will build my ekklesia," stated Christ. "And the Gates of Hades [Sheol] will not prevail against it!"  (Matthew 16.18).

One of my mentors, Dr Ken Chant, wrote years ago concerning the ekklesia, or community of Christ, that this spiritual dominion is the toughest establishment on earth! For, in it "the insecure find unshakeable security, the weak find invincible strength, the nameless find a divine identity, the lonely find unfailing fellowship, the dying find imperishable life, the disgraced find endless glory, and the separated find unbroken union with Christ."

What Edward Gibbon unearthed was an admission that the original community of Messiah was a commandment-keeping band of disciples who maintained allegiance to God's expectations of them. While they actually rejected the rituals, ceremonies and sacrificial cultus of the Mosaic Torah they retained a firm belief in Yeshua as Lord and Saviour, and they kept up an observance of the seventh-day Sabbath and (due to their northern hemisphere location) the annual festivals. The majority of the Nazarenes, however, desired to return to Jerusalem and as Gibbon informs us, they did so in their election of a Latin bishop. In other words they compromised with the world. Hadrian (Adrian) had prohibited any public assemblies where instruction on Torah observance was taking place, and along with these prohibitions threatened even human life if Sabbath observance was found to be maintained (S.W. Barron, Social and Religious History of the Jews, 1952, Vol.2, 107). The Gentile Marcus Christianised the heathen Sunday and railed against what was termed "Jewish legalism." In other words he promulgated modern "Christian" doctrine draped in second century CE regalia.

Despite the tight noose being placed around the necks of the obedient, a small disadvantaged group made the decision to stand firm in their obedience to the Messiah rather than to go in with the expectations of the Roman state! And God protected them. However, retaining their identity as Nazarenes these became known among the new Catholics as schismatics and heretics. This was an anticipated reaction to anything and everything considered "Jewish" in the Roman world. After all, Romans had become vehemently disaffected toward Jews after the third insurrection. First they put down the 66-73 CE revolt, followed by another in a variety of Mediterranean countries and throughout Mesopotamia, that was launched in 119 CE. Not learning their lesson the Jews again revolted under Bar Kokhba in 132 CE. That was the last straw! From then on any who identified with the Jews, or observed the seventh-day Sabbath, were either killed by the State or exiled across its borders into pagan "barbaric" regions in the East. It was during this time that the Catholic church distanced itself from the traditional 14th Nisan Passover observance by introducing the Sunday Passover celebration which would later be called Easter.

This is known in church history as the "Quartodeciman Controversy" , those Christians (Nazarenes) who refused to adopt the new Sunday observance for the Passover maintaining the tradition of the 14th Nisan "Lord's Passover" celebration were labeled "Quartdecimans" (which is Latin for 14th). Most of the Nazarenes by that time were centred in Asia Minor. It was in Asia Minor that the priestly John was headquartered, and where we locate the seven assemblies of Roman Proconsular Asia to which congregations John specifically wrote (Rev 2 & 3). Irenaeus (late 2nd century) informs us that one of the overseers of the ekklesia in Smyrna was a pastor named Polycarp.

"Polycarp... was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna... always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time" (Irenaeus, Adversus Haeres, III, 4, 3; 3, 4).

Likewise ecclesiastical historian Eusebius reliably stated: "...the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour's Passover" (Eusebius, Ecc. Hist., V, XX111, 1).

In the Life of Polycarp (also referred to as the Medicean Manuscript only a single mutilated Greek copy of which exists) , an early spurious work of unknown origin , carries within its pages a number of ancient traditions. Notice its admissions:

"In the days of unleavened bread Paul, coming down from Galatia, arrived in Asia, considering the repose among the faithful in Smyrna to be a great refreshment in Christ Jesus after his severe toil, and intending afterwards to depart to Jerusalem. So in Smyrna he went to visit Strataeas, who had been his hearer in Pamphylia, being a son of Eunice the daughter of Lois. These are they of whom he makes mention when writing to Timothy, saying; Of the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois and in thy mother Eunice; whence we find that Strataeas was a brother of Timothy. Paul then, entering his house and gathering together the faithful there, speaks to them concerning the Passover and the Pentecost, reminding them of the New Covenant of the offering of bread and the cup; how that they ought most assuredly to celebrate it during the days of unleavened bread, but to hold fast the new mystery of the Passion and Resurrection. For here the Apostle plainly teaches that we ought neither to keep it outside the season of unleavened bread, as the heretics do, especially the Phrygians..." (Pionius, Life of Polycarp, 11).

