|
Updated: 2018.12.06
Καινής – a divergent innovation, superseding displacement, supplanting or usurpation.– a"burning-up" of whatever preceded). Luke 5.36 serves as a fine example: a Καινής cloth patch isn't compatible, and doesn't comport, on an "old" garment. Καινής "denotes new, of that which is unaccustomed or unused, not new in time, recent, but new as to form or quality, of different nature from what is contrasted as old.
"Scholars" who claim that this ancient Hellenist-Greek term means simply "freshened", renewing Ta•na"khꞋ (with which it's absolutely and intractably contradictory) are boorishly ignorant of both history and computable logic.
Διαθήκης – i.e. last will & testament.
From the lifetime of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, his following of Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Jews practiced only Tōr•âhꞋ under the authority of his brother Ya•a•qōvꞋ ha-Tza•diqꞋ and subsequent pᵊqid•imꞋ until they were ousted and usurped by the Roman Christian Church in 135 C.E. Christianity was first, and originally, confabulated by the Hellenist Apostate Paul – in defiance of the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Pâ•qidꞋ – resulting in Paul's excision – and having no connection to Jews or RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa.
In the post-135 C.E. Hellenist-Roman world of the original, Roman gentile, creation of Christianity, this was the Apostate Paul's confabulation of a "last will & testament" to morph the Tōr•âhꞋ-prohibited, anthropomorphic (i.e. idolatrous) Roman Ζεύς, morphing it into the "Καινής" Hellenized Roman conflation idol: Jesus .
Marketing 101 in the ancient Roman world.
The earliest extant complete source texts of the Roman-Hellenist Καινής Διαθήκης are the Greek codices א and β — of the 4th-century CE, centuries after the expulsions of 70 CE and 135 CE!!!
Even according to the most authoritative Christian scholars, e.g., The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, acknowledges:
"A study of 150 Greek MSS of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings… It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the NT in which the MS tradition is wholly uniform… But there are many thousands which have a definite effect upon the meaning of the text. It is true that not one of these variant readings affects the substance of Christian dogma."
Of course Christians redacting the Jewish texts made Christian redactions to make the Jewish texts compatible with "the substance of Christian dogma"! 
And that's just a tiny peek into the Pandora's Box of misojudaic deceptions and falsehoods. Are you really going to continue believing this web that is woven of syncretized redactions of Egyptian and Hellenist idolatry?
Quoting again from The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (loc. cit.),
"It is equally true that many of them do have theological significance and were introduced into the text intentionally… Many thousands of the variants which are found in the MSS of the NT were put there deliberately. They are not merely the result of error or careless handling of the text. Many were created for theological or dogmatic reasons—even though they may not affect the substance of Christian dogma. [Thanks for reminding us that Christians made Christian redactions compatible with Christian dogma; ybd]). It is because the books of the NT are religious books, sacred books, canonical books, that they were changed to conform to what the copyist believed to be the true reading. His interest was not in the 'original reading' but in the 'true reading'"
(ibid.)—as perceived by the Roman Christian redactors, of course. (Emphasis added and quoted from Who Are The Nᵊtzarim? Live-LinkT (WAN))
All historians, even Christian scholars, agree that there was no Καινής Διαθήκης during the lifetime of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa, the lifetime of any of his original eyewitness followers, or even during the lifetime of any of his later Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ followers until centuries after they were eradicated by the Christian Church as "Jews under the law of sin and death" and "enemies of God and the Church" (by the 4th century C.E.).
A new unilateral bequeathal or testament; as derived from the Hellenized LXX Ιερεμιας 38.31-34. Calling the Christian-redacted accounts The Καινής Διαθήκης:
begs the questions (a logical fallacy = falsehood) of Christian supersession, Displacement Theology and what is Bible – in direct contravention of
is a Hellenist (unilateral) "testament," not a (bilateral) Judaic áÌÀøÄéú! (Just because Christians mistranslate it thus doesn't make it so! Those who trust in translators are trusting in men!)
has deceived billions by misrepresenting their Hellenized unilateral Διαθήκης to be the prophesied Judaic áÌÀøÄéú!
