Talk:Nazarene (sect)/Archive 1

Will any information ever likely to go here not to be found also, and in a broader context, at Nazarene? Nazarene Christian is a redundant tautology. Nazarenes who do not consider themselves Christians (whatever Pauline Christianity might think) are not Nazarenes? Combine under Nazarene I suggest. Wetman 07:07, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * Good Idea! User:210.118.226.147

Please sign your entries, 210.118.226.147. I have no doubt that Nazarene Judaism deserves its own page, but the present version is rather strongly POV (see the links; one page is about disavowal of a Netzarim community of all others by similar name). A few spin-off articles have been created, basically repeating the message of this article. Netzarim now redirects here, as does Notzrim. I lack the information to enhance POV on this page, but it bears saying that we're dealing with a few thousand people worldwide who definitely do not require several different Wipipedia pages that elaborate on their beliefs and relationships vis-a-vis other religions. JFW | T@lk  12:53, 12 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Their rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity may cause it to fall out of the Messianic Judaism movement. Will it? Is this pure speculation, or has a falling-out been scheduled?

I know chrstianity is trinitarian and that they ostricise unitarians as being non chrstian. I don't know what Messianics think though. The best way to find out is to try posting a comment about them being monotheistic Messianic Jews on the Mesianic Judaism article and see if it is accepted or rejected. Zestauferov 11:01, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * It is however recognised by the board of the Orthodox Yemenite Beit K'nêsêt in Raanana, Israel – Beit ha-K'nêsêt Môrêshêt Âvôt (which is recognized by the Israeli rabbinate). This keeps them firmly lodged within the orthodox Jewish Beit Din system and they are thus recognised as an authoritative body by the state of Israel. It is highly presumtive to say that this very implicit approval by the Israeli chief rabbinate can be seen as a de-facto legitimisation of the Netzarim movement within Judaism. The opposite is probably the case. JFW | T@lk  22:14, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Very good point.Zestauferov 11:01, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Discussion Moved from Ger Tzedek
Background: Zestauferov plays devil's advocate, Izak enacts the prosecution. The Question: Do Netzarim follow Halakha?
 * ''Zest:Had I known you work for the "devil" I would have worn a "fire-suit" (as if that could help). Futhermore, I did NOT agree to come to this page, as I am not interested in debating the pros and cons of "shades" of "Messianic judo-ism". You seem to want to "burn the candle at both ends": Debating (disguised) Christianity with (confused) Jews, and (fake) Judaism with pseudo-Christians. Hmmmmm. IZAK 05:39, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

I am not the one who brought this discussion to this point I am only the one who moved it here where it belongs. I was talking about Ger Tzedek and halakha.Zestauferov 10:24, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest: I am merely calling "a spade a spade". Would you feel better if I talked about "Yeshu HaNotzri"? I have never heard Torah Jews refer to him as "Ribi Yehoshua" either as some Messianic cults try to "Judaize" him so that ignorant ("assimilated" in your parlance) Jews will be "fooled" into thinking that he was just another "regular rabbi", a respectable "member of the tribe", which is a lie as he was rejected by all the rabbis of his time and since. If you don't like "Jesus" so why are you so dedicated to the "netzarim"? I don't get it, I must be missing something here I guess.IZAK 18:45, 13 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Yeshu Ha Notzri was a late 2nd Century early 1st century BCE apostate contemporary with Yoshua Ben Parachiah. I use to think they were the same person until it was pointed out to me that to think this way is to insult the chronological skills of the compilers of the Mishnah. Are you next going to say that he was also the early late 1st early 2nd century CE Plony Ben Stada? then that would make his life span accross 4 centuries!! There are no jewish records about Ribi Yehoshua Ben Joseph just as there are no records about any other minor Beth Hillel rabbis of the early days. Can you show me the line of Halakha where it says "A Jew must hate and dispise anything remotely connected to the coenter of Chrstian devotion" please? If there is rest assured I will hate him more than you, and speak out against them, but if there isn't I am just as puzzled about your negative stance as you are about my trollerant stance. Let them be as long as they are bringing Jews into orthodoxy. All the best. Zestauferov 02:17, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest:I am not sure who the people are that are "pointing out" things to you, but they sound like a pretty wierd bunch of folks to me. I have met many great genuine rabbis in my lifetime, and never have I heard the kind of things you seem to be exposing yourself to. Maybe it's time to find teachers who are more "mainstream" and not so focused in the "netzarim" folks who really appear to be way out in "left field" both according to Judaism AND Christianity (and as they say: "self praise is NO recommendation"). As for the "compilers" of the Mishneh, they were NOT concerened with "chronology" the way modern western academics are. The Torah SheBeal Peh (Oral Law) and indeed the Torah SheBichtav (Written Torah), deal with personalities and events within their own unique methodologies of "time" and one would have to spend many years in a good yeshiva getting acquainted with exactly how the Mishna "placed" people in time and space. They did NOT work under the asssumption that they must have a "sense of history" as it is understood in the secular world today. There was so much persecution of Jews by Christians, especially since it was the Jews' arch-enemy: ROME that "adopted" Jesus' "faith" that the combination of factors working against traditional Torah Judaism, made it imperative that Judaism's views of Jesus (whichever one he is, take your pick) be cloaked in deliberate ambiguity and "plausible deniability". IZAK 20:51, 14 May 2004 (UTC)