This ancient document, even though thought to be spurious, makes mention of Paul stressing that the blood and unleavened bread of the New Covenant celebration of the Lord's Passover was to be taken during the days of unleavened bread at the Passover , a once a year celebration! Moreover, the Catholic Irenaeus spells out the stand which Polycarp took against the bishop (overseer) of Rome.

"And when the blessed Polycarp was sojourning in Rome in the time of Anicetus, although a slight controversy had arisen among them as to certain other points... For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp to forego the observance [on the 14th Nisan], inasmuch as these things had been always observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant; nor, on the other hand, could Polycarp succeed in persuading Anicetus to keep [the 14th Nisan], for he maintained that he was bound to adhere to the usage of the presbyters who preceded him. And in this state of affairs they held fellowship with each other; and Anicetus conceded to Polycarp in the Church the celebration of the Eucharist, by way of showing him respect; so that they parted in peace one from the other, maintaining peace with the whole Church, both those who did observe [this custom] and those who did not" (Irenaeus, Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus, ANF, Vol. 1).

A 15th century CE Jewish historian admits that Polycarp was in actual fact a Nazarene (David Hoffman, Chronicles from Cartaphilus: The Wandering Jew, 1853, 636. Digitised 2007).

The beginnings of authentic Christian history have been focused, not on the Nazarenes, but on the Gentile churches of Greek/Roman, Coptic and Assyrian/Syriac origin. As we should already realise, the various accounts of the Nazarenes are more often than not penned by their Christian enemies , enemies of the true Gospel and enemies of anything and everything labeled as "Jewish." Reinforcing our understanding, Hurlbut adds this intriguing momento about the Nazarenes (and other so-called "heresies"):

"With regard to these sects and so called heresies, one difficulty in understanding them arises from the fact that (except with the Montanists, and even there in large measure), their own writings have perished, and we are dependent for our views upon those who wrote against them, and were undoubtedly prejudiced. Suppose, for example, that the Methodists as a denomination had passed out of existence with all their literature; and a thousand years afterward, scholars should attempt to ascertain their teachings out of the books and pamphlets written against John Wesley in the 18th century, what wrong conclusions would be reached, and what a distorted portrait of Methodism would be presented" (Dr Jesse Hurlbut, The Story of the Christian Church, 1918, 66).

Yet this is precisely what occurred in respect of the Nazarenes! It is to these commandment-keeping people of God that we should be looking in recognising that association of Messianic believers, called Nazarenes, to be the foundation of the ecclesiastical power which Christ himself established in the Second Temple period TO BE THE FOUNDATION upon which his authentic nucleus of the Kingdom of God would be constructed, grow and thrive. It is to these people alone that we ought to give hearty recognition, and not as so many Christian scholars have mistakenly ingratiated, to Greek and Roman apostates. The Nazarenes remain the earliest documented Christian/Messianic organism that was produced in the Second Temple period.

B.G. Wilkinson in his Truth Triumphant (1944) shares with his readers that the Nazarenes were also known as "Beni-Israel" or sons of Israel, and also "Messiahans" (chapter 4, page 43) thus linking them to the Second Temple volatile Jewish revolutionary movement. Of course, as I have previously pointed out in other lectures over the decades, the Messianists (Christians) were in a providential alignment with the Zealot movement (as the military arm of the Qumran sectarians) and what actually bound the Zealots and the Nazarenes together was the fact that Rome was the prophesied EndTime Edomite power hostile to God!

