Believing a Lie

You can lead a horse to water, even living water, but you can't make it drink.

"For I say to you,
I will not drink of the Fruit of the Vine
until the Kingdom of God comes!" (Luke 22:18)
​

If you can't see that the very serious vow that Jesus took at the Last Supper was not only in essence a Nazarite Vow, but was the most extreme Nazarite Vow ever expressed by any man in the Old or New Testaments, indeed, the quinessential Nazarite Vow of All Time, I have no power to open your eyes.

If this was NOT a very serious and profound Vow by the King of Kings, then whatever do you think Jesus was really doing here?

"Hey guys: quit chatting. Listen up...
Um, I think I am not going to drink anymore wine tonight.
Yeah...at least until dawn...oh nevermind...
it wasn't that important." (Luke 22:18, StandingFirmInChrist Translation)

​

Somehow your version of the text just doesn't have the same impact on me.

Peace,
Nazaroo

 

Stretch your brain, Nazaroo... as you have told me to do in the past.

Show me where Jesus said "I will not eat of the fruit of the vine." After all, that is part of the Nazarite vow... is it not? Show me where He said He would not cut His hair?

I cannot find it in the Word of God.


And that is not my version of the text, Nazaroo.

seems you are redefining what Jesus was to fit your liking.

 

1. I own no property. It is not a requirement for Israelites, or Christians to own anything.

2. I only wear cotton.


3. I do menial work.


No person has ever fullfilled perfectly the Torah, or OT Law. Neither has any Christian born that I know of ever walked a perfect Christian path.

No Jew has ever kept the Torah perfectly, and as far as I know no Jew has ever claimed to.

This doesn't make Jews liars or nonexistant or Christians nonexistant.

For you to argue that there is no such thing as a Nazarite because they don't meet your perfect standard is as stupid as saying there are no such thing as Jews, or no such thing as Christians.

Get real. Present a reasonable argument instead of just attacking people's religious beliefs and practices because they differ from yours. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

Peace,
Nazaroo

 

Jesus was not a Nazarite

Way of Life Encyclopedia
NAZARENE

(A native of Nazareth). A name for Jesus, from the fact that His childhood home was in Nazareth (Matthew 2:23; Matthew 26:71; Mark 14:67; Acts 2:22; Acts 3:6; Acts 10:38; Acts 22:8). Some have confused Nazarene for Nazarite in reference to Jesus, but Christ was not a Nazarite.

Jesus Christ did not take a Nazarite vow.

 

I don't have to attack your belief. The Word of God does it already.


You own no property?? Really? You aren't in a refugee camp using their computer, are you? I get those claims all the time.

What about a car? You don't own one? Not even the shoes on your feet?

Sounds more like a cult following to me. 'Everything belongs to the man in charge of my refugee camp.'

Yeah, right.

 

You know, any historian will tell you that trying to guess what life might have been like 2000 years ago is a very precarious business.

Thousands of claims against the historicity of Christianity have been made on the very same (talking through your hat) basis as your argument above.

There was a whole area of the temple devoted to proselytes (non-Jewish converts) and others who did not meet strict racial standards or standards of holiness (like women and lepers).

It was call the "court of the women". Any person, even a Roman could go there and converse with a priest, much as you can today in any church.

But even Israelites had no 'special status' in regards to taking up a priest's time. You had to make an appointment, set a day, or get in a lineup to have your ritual sacrifice, or temple gift recognised, documented, and dealt with.

It was not done at the Israelite's descretion, but at the priest's descretion. Just try getting an appointment with your local Ombudsman, sherrif, MP, Senator, or even county judge. It would have been much the same in the Temple in the time of Jesus.

You couldn't just walk up with a hunk of hair and two pigeons, and expect a priest to drop whatever he was doing, his temple obligations and duties etc. to deal with you. And in Jesus' time, no doubt these things cost MONEY, as Paul found when he had to pay for his own Nazarite Vow and those of FOUR other Christian companions. (See Acts).

Your argument is meaningless, because it doesn't in any way adequately even attempt to understand the historical or political situation at the time of Christ.

Spend a few decades studying historical documents, and then present a cogent position.

Peace,
Nazaroo.

 

You and your mockery, as a rich American, and living about as far away from the ideals and practices of early Christians as it is possible to achieve on planet Earth, do not surprise me.

Your unbelief or (fake) incredulity at my poverty is as hollow as it is callous and hateful.

Good luck on explaining to Jesus on Judgement Day what you were doing today.

I'll try to minimise your cruelty and I promise you I myself forgive you.

The husbands of Lot's daughters were also habitual mockers.

And when it came time to take a message seriously, they were unable to do so.
When Lot came to warn them of the coming destruction, they rolled back into bed,
because they thought he was joking.