 * This looks like you are saying that the life of the historical person in question was chopped up into several sections, given different names then thrown in amongst stories of different rabbis over the course of 4 centuries (or 8 in the case of the Toledoth Yeshu). This explains how in the case of Eliazer he sometimes appears as a man with disciples and at another time as a young boy. Interesting idea do you have any reference for this or is it just your own opinion? If you have a reference it would be good to add this synopsis to a Toldoth Yeshu article. Zestauferov 03:41, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest:The kind of "references" you seek are not necessary, as there is NOTHING in Torah scholarship that will cast positive light on Jesus-Yeshu (and/or anyone like him). He may even never have existed, but the fact that there is a world-wide religion called "Christianity" (in all its stripes and stages) that has always been hostile to Jews and Judaism, especially as espoused by Orthodox Judaism, throughout two millenia of history is enough "evidence" that Jesus=Yeshu was and remains "bad news" for the Jews. Reputable rabbis and scholars IGNORE him as he is persona non grata and the myriad movements he spawned are "RADIOACTIVE" as far as Torah-true Judaism is concerned. IZAK 18:30, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

The bottom line is, that you CANNOT have it both ways, even tho' groups like "netzarim" or "Jews for Jesus" types may want to foist the false idea that somehow one "can have one's cake and eat it"...it just ain't so according to any major Torah and Jewish thinkers. Either you are Jewish (Halachicaly) or you are Christian. One precludes and excludes the other, no matter how much the "Netzarim" types jump up and down or stand on their heads (as they even stand logic on its head) IZAK 20:51, 14 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I understand your point which you have already made very clearly several times over i.e. "You can't be ANY kind of "Cristian" and be Jewish (in the religious sense) simultaneously" I would expand it somewhat and say You can't be anything but Jewish in the traditional religious sense and be Jewish in any religious sense simultaneously. But opinion is not useful at all. I have asked "Can you show me the line of Halakha where it says "A Jew must hate and dispise anything remotely connected to the center of Chrstian devotion" please?" This would be very useful. What if careful analysis of evidence suggested that Siddarta Guatema might have been a minor unknown Jewish teacher amongst the Jews exiled in the east by Babylon? Same question different content would apply. What if Mohammed turned out to be a Ger Tzedek whose story has been corrupted by political factions? As far as I can see the netzarim are not following the person you think they are following They are following Halakha and put the Reform movement to shame in that respect. Is it this that is annoying you? Zestauferov 03:41, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest:Don't let your imagination run amock! You say: "...I have asked 'Can you show me the line of Halakha where it says 'A Jew must hate and dispise anything remotely connected to the center of Chrstian devotion' please?' This would be very useful...". Your question reveals your lack of insight into what Halacha is about. Halacha is not here to teach you to "hate" anything. It is not a program or "dogma" of "emotional reactions" as people may erroneously think.


