Dear Pastor:

While I can see you are certainly zealous for Jesus, it is obvious you don't understand what "Messianic Judaism" is all about. Therefore, I feel this is the perfect opportunity to clarify a few things.

Getting right to the heart of the matter, Yeshua (whom Christians call Jesus) was our FINAL SIN SACRIFICE who nailed to the cross the requirement to kill an innocent animal to atone for our sins; nothing more, nothing less. While He definitely was "God Incarnate" He did not come to replace YHWH (Yahweh) the Father or to abolish Torah (YHWH's original divine teachings). God's covenants changed over the years but Torah did not. The seventh day Sabbath which our Creator Himself instituted and observed and which He said would last FOREVER, didn't change just because Yeshua died. The Biblical Feasts which all foreshadow Yeshua weren't negated just because Yeshua died. Pork and shellfish didn't automatically become "clean" foods, just because Yeshua died. This type of thinking is the result of the much mistranslated and misunderstood writings of Paul.

By the way, I use the letters "YHWH" when referencing our Creator because that is His Name as transliterated from Hebrew: = Yud-Hey-Vav-Hey = YHWH, pronounced Yahweh). The letters were inspired by the Ruach haKodesh (Holy Spirit) to appear nearly 7,000 times in the Tanakh (Old Testament), yet the Name is nowhere to be found in our English versions except where it appears in an abbreviated form at the end of the word "Halleluyah." English translators were guilty of adding to our Creator's Word by replacing His personal Name with the capital letters LORD, GOD and the hybrid "Jehovah".

Belief in Yeshua means salvation/eternal life. It is the ONLY way to be saved. But that in no way negates the need for Torah, which is our ONLY blueprint for moral living. The Bible tells us that anyone who wants to follow the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is to be Torah observant:

Numbers 15: 13 "'Everyone who is native-born must do these things in this way when he brings an offering made by fire as an aroma pleasing to the LORD. 14 For the generations to come, whenever an alien or anyone else living among you presents an offering made by fire as an aroma pleasing to the LORD, he must do exactly as you do. 15 The community is to have the same rules for you and for the alien living among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the alien shall be the same before the LORD: 16 The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the alien living among you.'"

You said in your e-mail that you consider the NT "first". My question is: If the NT was "first" then why are the OT and the Prophets quoted throughout the NT and not the other way around? We cannot know what a story is about by reading the last half of the book; we must read and understand it beginning at Page 1. God outlined in the "first half of the Bible" who He was, how He wants to be worshipped, what days HE considers holy and demands that we keep, and even what He does and does not want us to eat. Those things didn't change just because Jesus died.

Pastor's comment: There is the Yahwist tradition, the Elohist tradition, the Deuteronomist tradition, and the Priestly tradition within the Torah. In addition, there is the religious cross-fertilization between the Hebrew religion and the Canaanites, Egyptians, Midianites and Persians.

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Your assertion is a popular theory, but completely anti-Scripture. The Bible tells us the text is YHWH-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).

(NOTE: The pastor's thought comes straight from Catholic, Jesuit, Oxford and Harvard sources. Humanism 101.)

Pastor's comment: Most notably, El is the Canaanite High God that Abraham acknowledged as the one God of all in his encounter with Melchizedek. All of these influences, even from well beyond the time of Moses, played a part in the shaping of the Torah. It appears to me that you have a double standard by applying historical critical and source critical methods to the New Testament, but not to the Torah.

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Most Torah observant believers in Messiah Yeshua tend to look at Scripture as a whole continuum. YHWH revealed His Word in a Semitic framework that uses El. He chose to allow El as a title for Himself. He said, "I am El Shaddai, walk with me…." I will not argue this point with you, nor will I turn around and condone the use of the term "Lord" which - truth be told - YHWH never authorized as a substitute. Replacement is forbidden (Joshua 23:7, Isaiah 42:8-9, and 300 others....)

Some afterthoughts: I wonder if all Lutheran pastors teach that Abraham worshipped a Canaanite deity, and if their Jesus was a product of a pagan deity? Most people know the title El was used in pagan cultures. The Canaanites were polytheists, so they would have picked up every deity they could....Avraham's hometown was called Ur in Chaldea (the secular Ebla tablets of Syria confirm the account of Genesis 11:31). The Ebla tablets demonstrated that the name of YHWH was known during the time of Avraham, and there were a large number of other names in these tablets that are found in Torah.