A áÌÀøÄéú is a bilateral covenant, alliance, treaty or pact—a two-party contract requiring action of both parties and binding on both parties; while a Διαθήκης is well translated as testament since it is a unilateral bequeathal requiring nothing from the recipient. The áÌÀøÄéú çÂãÈùÑÈä of YirmᵊyâhꞋu ha-Nâ•viꞋ 31.30-32 describes a new, compatible (not Καινής), bilateral áÌÀøÄéú, not a unilateral Διαθήκης!
These are fundamental differences between Judaism and the Apostate Paul's Hellenized straying of Christianity; and why Christians mistakenly—eternally fatally mistakenly—think they need do nothing but believe.
In addition to being logically wrong, begging these questions that impugn Tōr•âhꞋ is offensive to Jews who keep Tōr•âhꞋ.
According to the earliest extant Christian Church historian (Eusebius), the original Pᵊrush•imꞋ Jewish followers of the Pᵊrush•iꞋ RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa rejected the Christian claimed Καινής Διαθήκης
!!!
Christianity was born with the Hellenist-Roman expulsion of the 15th Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Pâ•qidꞋ from Yᵊru•shâ•laꞋyim in 135 C.E. and his consequent displacement (!) by the first gentile—(Hellenist-Roman) Christian—"ἐπίσκοπος".
Nothing of The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu is documented to have been Hellenized and translated into Greek before the Apostate Paul and his Hellenist Roman followers, ca. 64 C.E.. No serious rival to the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ among Jews who had followed RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa is documented prior to 135 C.E. Subsequent to 135 C.E., Christians (almost entirely gentile Romans), having arrogated unchallenged leadership, had split entirely from Jews, vilifying Jews as "sons of Sâ•tânꞋ under the law [meaning Tōr•âhꞋ] of sin and death". These original Christians were, from the outset with the Apostate Paul, entirely dependent on Hellenist Greek texts, with subsequent mushrooming of redactions of the Apostate Paul's letters, beginning in earnest only in the 4th century C.E. with the appearance of the first two codices of the Καινής Διαθήκης.
The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ never changed their mind about the Christian Καινής Διαθήκης, maintaining that only the Jewish Ta•na"khꞋ is Scripture and only their own Nᵊtzârim Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu was a legitimate account of the life and teachings of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa.
The Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ haven't changed from this position, and won't change from this position.
Modern English-speaking Western Christianity has derived from the relatively modern KJ/V of 1611 C.E. Only 9 years before the pilgrims were embarking in the Mayflower, the miso-Judaic (biased) King James of England, who had just expelled the last Jews from England, produced his KJ/V. Four years after the Mayflower—and 13 years after the KJ/V—in 1624 C.E., King James then produced the Greek Textus Receptus! So the Textus Receptus corroborates the KJ/V. What a surprise!!! Translating the English KJ/V back into corroborating Greek. Oh yeah, that makes sense! 
The Codex Alexandria (ca. 450 C.E.) and subsequent mss. must be eschewed because, although it's well over a millennium older than the KJ/V, it's still too recent, eclipsed by codices à and β. This just keeps getting better. The Christian Ignorati, those who spew Christianity most ardently, have never heard of the Codex à or Codex β (both, ca. 300-400 C.E.) or the rare few sentences in earlier papyri; much less the tens of thousands of miso-Judaic redactions increasingly injected after 135 C.E. (documented in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (loc. cit.), NHM and Who Are The Nᵊtzarim? Live-LinkT (WAN).
The more recent the ms. the more miso-Judaic its Hellenized-Christianized text. Conversely, the older the ms. the less Christianized and miso-Judaic. Moreover, eschewing Hellenist (Greek and other gentile-language) texts to rely exclusively on Hebrew and Aramaic texts minimizes Hellenist and Christian corruptions. If the Christian Ignorati would bother to read Who Are The Nᵊtzarim? Live-LinkT (WAN) and NHM they would know these things
Accordingly, only quotes from NHM and Ta•na"khꞋ are recognized by the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ as authentically and authoritatively descriptive of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ. Other works not recognized as authoritative by standard Judaic institutions are not recognized as authoritative by the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ either.
 |
|
 |