 * No Izak, I know this very well, I was simply wondering if you realised this. I suppose I set myself up for that stab though. Serves me rightZestauferov 11:01, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

(Sadly the "Koran" does incite its readers and that is one reason why Islam has always been so dangerous as it is so "emotion" based.) Instead, the Halacha is here to help people BECOME BETTER JEWS and human beings (you know, like that line the Christians stole of "love thy friend as thyself" Leviticus, 19:18). I would say it is very simple: The Torah FORBIDS following anyone who is deemed to be a Navi Sheker (a "False (Liar) (so-called) Prophet"): ...if a prophet presumptiously makes a declaration in My name when I have not commanded him to do so, or if he speaks in the name of other gods, then that prophet shall die... (Deuteronomy, 18:20). The Torah urges us in the Ten Commandments to worship only the One true God and NOT to have any other FALSE Gods or idols! IZAK 18:30, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Very good, thankyou. I know the passage of course, but I don't know what your evidence is for infering the Netzarim worship idols etc., and that their Ribi Yehoshua Ben Joseph was a Navi Sheker. Which sources are you establishing your beliefs upon? Zestauferov 11:01, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest:It's not just "idols" per se, it's any "belief-system" that is not part of the Mesorah (authentic tradition) of Torah Judaism as it has been sanctioned by the Torah sages of ALL generations, and none have sanctioned or even taken note of "Ribi what's-his-name". "Ribi Yehoshua" could also be classified as a Meisis Umediach: '''13:7 [This is what you must do] if your blood brother, your son, your daughter, your bosom wife, or your closest friend secretly tries to act as a missionary among you, and says, 'Let us go worship a new god. Let us have a spiritual experience previously unknown by you or your fathers.' 13:8 [He may be enticing you with] the gods of the nations around you, far or near, or those that are found at one end of the world or another. 13:9 Do not agree with him, and do not listen to him. Do not let your eyes pity him, do not show him any mercy, and do not try to cover up for him, 13:10 since you must be the one to put him to death. Your hand must be the first against him to kill him, followed by the hands of the other people. 13:11 Pelt him to death with stones, since he has tried to make you abandon God your Lord, who brought you out of the slave house that was Egypt. 13:12 When all Israel hears about it, they will be afraid, and they will never again do such an evil thing among you.'''(Deuteronomy, 13:7-12) IZAK 21:23, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Another very useful reference thankyou Izak. But still it would be useful for you to provide which sources are you establishing your beliefs that he could be a Navi Sheker, and/or Meisis Umediach upon? All the best. Zestauferov 01:59, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest: I have just provided you with the best sources available from the Torah, do you doubt that ANY Torah-true (Orthodox) Talmidei Chachamim (Torah Scholars) and even those who follow non-Orthodox Judaism have any doubts whatsoever that "Ribi Yeshoshua" aka Jesus was NOT either a "Navi Sheker, and/or Meisis Umediach"? C'mon now, what are you expecting from "Halacha", a "clear statement" about him? Do you think that they were THAT stupid, self-destructive or suicidal? Every time a Jew was thrown to the lions in the name of "Yeshu" or ripped apart by a Crusader, that Jew knew who was to blame: Your wonderful "Ribbi Yehoshua" who had incited the WORLD against his own people (see his words in the "New Testament"). Add "traitor" to his resum`e. IZAK 05:39, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The Torah is indeed the best thing one can reference to, but it is like talking about what to do with bad apples without showing your evidence that an apple in question is bad. However, the last part of your posting clinches it for me.

"Your wonderful "Ribbi Yehoshua" who had incited the WORLD against his own people (see his words in the "New Testament"). Add "traitor" to his resum`e."


 * You are basing your beliefs upon the "NT"?? Don't you know there is halakha against that? Don't you know about the people who compiled and edited it?

"Every time a Jew was thrown to the lions in the name of "Yeshu" or ripped apart by a Crusader, that Jew knew who was to blame"


 * If you had just left it at this I might be more satisfied but for the fact that Jews have been persecuted from the beginning. It has plenty to do with hate for the truth and very little to do with anything much else. This is why I am interested in the truth surrounding a subject and will not allow myself to get worked up to the state where I become just as much an enemy to the truth as those who wished to silence us over the years have. The persecution of the Jews is equivalent to censorship, and that is the example you are copying by not trying to through the tears of many years.