The fact that this pastor alleges that Abraham worshipped a "Canaanite High God" is not just wickedness, but bad theology! Paul says in Galatians 3:16: "Now the promises were made to Awraham and to his seed as a covenant. He did not say seeds, as of many, but seed, as of one, that is Mashiyach." This pastor is in fact teaching a wicked heresy that Mashiyach is a product of a Canaanite pagan deity and, in all honesty, one wonders how the Lutheran Church can keep him in good standing because, judging from our research, the Lutherans, as part of their Trinity, believe that Mashiyach came from YHWH, the One True Creator.

Pastor's comment: In discussing the Holy Trinity of God, I was surprised that you do not accept this belief, since it is so intimately connected to Jesus as a Messiah who is God incarnate -- the perfect one whose sacrificial life merited for all creation an everlasting salvation. But then, I discovered that you do note accept the Messiah, Jesus, as the divinely incarnate Savior proclaimed by the New Testament and the Christian Faith. I was further surprised at your unfamiliarity with Matthew 28: "Therefore go and make disciples... baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit..."

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Actually, we DO believe that Yeshua is YHWH in the flesh. (We call our Savior "Yeshua" because that was His given, Hebrew Name - a name that actually has a meaning: "YHWH is Salvation" while "Jesus" is just a name the world gave Him which has no meaning, whatsoever. People even use it as a cussword….)

As for Matthew 28, while we are to be baptized "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," this doesn't automatically mean there is a "trinity" or "three separate personas" within God. You won't find the word "trinity" in the Bible - just like you won't find the word "rapture." These are concocted Christian terms, which means whoever concocted them was guilty of "adding to" the word of God!

YHWH has presented Himself not only in the form of Yeshua (an aspect of Himself to Whom He gave a Name), but also in the form of a burning bush, pillars of cloud and fire, "three persons" to Abraham at the Oaks of Mamre, and He's spoken through a donkey. To say He is a "trinity" is to severely limit Him! My assertion that there is no such thing as trinity is supported in a footnote from the Netzari Aramaic Interlinear by Andrew Gabriel Roth, which will be published in December 2007:

The Netzari Aramaic English Interlinear, by the way, is an English translation directly from the Aramaic of the oldest NT ever found, which some scholars have dated back to 120 AD.

Pastor's comment: The Council of Nicea only formalized this pre-existent theological understanding with a specific language and way of naming God that takes seriously the incarnational and tri-unifying theology of the New Testament.

Response from The Refiner's Fire: The Council of Nicea, as you know, was convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine, who placed "the Church Triumphant" over "Vanquished Israel" and made Christianity the official religion of the Empire to the exclusion of all other religions. Until that time, people were worshipping God according to how Yeshua, our Torah observant, seventh day Sabbath and Biblical Feast keeping JEWISH Messiah had taught them - the same Messiah who said He came NOT to abolish but to fulfill. "Fulfill" did not mean "put an end to" but rather, to establish or confirm….

After Constantine became emperor, the "Greek mindset" crept in to the Word and basically abolished the original teachings by removing anything "Jewish" and instead, pushing their own made-up "holy days" and even changing our Savior's Name, birthday, and dates of death and resurrection (ALL of which are clearly outlined in the Bible). Yeshua was foreshadowed throughout the Tanach (OT), especially in Isaiah 53 and all the Biblical Feasts, of which He has so far only fulfilled the first four (the next one will be what the church calls "rapture"). There are three more to go, yet "the church" pays no attention and instead insists on celebrating the pagan-filled "holy days" of Christmas and Easter - both of which perpetrate FALSE days of His birth and resurrection, and both of which are steeped in paganism. The last time I checked, lying, and "adding to or subtracting from" the Word was considered a sin.

Pastor's comment: When you said that "We don't have the cross," this cut me to the core since you profess to accept Jesus/Yeshua as the Messiah. You said that the only symbol that is sanctioned by God is the menorah, and that the Israeli star and the cross are of a lesser order. Then I said that the crucifixion of God the Son on the cross sanctified this symbol of death and made it the preeminent symbol of God's presence and life-transforming power. This is why the primary symbol in the New Testament is the cross.