"HE SEEMED AS ONE THAT JOKED UNTO HIS SONS IN LAW." (Genesis 19:14)

You are unable to hear me. I hope the Lord unplugs your ears.


Peace,
Nazaroo

 

HP: If Christ fulfilled all the sacrificial aspects of the law INCLUDING the Nazarite law for us, then why would any today desire to add to that which has been fulfilled in Christ by the piecemeal approach to a vow age-specific to Jews only? How you conclude as you do by what you said is beyond me,……. but far be it from me to argue with one who desires to believe that he is one.

HP: It would seem logical to me that if one cannot fulfill the sacrificial rites that were commanded as part of the vow, to take such a vow is to take a vow that you cannot fulfill or keep.

HP: If anyone tries to fulfill the rituals that even you say were fulfilled in Christ, would that not be classified as at the very best wasted effort, and at the worst, idolatry or something akin to it? At any rate whatever they are now doing in that regard would be the farthest thing from loving God or exemplifying holiness having rejected the Messiah Himself.

Why anyone would desire as a believer to follow or try and emulate the efforts of such misguided individuals is beyond me. As a believer I would want to distance myself as far as possible from such cultish practices, nowhere commanded or even hinted at as NT practices to be practiced. If one thinks holiness can be achieved or needs to be shown by taking a vow such as the Nazarite vow such a one is simply deceived and believing a lie. To me such attempts would be making a mockery out of the vow itself, the vow not applying to our dispensation in the least and also the fact of not being able to fulfill it as it was commanded anyway.

Why would a Chirstian believer try and emmulate the OT ritual, shadow, and schoolmaster is beyond me. Seriously, could it be, at least in some possible cases, nothing more than a desire to have long hair, and to have some palusible excuse to be in direct violation of the NT admonition that even nature teaches us that long hair on a man is a shame? Just wondering.

 

Rich American??? ROFL.

My annual income is only $6,168 and you say I am rich? Now I ask... where are those riches I supposedly own?

Why are you adding to the Word of God? The Scriptures do not say the daughters rolled back in bed. And it was only the sons-in-law that were said to have mocked... not the daughters.

 

Fellas,
Nazaroo has said he did not think anyone is or ever has been able to fulfill the Nazarite vow(s). This admission does not mean he is not earnest in his efforts.

Nazaroo, the Nazarite vow(s) will be viewed as a legalistic position by many on this board. This does not hurt your degree of earnestness, please understand.

Both sides of the question need to exercise more grace in disagreement. Do not be so easily offended, and especially do not be so quick to use offensive language.

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

HP: Don’t give us that line. I know your Father and He owns the cattle on a thousand hills. :wavey:

 

Why are you falsely accusing me? You quoted what I wrote, but apparently you didn't read it.

I did not mention the behaviour of Lot's daughters. Only their husbands.

Peace,
Nazaroo

 

He may own the cattle on a thousand hills, yes, but He has not seen fit to put them in my backyard.:laugh::wavey:

 

Nazaroo. you are still adding to the Word of God when you say the husbands rolled back in bed.

It is not there.

 

He owns all the cattle on all the hills.......:thumbs:

 

HP: If what you say is honestly what he said, (and I have no reason to doubt the veracity of your statement, I just did not read it) according to Scripture should a man take such a vow knowing and stating what you say he has stated?

 

The text is plain. They thought Lot was joking, and they ignored him.

He and his daughters left. They stayed behind.

You just aren't getting the message.


"Thou art the man!" (2nd Samuel 12:7)


Fill your cup. Half empty is only half full.

 

HP: I would, practically speaking, think that would be to your favor in more ways than one. :laugh:

 

Dear Pilgrim:

Your confusion is in this.

You are confusing the trappings and the wrappings for the present.

The 'ritual' with turtledoves, the wave offerings, the bowl of grain, the presentation to the priest, the recording of the time and period of the vow, these are just the decorations, the trappings.

The actual vow is the vow itself.

One takes a serious vow to remain holy for a set period of time.

Thats the vow and nothing else.

The 'sacrifice' to feed the priest, the out of tune cantor mumbling a psalm, the old men sleeping in the pews of the synagogue, these are superfluous.

Even the witness of the priest is only a formality, a way of keeping order and keeping people honest.

All that matters is the VOW OF HOLINESS.

You can make that alone before God in the wilderness like John the Baptist.

You can keep it in a cave like Elijah.

You can do it before witnesses at the Passover like Jesus.

But none of that matters.

What matters is, are you keeping your vow of holiness, by diligently following the rules?

No grapejuice, vineyard products etc. No wine. No mixed drinks. NO DRUGS.

Don't go near any dead bodies.

Don't defile yourself, even for your own mother.

End of story. Thats the vow. There is no other.

Peace,
Nazaroo

 

Nazaroo, if you want to take a Nazarite vow, I see nothing wrong with it. Makes no difference anyway.
Not sure what the fuss is about