 * Oh, and I don't know how many times I have to say this, I am not a Netzarim! I am simply interested in truth. My personal belief is that the events described in the Mishna are true. Yeshu Ha Notzri is nobody and was simply too early to be anyone, though I am pretty sure the chrstians created their religion by mixing up things they heard about him with that of Yeshu Pandera who is mentioned ONLY in Tofseta Hullin 2:22,23,24 and that Yeshu Pandera is probably the true historical identity. I believe this same Pandera may have been the biological father or uncle of the mamzer heretic known as Ben Stada. I have heard that even Chrstian historians record that the family name of the man they worship's grandfather was something like Pandera. Rabi Eliazer seemed impressed by a certain Jacob Kefar who was a student of this Pandera. The authorities at the time and Rabbi Ishmael on the other hand seem to have been against him. Since the authorities at the time were dominated by Beth Shammai (who even rejected Shammai!), Herodians and Helenized Roman-conspirator pseudo-Zadokites, I see no reason why I should consider either these or Pandera to be any better than each other. I do however like Rabbi Eliazer, so maybe there was a certain Jacob Kefar who could heal who was a disciple of a Ribi who may have been a good man but who was also certainly unpopular with the authorities because of his outspokeness, and who may have been an uncle/ancestor of the mamzer heretic Ben Stada. As for the messiah? I believe, with perfect faith, in the coming of the Messiah, and though he may tarry, I wait, through each and every day, for his coming. Shalom. Zestauferov 10:24, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Zest:No-one serious about Torah-true Judaism makes a "study" of "Mr.Ribi/Yeshu/Pandera/What's-his-face/etc" as you seem so intent on doing. As I told you, the guy has been "blotted out" of the Jewish lexicon, and the less said the better. (I have already said too much and cannot add much more). I mentioned the "New Testament" as those are the writings that purport to speak for him, regardless of your feelings, they are unkind to Jews, period. You claim to be searching for the truth. What that "truth" is, is hard to know for those trying to decipher your statements, as you make so many contradictory declarations and citations that it's hard to tell "top" from "bottom". One day it's this, the next day it's that, and so on and so forth etc ad nauseum. Take it easy. IZAK 23:54, 18 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Zestauferov, whenever the Ribi lived, it was after the "official" cessation of prophecy with Haggai, Zecharya and Malachi. It is impossible to say whether he was a prophet as far as Judaism is concerned, and (hence) it cannot be "falsified" either. The fact is that the Netzarim are on the verge of discrediting their beliefs by attaching importance to a man who (in their eyes in a caricature) has come to mean so much to a billion christians. What does his theology have to offer to the Netzarim that cannot be found in the body of B'nei Noach ideology?


 * Very well said indeed.Zestauferov 17:24, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * At any rate, they deserve treatment by themselves in the Nazarene Judaism article, and material pertaining to the Netzarim does not belong in Ger Tzedek or Noahide Law. Nazarene Judaism is not a halachically valid option for B'nei Noach as far as most rabbinic authorities are concerned. JFW | T@lk  12:46, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

"and material pertaining to the Netzarim does not belong in Ger Tzedek or Noahide Law"
 * Why not? Is it because

"Nazarene Judaism is not a halachically valid option for B'nei Noach as far as most rabbinic authorities are concerned."
 * Does that mean there are some rabinic authorities which do cosider it valid?
 * And does this matter anyway? Are Noahides required to follow Halakha?Zestauferov 17:24, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Zestauferov, I take strong issue with your habit of cutting up peoples' responses. It makes my response look fragmentary and spaced in time, while it is supposed to be a coherent whole. You might prefer to copy&paste relevant quotes and italicise them, rather then endless indentations interspersed with a message's body. I can agree with "netzarim" and similar groups being mentioned on the Ger Tzedek or Noahide Law, but with a clear disclaimer that these groups are not considered by Orthodox Judaism to belong in either category. Indeed, the "netzarim beit din" like to tell us that some Yemenite congegation has endorsed them, and that this provides them with legitimacy. Some rabbinic authority must have authorised this (hopefully that community's own rabbi). Nonetheless, this does not promote their cause much. I think more ASCII has been spilt on this peripheral subject than there are members to Nazarene Judaism. User:IZAK is correct that present orthodox leaders are not (and probably will not) approve of belief in Ribi Yehoshua, for whatever reason. That ends the matter. JFW | T@lk  00:08, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