Response from The Refiner's Fire: It's not that the cross is unimportant; it's that it's just another man-made symbol. The menorah is the only symbol YHWH designed Himself (Exodus 25:31-40) and Messianic believers don't look to the cross as anything to be idolized. I mean, why wear something around your neck that symbolizes the death of our Savior, a cruel way that MAN designed? A few years later, and He might have been executed via a noose strung across a tree, or in a gas chamber. Would Christians willingly wear those things on a chain around their necks?

As believers in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, we have to be VERY careful not to allow any kind of paganism into our worship. As a Christian, you are grafted in to the Olive Tree (Israel) and are therefore a part of Israel. God made His New Covenant with the Houses of Israel and Judah (not with Gentiles, Christians, Muslims or anybody else) - and He told Israel: "I give you good instruction: Do not forsake my Torah." (Proverbs 4:2).

Let me ask you something: If someone put some cow dung in your soup - even just a tiny little bit - would you be willing to eat it? Of course not! Then why are you willing to allow the smallest particle of paganism and/or false teachings to take root in your faith? How much paganism and false teaching is "okay"? Does anyone remember that YHWH used to put to death people who brought "strange/ unauthorized fire" to the altar (Leviticus 10:1; Numbers 3:4 and 26:61; 1 Peter 4:12)? The only reason we aren't being put to death today for shoving paganism down the throat of our Creator is because of the Final Sin Sacrifice of our Torah observant Jewish Messiah!

Pastor's comment: In our conversation, you dismissed some of the teachings of the Apostle Paul as simply unintelligible, because they appear to deemphasize the place of the Torah in faith and spiritual life. However, while Paul's overarching argument for the gospel of God's grace in/with/through Christ is nuanced, I am convinced that it is plainly intelligible. Paul essentially says the following: Salvation comes by God's grace in Christ through faith alone, not through observing religious laws and ordinances. Salvation cannot even be found through observing the Torah....

Response from The Refiner's Fire: I'd like to remind you that Paul also said in Romans 3:31: Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law... Please make sure and read the link about Paul and the Book of Romans as mentioned above.

Moving on with your comments, you said: The Torah does not come before the gospel. Why doesn't it? Torah is YHWH's ORIGINAL teaching and instruction - something Christians have deemed a "curse!" Torah was taught WAY before Yeshua was "born." Yeshua Himself taught Torah! He taught in synagogues; He kept all the Biblical Feasts; His day of rest was on the SEVENTH day….And what's more, NOWHERE does the Bible mention that these things were to change after His death! MAN changed YHWH's holy days and His Sabbath - and who does the Bible accuse of changing His appointed dates and times? The ANTICHRIST!

Matthew 5: 17 "Don't think that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete. 18 Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or stroke will pass from the Torah - not until everything that must happen has happened. 19 So whoever disobeys the least of these mitzvot (words/commands) and teaches others to do so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness is far greater than that of the Torah-teachers and P'rushim (prophets), you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Has everything happened that must happen? Have heaven and earth passed away yet? If not, then why is the Church ignoring Torah? How do the concepts of "complete or fulfill" equate to "abolished or done away with"? Especially since Yeshua was our Final SIN Sacrifice!

Pastor's comment: I overhead someone at the wedding talking about worshiping only on the traditional Sabbath of the Old/First Testament. They said that it is a trick of Satan that so many God-fearing people worship on Sunday and thereby break the commandment. I felt like I was in the Twilight Zone! Of course the traditional Sabbath is the last day of the week, but again, the resurrection of Christ sanctified the first day of the week as the new Sabbath, the day of the Lord, the day of new creation. Christians know full well that the traditional Sabbath was the seventh day of the week....

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Please read the following articles which explain that YHWH never changed His mind about the SEVENTH day, and which completely blows the Christian Sunday myth out of the water.

While we're on the subject, let me ask you: Did Paul say it is up to each of us to decide what we should eat and what day we should keep?