We are told by Hugh Schonfield, "The Emperor Claudius (AD 41- 54) actually wrote to the Jews of Alexandria warning them not to entertain itinerant Jews from the province of Syria (of which Judaea was a part) if they did not wish to be treated as abettors of 'a pest which threatens the whole world' (i.e., the Roman Empire)." [Letter of Claudius to the Alexandrians.] "He ordered the expulsion of foreign Jews from Rome 'who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus' (i.e., engaging in messianic agitation)" [Suetonius, Claudius XXV; Dio Cassius, lx. 6; cf Acts 18.2]

All of this historical reconstruction of early Christianity, in our rejection of "Athens" and more appropriate refocused attention on "Jerusalem," allows us to more properly grasp why it was that in Thessalonica the local Jews pleaded with the magistrates to take legal actions to prevent Christians from making inroads into their city primarily due to the fact that "these subverters of the Empire have now reached here... and they are all actively opposed to the Imperial decrees, saying there is another Emperor, one Yeshua" (Acts 17.6,7).

NAZARENES PREDATED CHRIST... AND NAZARETH

For decades we have been virtually alone in our argument that the town or city or village of Nazareth did not exist until centuries AFTER the earthly life of Yeshua. This is because scholars had to scramble to locate a town by that name in order to link the appellation Nazarene to a place rather than to an order or religious establishment. Centuries after the crucifixion and resurrection, Catholic scholars imposed on an isolated unimpressive and obscure village the name of "Nazareth." Greek texts in the Gospels which mention Nazareth as Yeshua's home or place of residence are garbled and ought to be translated more properly as Nazarene/Nazarenes according to context (See Glenys Evelyn Gosling, Messiah's Mum, 2009, 105,106).

It would surprise myriads of Bible students (and their church scholars) to learn that Nazoreans (Nazarenes) was a sectarian term of which the Hebrew is notsrim and unconnected to the mythical Nazareth. Equally, in my opinion, the appellation in association with nezer (branch/Branch) from the roots of Jesse should be jettisoned (Isaiah 11.1). Jewish rabbis readily grasp that notsrim signifies "those who keep" or "those who preserve." In other words they keep and preserve the secret Name of God and The Way of God , the expectations of God for His people. The Notsrim relished receiving enlightenment and keeping those things committed in secret to them. This involved the correct interpretation of sacred texts, and the proper methodology to be exercised in the day-to-day applications of commandments.

Listen! The pre-Christian sect of Nazareans (Aramaic Natsaraya) which is described by Epiphanius in the Panarion are spoken of as continuing to exist in his day (late 4th century). Surprisingly, the Mandaeans (the baptising sect) in Syria and lower Euphrates are non-Christian and disciples of Yochanan the Immerser whom they firmly believe was, and is, the Messiah. They promulgated this view early in the days of the priestly John (John the apostle or emissary of Christ) and he vehemently rejected both their beliefs and their messianic stand regarding the baptiser (John 1).

What this reveals is that both the disciples of Yochanan the Immerser and the followers of Yeshua were known as Nazoreans. They were differentiated only by their specific identity to whom they granted their Messianic allegiance. The first chapter of John's Gospel allows us traces of the antagonism that aggressively emanated from the author toward the disciples of the baptiser. For those who have shown an interest in an alternative history of the early Christian community, and have questioned the origins of The Clementine Recognitions let me just say that it is my opinion that this ms has survived as an authentic Nazorean document.

Again, Schonfield assures us that "it is clear from the Christian records that the Nazoreans had established in Jerusalem a Council for the government of all the followers of Jesus, which was in fact an opposition Sanhedrin, consisting of the Apostles and Elders under the presidency of James [the brother of Jesus]. The Nazoreans saw themselves as loyal Israel which gave allegiance to Jesus as the rightful Jewish king. They were therefore justified, pending the return of Jesus to take the throne, to create a government exercising supreme authority and jurisdiction over all believers at home and abroad. Thus the Council had a political as well as spiritual significance, being set up in express rejection of the governmental body which had taken action against Jesus and which owned Caesar as lord. The appointment of James to the presidency had been in no small measure a political appointment, since he was of the blood royal and brother next in age of the absent monarch. This explains why he rather than Peter had been chosen" (Hugh Schonfield, Those Incredible Christians, 1968, 112f).

This is the only way we can make sense of the apparent necessity for the successors of James , as president over the Nazorean ekklesia , to have been actual blood relatives of Yeshua, the Nazorean King of the Jews and Emperor of the world.

