I Count All Of This As Dung

This is an interesting point that is made by some Messianic Jews that we must return to the tenants of Judaism to understand Christianity. There is some truth to this, Christ was a Jew and Christianity is the completion of Judaism. It is good to remember that the early church under the apostles were mostly converts from Judaism except the Gentile churches. Many in the first century church were Jews. Does that make Judaism right? I think not. Does it make the study of Judaism a must? Sure, it is good to have an understanding of Judaism but it is not prerequisite to knowing God. Judaism is the foundation, a foundation that started with Moses and went further and further from God. This straying started in the wilderness and continued through the remainder of the Old Testament time albeit with pulling back to the truth at times. Admittedly much of the straying without revival came in the 400 years between the old and new testaments. One of the reasons I reject the books of the Macabees is they were more interested in the physical restoration of Israel than the spiritual restoration and the coming Kingdom. They failed to see what the truth. By the time Jesus came on the scene the religious leaders of Israel were teaching two forms of Judaism. Neither of these had more than a vague resemblance to what God intended his people to follow. One had become so humanistic that it denied angels and the resurrection. The analogy today are the churches today that have denied the spirit and power of God. They deny healing, God's favor, manifestations of His power and His speaking to His people today. They include the Jehovah's Witnesses and the historic churches that have become so social that they some of them no longer recognize the Bible as the word of God. The other form became so legalistic that nobody could do right. The analogy today are the Churches today that preach nothing but sin. The Charles Feeney, Saturday Sabbath and Jesus-Only cults are examples today. John the Baptist stood alone for God as anti-establishment. He fought a two front war against both sects. Sure he spoke out against sin but more important he emphasized repentance as the way to God. He underscored the value of repentance by preaching that anyone could come to God if they repented. These two forks of Judaism are the parents of the two major groups of Judaism of today, the reform and traditional. The third small fork, Messianic Judaism has embraced Christ as Lord but many have hung on to the teachings of their fathers. Like the Lutherans and Anglicans who hung on to the infant baptism of the Roman Catholic Church (which is neither Roman, Catholic (universal) nor the church of Christ) they hung on to the Jewish rituals and fables.

I have said this several times here, the Catholic Church started out right. But given time, man seems to be able to "improve" on the gospel and soon it is no longer the gospel. The truth can neither be improved nor can it stand improvement and remain truth. The Catholic Church hit this about the time of the dark ages. It is to the credit of the men in charge that it took as long as it did! There are Protestant groups that have started right and gone off the deep end in far less. I have seen at least one that took less than a dozen years, not a dozen centuries. And even worse, some didn't even start well. Their “prophets” were self-serving men and women like Ellen G White, Joseph Franklin ("Judge") Rutherford, Herbert W. Armstrong, Garner Ted Armstrong and Joseph Smith.

Catholics decry the number of protestant groups and factions. Let me explain that. The reformers of the Catholic Church (Luther) tried first to work within the structure of the Catholic Church. Luther's big concerns about the church was not it's teaching about God as much as his concern about the priests selling indulgences in the name of the Pope. When the efforts from within failed they took the approach that Peter did with the Jewish leaders.

Acts 5:28-29

28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

(KJV)

Luther and others had a choice. They had to leave the church and obey God or remain and live in disobedience.

The same has happened with others in Protestantism. Luther left the Catholic Church but he did not denounce all error and some of the teaching of the Catholic Church came with him. Infant baptism was preserved which was not one of Jesus' doctrines or the apostle's doctrines but an invention that came about in the second century after Peter had petered out. It was continued by the Lutherans and is to this day. Menno Simmons and other Anabaptists, a word meaning another baptism saw this as an error and left Lutheranism much the same way Luther left Catholicism because the descendents of Luther held his teachings above the Bible. They could not fix the organization so they left. They had seen baptism as valid only if the person being baptized is born again. Since a child cannot give this assent the infant baptism is not valid and gives a false sense of security. They said one baptized as an infant needed another baptism hence the name Anabaptist meaning another baptism. And they were severely persecuted for their stand.