"Zestauferov, I take strong issue with your habit of cutting up peoples' responses. It makes my response look fragmentary and spaced in time, while it is supposed to be a coherent whole. You might prefer to copy&paste relevant quotes and italicise them, rather then endless indentations interspersed with a message's body." JFW


 * I did as you have described above, I only interupted once to express agreement. Have I done this before? I am sorry my agreement upset you so much friend. Even so interspersing a posting meant to be a cohesive whole is not forbidden in wiki. Please remember If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit itZestauferov 05:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

As for Halakha, I have discovered that there is nothing wrong with any Noahide accepting "Ribi Yehoshua" as a teacher or even a prophet as long as they 1) do not force others to accept him. 2) Emphasise the distinction that he is not the same as any divinity worshipped alongside Ha-Shem. The orthodox authorities do not reject any Noahide's belief in any prophets. I have also confirmed that the Muslims are also Noahides, and that there is nothing wrong with them accepting Muhammad as a prophet (though they may be wrong) as long as they do not force jews to accept the same belief. Thus your request for a "clear disclaimer that these groups are not considered by Orthodox Judaism to belong in either category" would infact express an inaccurate POV. All the best Zestauferov 05:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC)


 * interspersing a posting meant to be a cohesive whole is not forbidden in wiki - no, but it might be polite. Please do not interpret my rant as a personal attack. I find this debate much too amusing and fascinating to let it be spoiled by formatting issues.
 * You are right that acceptance of Ribi Yehoshua as a prophet is not a sin for a Noachide. My only point in the previous posting is, that it will be mighty difficult for a Ribi-Yeshoshua-believing sect to claim legitimacy with the orthodox Jewish framework, as most halachic authorities will be uneasy about lending credence to a movement centered around Jesus, even if he's not considered a god.
 * I have also stated above that Noachides do not need approval from orthodox authorities. However, if they want this approval, then belief in Ribi Yehoshua and his teachings can be a major obstacle.
 * Therefore, I think this disclaimer is not POV at all - a Ger Tzedek is a full convert to Judaism, something the Nazarenes are not. They keep the Noahide Laws, and perhaps a disclaimer is not necessary in the latter article. JFW | T@lk  11:59, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

I wonder if we are talking about the same people here? http://netzarim.co.il ? I ask because in two posts you mention that they cannot be Jews. But they exist already within the Yemenite Jewish community, and they do not accept anyone into their Beth Din unless they are already Orthodox Jews. Are you saying an orthodox Jew is not a full Jew? Maybe I missed your point. Please forgive me, could you try to explain again? :-) I have also found an online reference for the POV I expressed on Ger Tzedek earlier so I am putting that link in that article.Zestauferov 15:09, 19 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I have seen the http://www.netzarim.co.il site. It seems to be the primary outlet of Netzarim ideology. It turns whackier with every line I read, and the petty puritanist insistence on correct pronunciation and etymology is nauseating. The Paqid Yirmiyahu ben-David could do a lot better than that.
 * They do not exist within the Yemenite community - they claim to have an endorsement from that community's board. Otherwise their house of worship is modeled after (and run like) one of the Yemenite community.
 * I had not realised that the Netzarim also aim to attract Orthodox Jews - an oversight on my part but an important point. Again I cannot stress enough that the unofficial endorsements do not put this strange community within the framework of Orthodox Judaism. No orthodox rabbinic authority will speak out and say that it's OK to pray in the house of worship of a community that maintains that Jesus/Ribi Yehoshua was the Messiah!
 * This said, I'm having growing doubts whether this stuff is encyclopedic at all. We're talking about a very small group of people whose only hallmark is that they claim to be orthodox Jews while celebrating "The historical figure behind Jesus" as the messiah.
 * JFW | T@lk  20:17, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Request for information
Could those editing this page please provide some more information to help less expert readers? Thanks. seglea 18:05, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The phrase "the Nazaraeans/Nasoraeans Theodoret described" is useless without a link to Theodoret, which we don't have. Either we need a short article on him/her, or we need a one-line explanation of who s/he is/was.
 * Is the "Jochanan the immerser" referred to John the Baptist, or at any rate a figure otherwise known who is held to be the origin of that New Testament figure? If so, we need a link and perhaps a brief word of explanation. 