Schonfield adds, "From what we learn of the Nazorean Sanhedrin it was similarly constructed [on the Sadducean Sanhedrin model] and had similar functions. The ruling body consisted of seventy Elders. It is said that Jesus appointed these after the twelve Apostles; but in the actual Council it would seem that the twelve were part of the seventy, or at any rate also ranked as Elders, though they formed the inner cabinet. In the same way as the president of the Sanhedrin was the high priest, so James, according to tradition, was invested with the high priestly office, and had Peter and John as his deputies, the three constituting 'the pillars' referred to by Paul in Galatians. Later Nazorean records style James 'the supreme Overseer, who rules Jerusalem, the holy Community of the Hebrews, and the communities everywhere excellently founded by the providence of God.' [Epistle of Clement to James, prefacing the Clementine Homilies.] He was of the line of David, being the son of Joseph, 'and moreover we have found that he officiated after the manner of the ancient priesthood... Furthermore, he was empowered to wear upon his head the high priestly diadem.' [Epiphanius, Panarion, lxxviii,]

When we read the normative church history, particularly that with which we have all been groomed, namely the contents of elements, events and personalities constellating around a 'western' orientation, we are ever only invited into the inner sanctums of Athens and Rome and Constantinople. But here and there in that same history we occasionally find an eastern invasion with its accompanied shock value of new ideas and radical stances usually labeled as Jewish legalism as surges of heresy from the outer fringes of "the geographical wild" and especially the Balkans. But it is precisely with this sporadic movement that we should all be open in gaining a more appreciable balance in the story of the "church" (if we are compelled to use that term).

I have included in this essay the valuable contributions made by Dr Hugh Schonfield.  I have done so purposely, though he has been viewed by the Christian church with immense disfavour and contempt. But in his own words, and relative to this series:

"Gentile Christianity has been intelligibly enough preoccupied with its own rise to power and influence, and in the first flush of that power it sought by anathema, suppression and wholesale destruction of documents to overthrow the witness of Jewish Christianity. If there was a death at all, which there is good cause to doubt, it was not a natural one; it was matricide. Far from becoming a futile anachronism its spirit and human activity has persisted until the present day, and is even now undergoing a revival on a scale unknown since apostolic times. Jewish Christianity has always existed to supply that of which the Church has stood in need , the Messianic vision" (Hugh Schonfield, The History of Jewish Christianity from the First to the Twentieth Century, 1936, 5).

The Messianic Vision indeed! The BRI/IMCF stands in that unique tradition bequeathed to us from the Nazarene assemblies of the Second Temple Period. And it takes enormous FAITH to stand.

IN THE MEANTIME"¦ BACK TO PAUL
                                                                                                                                         
Paul wrote to the Corinthian Greeks, "Be constantly alert! Stand firm in the Faith. Keep on being courageous and strong" (1 Cor 16.13).

One cannot be firm in THE faith unless they are already firm in their own personal faith. Actually, this text in accordance with some ancient mss, can be translated either "the Faith" or simply "your faith" and some versions have adequately followed this rule of translation in accordance with mss numbers, by following the latter.

It is written: "The just shall live by his faith" (Hab 2.4).

It is a fact of history that when Paul wrote his introduction to Romans, and spoke of faith, quoting the prophet Habakkuk, there existed a Roman goddess of faith. In fact she was actually called "Faith." (Fides in Latin is the English equivalent, Faith). As in the days of Paul, so in our EndTime period now. There are myriads who claim to follow Christ; myriads who pretend they have faith; myriads who call on the Name of the Lord, and to whom he responds... "I never knew you." The Lord does not respond, "I knew you once but you fell away." Or, "I know you a long time ago but you never measured up to my brilliant personal overcoming ability , and you never ever qualified!" Oh no! Rather Yeshua understands our fragility, our weaknesses, and our failures. But NONE of this is ever placed on the heavenly record book. None of it! So great a salvation is what Yeshua has provided for each and every one of his brothers and sisters.

Example: Peter was crossing the sea of Galil when the disciples in the boat saw the Lord Yeshua walking on the water. Peter cried out (impetuously as always): "Lord if this is you, tell me to come to you on the water." Peter leaped out of the boat and actually walked across the surface of the sea. Now listen! I don't know about any of you, but I have personally attempted on two occasions to walk on the water. Needless to say, I failed on both attempts! I have never tried to do so since. But for all his faults, he walked on the water. As soon as he became mentally aware of what it was he was accomplishing he started to sink , rapidly! He screamed into the gale: "Lord save me!" (Matthew 14.28-31).