Romans 14: 5 One person considers some days more holy than others, while someone else regards them as being all alike. What is important is for each to be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes a day as special does so to honor the Lord. Also he who eats anything, eats to honor the Lord, since he gives thanks to God; likewise the abstainer abstains to honor the Lord, and he too gives thanks to God.

Answer: Absolutely not. The context of this passage was a dispute over whether one may eat food that MAY or MAY NOT have been offered to idols. In those days food that was offered to idols was usually put out for sale to people on a certain day of the week. It could or could not have been offered to idols. Therefore, some believers would not buy food and eat it on those days just to make sure. However, some believers did, because they reasoned that since they didn't know for sure it was offered, it was not wrong. Paul's instruction did not address either Kosher or Sabbath day observance. It addressed the dispute over whether marketplace food, because of idolatry, should be purchased and eaten on a certain day of the week. It also shows how sensitive the believers were to the possibility of food offered to idols. How much more sensitive should we be to what we eat, as to whether or not it is approved by the Word of God.

Please check out David H. Stern's explanation in the preface of his Complete Jewish Bible, where he demonstrates that there is a difference between what is kosher and what is ceremonially clean. God NEVER said pork, shellfish, etc. were food - people called it food in rebellion against God. Where the passages are in question in the Bri't Chadasha (NT), it is dealing with animals God gave us to eat and whether they are ceremonially clean and can be eaten at that time. Even in Peter's vision, he would never have eaten the kosher animals that had been in contact with treife (non-kosher) animals. The vision was to show that the kosher animals were no longer considered unclean because they were among the treife. This was clearly showing that the Gentiles were to be accepted and it would be okay to associate with them. The rest of the passage shows that this is the correct interpretation and what the vision was all about.

Pastor's comment: But after talking with you, I fear that you represent a neo-Judaizer movement that runs counter to the apostolic faith of Christ found in the New Testament. It is a return to religious legalism and spiritual bondage. Among other NT books, just read Galatians for goodness sake! In our discussion, you liked to quote to me Romans 11 about the Gentiles being grafted into the olive tree of Israel in order to say that the gospel of Jesus Christ is merely God's way of turning Gentiles into Torah observant Jews, but you forget the rest of Paul's arguments about the new universalized and spiritualized Israel of God and the new creation where there is no longer Jew or Gentile, etc.

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Neo-Judaizer movement? I consider that to be a very strong and anti-Semitic term, especially since Christians are guilty of having borrowed from the Jews the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and turned Him into someone unrecognizable. I'm sure you realize Luther was a Jew hater and anti-Semite, yet millions have chosen to follow him….

Last time I checked, YHWH didn't hand down two different sets of rules! If you believe that He did, then you need to ask yourself why Christians have changed the Name, birthdate, death date and date of the resurrection of His Messiah - all of which are clearly outlined in the Bible! Why have Christians chosen to force paganism down the throat of our God via the man-made, paganistic "holy days" of Christmas and Easter while ignoring the COMMANDED Biblical Feasts? Please read Galatians from the "Aramaic of the Path to Life" by author Andrew Gabriel Roth.

By the way, Paul, in the Gospels, was not trying to turn Gentiles into Torah observant Jews and he also never implied that Torah was being abolished. These were not the issues at all:

Romans 2: "12 All who have sinned outside the framework of Torah will die outside the framework of Torah; and all who have sinned within the framework of Torah will be judged by Torah. 13 For it is not merely the hearers of Torah whom God considers righteous; rather, it is the doers of what Torah says who will be made righteous in God's sight."

He goes on (Romans 2:14-15) to say that though Gentiles "don't have Torah", meaning it was not given to them as a covenant, and further says that "the conduct the Torah dictates is written in their hearts". So the Gentile, with Torah written on their hearts, is to do Torah! One can draw no other conclusion.

Read carefully the end of Romans Chapter 7, and the first part of chapter 8: Romans 7:24-25 "24 Who will rescue me from this body bound for death? 25 Thanks be to God, He will! - through Yeshua the Messiah, our Lord!"