 * John is the English version of the Hebrew name Yochanan (or Jochanan). We can safely assume that we're dealing with the same immerser here.
 * I've got no idea who Theodoret is, but when Googling for the name, the second site is the Wikipedia article on Theodoret. (See also the entry in the Catholic encyclopedia). He appears to have been involved in a Nastorean controversy, and the author of this article is probably referring to that event.
 * JFW | T@lk  20:17, 19 May 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks, JFW. I'm sorry I missed our Theodoret page - I realise now that I misspelled him when I searched for him.  I have to say that I share your doubts about whether this material is encyclopaedic.  It is deeply obscure to me, as a reader from outside whatever world those writing it (or those who are being written about) are in - so obscure that I can't even tell what world that is; which makes me suspect that I'd find it highly POV if I could only discern what its POV was!
 * I guess that criticism begs the question of what would make it more encyclopaedic. Well, it would be nice to have some basic information about the size and geographical spread of these groups - are we dealing with hundreds of people or millions, and where might we meet them? - and how their beliefs are derived - are they constructing a new (Jewish?) interpretation of the New Testament, using existing traditions about the NT (and if so where do those come from, and what evidence are they based on?), relying on other ancient documents (which?) - etc.  And it all needs to be written in a language and style that isn't a concealed attempt to rubbish anyone else's belief system, whether that's Jewish, Christian, or anything else.  seglea 06:01, 20 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I share all your concerns, and a lot more NPOV should go into this article. Basically, all these groups are still Jesus-centered but claim to be Jewish. They do not subscribe to Jesus' divinity, only to his rabbinic and Messianistic role (failing to explain why there's no world peace yet). They are a bit closer to Judaism than adherents of Messianic Judaism but cannot in any form be considered mainstream Jews, however much legitimacy is claimed.
 * Numbers are probably under 10,000 worldwide, but the website of the Netzarim doesn't provide us with these stats. JFW | T@lk  12:42, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

I agree, and

"failing to explain why there's no world peace yet"

that is the Key point isn't it? All these messianic groups whether it be centered around Menachem Mendel Schneerson, or Ribi Jehoshua, or anyone on this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah#Other_Jewish_people_purported_to_be_messiahs the fact that the messianic era has obviously not begun yet needs to be addressed by any such group. But do we find any such explanations offered anywhere? All I have seen is a lot of deflection.

@Seglea. In answer to one of your questions, I know that they consider the Testaments of the Evangelists and other such writings to be nothing more than historical documents no better or worse than any of the early chrstian writings, and apply a scientific method in deducing which texts might hold the most accurate information. I think that they consider the reconstructed Hebrew Matthew pretty trustworthy but do not consider any of these texts to be from HaShem. With these writings then then simply read to understand them from the orthodox Jewish paradigm. Thus the immerser simply becomes a Matbil. Ribi Jehoshua's teachings simply identify him as a Beth Hillel Ribi, etc. etc. Quite interesting actually, if only they dropped the messiah belief their research might be taken more seriously. Zestauferov 13:28, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

I have done some further reading on the subject and I have discovered that there are several "Nazarene" sects all with very similar names but not all identicle. I suggest that this page be merged with Nazarene and that each of the sects is clearly disambiguated with a summary of their respective beliefs. It also seems as it stands, like some of the info on this page is inaccurate. Zestauferov 09:46, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Well I've done quite a bit that was needed, but this still needs merging with Nazarene as Wetman first suggested at the top of this page.Zestauferov 14:16, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Nazarene Karaite group is Nonexistent
A while back some information was posted about a so-called "Nazarene Karaite" group, but as it turns out, there is no such group. I was the one who wrote most of that information. I apologize for doing so, and I can only say that I did it out of excitement. I had been talking with Jacob Moak...a Southern Baptist who works with Messianic Jews, about the possiblity of creating a Nazarene Karaite group, which at first interested him. A few days after I posted the information that we had been discussing, Jacob said that he wanted no part in dividing Christianity more than it already is. Basically, the whole idea fell through, and I shamefully admit that I am to blame for any controversy about the matter on this site. Only one other person, my friend Lee, has posted information, but only to help quiet any debate. Sorry.