Peter cracked under the immediate strain. How many of us have cracked under personal strain and natural anxiety? But Peter's discipleship did not end there. He went on to do great things for the Lord. And what happened to Peter? He repeatedly failed to measure up to the high calling of Anochi I-Source in "Messiah Yeshua" culminating in his personal rejection, and betrayal, of his loving and lovable Lord Yeshua (John 18).

After his betrayal of Yeshua as LORD he went on to great things in his personal outworking of the Gospel (Acts 3 entire chapter).

Where I am heading in this dissertation is that in Hebrews 11 , the FAITH chapter of the Word of God , we have a list of people who FAILED to measure up TO God's standards of holiness and character development. Read about their life stories. The chronologies of their life are all about how they failed to measure up to the expectations of God. Yet NONE OF THESE FAILURES are ever mentioned in Hebrews 11. They are ALL called men and women of FAITH.

Anochi I-Source is keeping track, not of our personal failures in measuring up to the high calling of God in Messiah Yeshua, but only of our victories of faith. The Lord does not look at our isolated failures but at our overall picture of our developing faith.

This is known as GRACE, not mercy.

"The just shall live by faith." Habakkuk stated it first, and the apostle Paul repeated it in various forms. Others followed him in his free interpretations. Paul, in this letter, uses an expression directly based upon the Habakkuk passage. He says, "from faith to faith." The NIV (which I usually call the "Non Inspired Version") speaks of this phrase as meaning "faith from first to last." But is this a correct interpretation? Consider scholar N.T. Wright's slant on this passage:

"...its most natural meaning is 'from God's faithfulness to human faithfulness.' When God's action in fulfillment of the covenant if unveiled, it is because God is faithful to what has been promised; when it is received, it is received by that human faith that answers to the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, that human faith that is also faithfulness to the call of God in Jesus the Messiah" (N.T. Wright, Romans, NIB Vol. X., 2002, 425).

In other words, writes Jason Overman, in From Faith to Faith, "God's own faithfulness is in view with the first of Paul's faiths. This is a progression 'from [God's] faith, to [our] faith.' Notably, Paul's next reference to faith in Romans is of 'the faith of God' (Romans 3:3 KJV). Paul asks rhetorically, 'Does the unbelief, or faithlessness, of the Jews nullify God's faithfulness?' Paul adamantly replies: God forbid! Human beings as Paul has already concluded in chapter 1 , and even God's own people, Israel (in chapter 2) , are fundamentally faithless because of sin.

"What then is to become of us? The good news of the Gospel is that God's faith can be counted on. He acts. And it is exactly his faithfulness that is at work to save in the 'faith of Jesus Christ' (vs. 21-26).

"This viewpoint highlights a little-appreciated fact about the Greek word pistis. Both faith (trust) and faithfulness (trustworthiness) are within its semantic range. It is like two sides of a coin: The thing trusted in must itself first be trustworthy. Of course, God's faith does not indicate His trust in us but rather His trustworthiness. And our faith indicates empty-handed trust in Him, as well as that faithfulness that follows from being in relationship with Him" (Jason Overman, From Faith to Faith, 2016).

Overman then adds a thought with which I am in total agreement. "The 'faith of God' is prior to all. It is the fundamental faithfulness that undergirds the covenant and creation itself... But the revelation of God's righteousness is not just personal but cosmic. The prophet Isaiah virtually equates God's righteousness with His salvation, which will act for the whole world. 'Thus says the Lord: Keep justice, and do righteousness, for my salvation is about to come, and my righteousness to be revealed' (Isaiah 56:1; cf. Psalm 98:2,3)."

In his recognition that Isaiah "virtually equates God's righteousness with His salvation" Overman is very close to acknowledging a universal salvation in Christ. For in Jewish thoughtform God's "justice" or "righteousness" is to be equated entirely with "salvation." For, God by Nature and in His essential character IS salvation: His will is nothing less than Salvific. And, with the exercise of a little thought, God would not be God were He not salvific.