Chapter 8: "1 Therefore there is no longer any condemnation awaiting those who are in union with the Messiah Yeshua. 2 Why? Because the Torah of the Spirit [see 7:14 "For we know that the Torah is of the Spirit], which produces this life in union with Messiah Yeshua, has set me free from the "torah" of sin [Paul is not equating "Torah" with "sin", but has instead in Chapter 7 explained that "sin" is like a "torah" in sin's grip on humans] and death. 3 For what the Torah could not do by itself, because it lacked the power to make the old nature cooperate, God did by sending his own Son as a human being with a nature like our own sinful one. God did this in order to deal with sin [note this - it is very important, Yeshua was sent to deal with sin, and only sin, not to take away Torah], and in so doing he executed the punishment against sin in human nature 4 so that the just requirement of the Torah might be fulfilled in us who do not run our lives according to what our old nature wants but according to what the Spirit wants [see again 7:14, Torah is of the Spirit, hence Paul is talking about those of us who run our lives according to Torah!]. 5 For those who identify with their old nature set their minds on things of the old nature, but those who identify with the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit [i.e. Torah!]. 6 Having one's mind controlled by the old nature is death, but having one's mind controlled by the Spirit [i.e. Torah!] is life and shalom. 7 For the mind controlled by the old nature is hostile to God, because it does not subject itself to God's Torah - indeed it cannot. 8 Thus those who identify with their old nature cannot please God.

So you see, it is far from a "return to legalism and bondage." Torah was simply NEVER negated! And Paul says in Romans 3:9 "So are we Jews better off?" thus revealing, and leaving no doubt, that Paul himself, was a Jew who without question observed and followed Torah without fail! And in the scripture cited above, Paul was laboring to show Gentiles that Yeshua died for their sins, yes, but that they must still please God. So how can any reading of the Gospels conclude that Paul was declaring that Torah was abolished?

Pastor's comment: Luther was not 'reforming' the teachings of Jesus/Yeshua. The Church needed reform, because it had become the Imperial Church. The oppressive orientation of the Imperial Church needed to be done away with, so that the pure grace-oriented Trinitarian faith (which flows from a direct apostolic witness) may once again thrive...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Regardless - Luther was "reforming" a church that was totally off the mark, and he didn't bother to "reform" his teachings to conform with Yeshua's. And Yeshua was a Torah observant, seventh day Sabbath and Feast keeping, kosher JEW. If it was good enough for HIM, why isn't it good enough for us?

Pastor's comment: Yes, Jesus/Yeshua did not come to start a new religion, but because of his gospel (a stumbling block to some and foolishness to others) a distinct community of faith in God did result -- a community of faith rooted in the teachings of the Apostles of Christ (the ones who knew him and conveyed his message to the whole world). "One, holy, catholic and apostolic" are merely adjectives to differentiate the community of Yeshua from the Gnostics and the Judaizers, and the other pseudo-apostolic, heretical groups that had vied for the hearts and minds of the followers of Christ during the NT and early Church days...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: In other words, your faith is rooted in something other than what Yeshua personally taught and what YHWH handed down eons ago. About your term "Judaizer" - I asked my friend, author Andrew Gabriel Roth whether he considered "us" to be Judaizers, and here's what he said:

Pastor's comment: Names change from one language to another. It was a Greco-Roman world, then later it was an Anglo-Saxon world. The name Jesus is simply an Anglicized version of the Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Yeshua. No biggy! A rose by any other by name is still a rose. The definition of Jesus is the same as Joshua, it's just that the name Jesus went through an extra historical step, rather than just going straight from Hebrew to modern English...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Okay, if names are no biggie, then is it okay if I refer to you are George or Jonathan or Pookie tomorrow when we talk on the phone?

Pastor's comment: Yes, Christ-mas and so on are not the historically correct days of the the events of the Incarnation, Crucifixion and Resurrection, but these days are the long established common commemorations for these events. Good luck changing the practices of all 2 Billion Christians on Planet Earth! For me, there are bigger fish to fry than playing with long established, deeply-rooted dates for commemorating the life, death and resurrection of Christ. Besides, in my opinion the importance of these commemorations have sanctified these holiday times for the faithful, despite the fact that they are not the literal dates of these important events...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: There can be no "but" when it comes to God. There is no gray area in His Word or His commands! What does YHWH continuously espouse about man's "traditions?" If 2 billion Christians want to continue to shove paganism down God's throat, well, they can just go for it; I don't care. I'm glad the Holy Spirit showed me that God wasn't pleased with that....

If He didn't approve of man's traditions back in OT times, do you think He approves of Catholic or Christian traditions today? He used to put people to death for offering "strange fire" (Lev 10:1-3)! The ONLY reason those offering paganism before God today aren't immediately killed is because of the atoning death of Messiah Yeshua. God WARNED us about "traditions" - as a matter of fact, He told Israel to refrain from learning the ways of the Goyim, including the custom of what's known today as "Christmas tree":

Jeremiah 10: 1 Hear the word Adonai speaks to you, house of Isra'el! 2 Here is what Adonai says: "Don't learn the way of the Goyim, don't be frightened by astrological signs, even if the Goyim are afraid of them; 3 for the customs of the peoples are nothing. They cut down a tree in the forest; a craftsman works it with his axe; 4 they deck it with silver and gold. They fix it with hammer and nails, so that it won't move. 5 Like a scarecrow in a cucumber patch, it cannot speak. It has to be carried, because it cannot walk. Do not be afraid of it - it can do nothing bad; likewise, it is unable to do anything good!"

I'm sorry you feel God's mo'edim (appointed times) which He spent a LOT of time explaining in the Book of Leviticus, etc., are unimportant. Man might have "sanctified" Christmas and Easter, but YHWH sure didn't! I mean, besides calling you George tomorrow during our phone conversation, is it okay if I tell people you were born on another date besides your actual birthday? It's no biggie, right? Since God gave us the EXACT dates of important events (including the birth, death and resurrection), WHY is the church ignoring them? What is "right" about celebrating paganistic "holidays?"

Pastor's comment: Again, because of the sacrifice and resurrection of Yeshua (that which is "of first importance" [1 Cor. 15]), Sunday was sanctified as the primary day upon which the Church of Yeshua began worshiping, especially after they were expelled from the synagogues in 84 AD. It is the Sabbath of the new creation...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: But by WHOM was Sunday sanctified? Not by YHWH or Yeshua! You clearly didn't read my article showing Yeshua rose on a SATURDAY EVENING! His Sabbath always has been and always will be on the SEVENTH DAY!

Isaiah 66: 23 And it shall be that from one New Moon to another New Moon and from one Sabbath to another Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before Me, says the Lord.

Pastor's comment: Jesus taught both his fellow Jews and the Gentiles he befriended that love fulfills the Law and the Prophets. This is what the Apostles taught as they evangelized the Greco-Roman world, only insisting on a few things in Acts 15...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: YIKES!!!! Like most Christians, you have totally misunderstood the writings of Paul. That is because you are coming from a Greek instead of a Hebrew mindset.

A new book called "Should Christians be Torah Observant?" due out in December, contains an entire chapter about Acts 15 and Gentiles. Throughout the Tanakh, Gentiles were considered to be immoral heathens and pagans because they worshipped every kind of “god” except for YHWH. But yet, it was YHWH’s will for the Gentile nations to receive His Salvation (Isaiah 49:6, 42:6). He told Abraham that through him all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:1-3). Early believing Jews didn’t understand that this and at first proclaimed the Good News of the Messiah only to Jewish people. Consequently, the controversy in the First Century was not if it was Jewish to believe in Yeshua but whether Gentiles could be included without having to become Jewish (addressed by the Jerusalem council – Acts 15:1-31).

Paul does not suggest that Gentiles should spontaneously master the Torah. The point is they should learn the written Torah without distraction from Pharisaic traditions which are not rooted in the plain understanding of Torah.

Pastor's comment: The Apostles of Christ passed on the one faith and baptism of Yeshua to the Apostolic Fathers, and the Apostolic Fathers passed this on to the Apologetic Fathers, and then on to the later Church Fathers, and so on. This apostolic leadership and witness flows from the NT and the Apostles themselves. Each generation of apostolic leadership discipling the next, and each new generation clarifying, systematizing and formalizing the generation before it -- all with the anointing and guidance of the Holy Spirit...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Then why is it that NO church is Torah observant? The Apostles were ALL Torah observant!