Moreover, Our Lord Yeshua , as the unknown author of Hebrews knew, and as Paul knew, and the Nazarenes were well aware , Yeshua is not only the author of our faith (Hebrews 12.2) but the finisher of our faith as well (same verse). I might add, Yeshua is the finisher of faith itself. Yeshua the Messiah was entirely faithful in his whole life's journey with humankind , he was faithful to men and to God. Indeed, Yeshua as God incarnate revealed God's faithfulness toward the pinnacle of His creative activity, Man as the destined IMAGE of Deity.

But even more than this, which is awesome enough in itself, Yeshua as REPRESENTATIVE MAN reveals in his Self-revelation and Self-expression the altogether faithful response of humanity toward God. For ALL humanity, and ALL of creation, are to be found IN the Messiah. This is what Catholic theologian Hans Kung and Lutheran theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg have especially attempted to stress, in the Pauline tradition, and which churches and their attendants have utterly failed to grasp.

In any event, if we are not of faith we are apart from God. That is why it is the faith of Christ that saves us. And as such when Paul uses the expression from "faith to faith" is it obvious that he does not intend our own progression in faith, our own advance in faith , as hapless in faith as we really are , but that Christ's faith supplements our own, embraces it, swallows it up, and proclaims it in the heavenlies to be victorious.

And it is THAT faith which was so evidently expressed by the original Nazarene Community of Faith and which brought it into a terrible collision with the apostate Christians of the third and fourth centuries and which faith Catholic Rome tried desperately to destroy.

We will return to the Letter of Paul to the Roman Christians and the alternative history of the Christian Church shortly.

THIS CONCLUDES LECTURE SIX

Additional Notes on Romans Lecture: Questions of Faith and Faithfulness.

Text: Habakkuk 2.4
Theme: "I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Messiah" (Romans 1.16).

Paul's political and psychological description is found in Acts 24.5: "pestilent revolutionary," "mover of sedition among the Jews," and "ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes."

Gentile History of the first 200 years of the Christian Church:
Church founded , chief document, the Lukan Acts.
Darkness descends on church, circa 66 CE.
Dark cloud rises circa 120 CE with the first writings of the Gentile Church "Fathers."

Alternative History of the first two centuries of the "Church":
Messianic Movement begins with Yochanan the Immerser and his cousin Yeshua.
Essene Nazarenes (predating Christianity) constitute first Christians.
"Christians" first called as such is an intended repugnant appellation originating in Antioch in Syria.
Simon Magus, a follower of Yochanan the Immerser, apostates and establishes a counterfeit Christian movement.
Destruction of Jerusalem 70 CE.
Nazarenes flee to Pella and surrounding mountainous districts.
Anti-Jewish polemics emanate from Rome after three abortive revolutionary attempts, viz., [1] 66-73 CE, [2] 119 CE, [3] 132-135 CE.
Enormous persecutions of Christians (particularly Jewish believers) to the 4th century and beyond.
Nazarene texts destroyed.
Clementine Homilies and Clementine Recognitions, as Nazarene documents, survive.
Nazarenes flee borders of Roman empire into Parthia and the Balkans and from thence into Europe.
Original Jewish Christianity resurfaces through every century (4th , 21st) in the West.

On the Issue of Salvation by Faith
We are saved, not according to our faith of and by itself, but the faith of the Messiah Yeshua which was, is and will remain perfectly steadfast on our behalf. While it is the faith of God imputed to us, we are nevertheless saved entirely, wholly and only by HIS faith.
-- Les Aron Gosling

Have you been spiritually edified with this lecture? Would you like to know more about the biblical revelation from such a unique perspective? Our private BRI/IMCF International Internet Yeshiva Members Forum has hundreds of in-depth lectures available for those who subscribe to the IMCF. Membership is entirely by donation and Messianic Enterprises has provided a PIN PAYMENT icon for your convenience which you can access on the front page of the public BRI/IMCF site at:

http://www.biblicalresearchinstitute.com.au/

Just depress the Pay Now icon and within days your request for International Messianic Community of Faith (IMCF) membership will be acknowledged.

Thank you for becoming supportive of this growing unique Work of God and for allowing us to serve you in this manner.