Let’s ask ourselves this: If Yeshua had indeed abolished the “law,” then why did the apostle Paul observe it with four other church men in Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) 29 years after the crucifixion of Messiah (Acts 21:23-24)? Paul wrote:

Romans 7: 7 Therefore, what are we to say? That the Torah is sinful? Heaven forbid! Rather, the function of the Torah was that without it, I would not have known what sin is. For example, I would not have become conscious of what greed is if the Torah had not said, "Thou shalt not covet."

Romans 7: 12 So the Torah is holy; that is, the commandment is holy, just and good.

Paul also said that YHWH’s law is spiritual (Romans 7:14) - and that which is spiritual is eternal.

Pastor's comment: Again, like the word 'Incarnation,' the name 'Trinity' is a non-biblical word that flows out of a deeply biblical truth...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: But that doesn't explain how YHWH is a "Trinity"...He explained Himself to us throughout the OT, and He never, ever suggested He was merely "three in one"...That is strictly a man-made term which attempts to limit our Creator. He wasn't even called "Father" until after Yeshua arrived. He gave us His Name YHWH, and the church doesn't even acknowledge it except for its contraction in the word "Halleluyah".....

Our God is "echad" - the plural form of ONE. The Jews know that as well; it's in their Shema. That describes Him a whole lot better than "trinity."

Pastor's comment: I understand that Martin Luther was anti-Semitic. It was a sad dominant reality of his day and age, and he was thoroughly a man of his day. But that should not mean that we dismiss all of his excellent insights, reforms, and positive theological principles...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Since Yeshua followed and taught YHWH's DIVINE teachings, why would anyone want to "reform" them, and why would anyone follow a Gentile's version whether or not they sounded "excellent" or "positive"? Who do we follow, God or man? If Luther's teachings had indeed been excellent and positive, then they would have remained true to the ORIGINAL teachings; they would not have changed one jot or tittle or GOD'S teachings - nor would they have started a whole new religion - which led into THOUSANDS of more "religions"! It's no different than baking a batch of cookies with a little cow dung in them. Would you eat them if you knew? Of course not! Then why are you allowing a little "reform" from what "GOD INCARNATE" taught?

Pastor's comment: Therefore, if a Messianic Jewish group was to stray away from this one Trinitarian faith and baptism, they cannot be considered a part of the one, holy, catholic (universal), and apostolic Church of Yeshua the Messiah -- they are another religion of God altogether. In the name of Yeshua, such a group would actually constitute a different faith from the faith of Yeshua passed down through the Apostles of Yeshua, but such a group would still be a religion of the one God nontheless (like Judaism, Islam, etc.)...

Response from The Refiner's Fire: Yeshua did not come to start a new religion called the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Yeshua the messiah!" First of all, the Catholics and Christians don't even call our Savior by the Name He was actually called while He walked this Earth! They changed His Name (which MEANT something) to a Gentile name which means no more than George or Susie. Please see my challenge to Catholicism which is COMPLETELY off the mark.

Messianic Judaism is not false or "another religion". The "another religion altogether" which you mentioned, is Christianity - which as I said before, changed His Name, His birthdate, and His dates of death and resurrection (and incorporated them into paganistic "holidays" which don't even attempt to remain NEAR the original dates) - not to mention, His FEASTS. How did all that please God?

Please re-read the Gospels to see how Yeshua taught, where Yeshua taught, and when Yeshua taught; and then re-read how, when and where the Bible says His followers worshipped....He taught in synagogues (not Christian "churches"); His Sabbath was on the seventh day and ALL who heard His message were Torah observant. NO BELIEVERS in the First Century - until Catholicism came along to pervert the Word - strayed from God's Torah....

That is because they knew YHWH didn't hand down separate rules for Jews and Gentiles. In your household, if you have natural children and adopted children, would you have separate rules? Would you make you natural children "toe the line" while allowing the adopted children to do whatever they wanted and even concoct their OWN rules? Would you allow your adopted kids to kill your natural kids or call them names? That's what Christians have been doing to the Jews since time immemorial! Why is that? After all, if it hadn't been for the Jews, Gentiles would NEVER have known about Yahweh or Yeshua....And they certainly would not have salvation.