|
Updated: 2026.10.16
 basal suckers (Ariz St U) 0250x169.jpg "Netzarim - Mediterranean Olive (Olea europaea) basal suckers (Ariz St U)") |
 basal suckers (Ariz St U) 1080x729.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small} Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ - Mediterranean Olive (Olea europaea) basal suckers, scions; like little protective sentries guarding the mother tree (Ariz St Univ.) |
NeiꞋtzër, pl. נְצָרִים (Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ); basal sucker offshoot(s), scion(s); especially from the root or trunk of an olive tree—like little sentries standing at the foot guarding the mother tree; derives from the prophecy in Yᵊsha•yãhꞋu 11.1 and 60.21.
Contrast נְצָרִים, often translated "shoot" against חֹטֶר, which is correctly translated as "shoot." Clarity is found only in the original Hebrew.
Religion sounds nice, innocent; just belief in God, right? everybody should practice their religion?
Everyone practices "religion" as literally (not metaphorically nor figuratively) defined in Webster:
Aside from rolling my eyes at the circularity of the definition, the important central meaning "religion" conveys is an "organized system" — a clergy composed of mortals, humans, who determine, set laws, judge and decide all matters of "religion".
All of these functions depend on the clergy proclaiming their exclusive "divine rule" from God! They presume and pretend to arrogate to themselves that which is the exclusive Domain of the Creator/יְהוָׂה!!!
Truth is, only one person controls your access to the Creator: you; alone. You, and you alone, will one day stand before the Creator to account for all of your actions; you, and you alone. No intercessor, no legal counsel. The Creator is צֶ֣דֶק.
This is why I am charged with making it as clear as I know how: the N´tzãr•im´ are not a religion! We have no clergy. The Nᵊviy•imꞋ predicted this modern world in which education, literacy, would negate the need for priests or clergy. You can learn and determine your own path. Recognizing this, I am the last Pã•qidꞋ; and I am not clergy. While all religious/religion is rejected, we are an open community―no "chosen", no one excluded due to race, birth, physical attribute, nationality or the like―a community of logical (discrete mathematics, not "philosophical" heuristics passed off as logic) analysts of reality—the real world and universe. We logically analyze creation as the products, therefore 
אָחוֹר (Trail/Attributes) showing the direction—דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָׂה–of the פָּנִים.
יְהוָׂה is צֶ֣דֶק and אֶמֶת, not biased toward or against any person. It's all on the life you choose to lead. The bᵊrit is open to every human being who will strive their best to meet its standards of admission―which is, as MikhꞋãh ha-Nã•viꞋ (6.8), Hō•sheiꞋa ha-Nã•viꞋ (6.6), Rav Hi•leil´ ha-Za•qein´ (Sr.) ha-Nãs•iꞋ (≈BCE 30 to 10 CE), Riy״by summarized, אֶמֶת and צֶ֣דֶק in all of your interactions except enemies (who, ignoring these 2 Principles, would take advantage). The Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ require nothing of you. We merely point to דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָׂה. All of the responsibility is on you, where it belongs. Seems likely, that's the whole purpose of everything.
Pᵊrūsh•imꞋIn the years leading up to the crucifixion in 30 CE, the Hellenist Romans determined they would ensure that they would never again have to deal with a Jewish Messiah-inspired nationalist threat. Recognizing the useful near-parallel zeal of their Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Jewish intermediary officials, it was plain that they could tantalize their collusion with hints of a possible return to their Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Ma•kab•imꞋ rule over the Jews. Only by such colluding together, could an impossible scheduling time-frame of a political-legal string of events become do-able literally overnight, before the Bæt-Dã•widꞋ-Beit Hi•leilꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ could even become aware of their collusive plot to organize any legal defense or resistance! Numerous entrapments were set to bait Riy״by into some statement that could be innuendo-ed into a legal charge in Roman courts of sedition against the "lawful" (meaning Roman) rule by claiming to be King of the Jews. (Indeed, Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων
was the Roman (not Jewish) legal charge written on the plaque above his head on the cross!)
To follow the dynamics of this historically world changing event, one must first understand the contributing dynamics that have existed from the first established families, clans and tribes still living in caves: this was a 2-layered power struggle:
With Pilate's fears that Rome would suspect him of complicity in planning an uprising if he exonerated the vaunted "Messiah" threat, the only account to reach Rome's ears was that of the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ, dutifully dealt with by Pilate: an actual threat of messianic rebellion. To Rome the threat was real and, consequently, Rome commissioned the Roman army to hunt down and execute every possible claimant to the Jewish throne written in the Jewish yō•khas•inꞋ. The accomplished this mission in 135 CE, 65 years after the Temple was destroyed. The only Roman of that generation free of guilt was Pilate. The only Yᵊhūd•imꞋ free of guilt were the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ. The same arguments by the same players, just different countries refusing Jewish priestly and "chosen" exclusivity, grate on everyone today, burning the fuses of never ceasing replays of the past 3 millennia. The ending never changes: religious vs reality of creation and its Creator, יְהוָׂה.
All of the above leaves open the question: why was the Temple destroyed?
The aftermath of the crucifixion of Riy״by upended the Jewish civil war that had been brewing beneath the surface at least since the first illegal usurping of the Davidic Throne by the priestly—QōꞋrakh tradition—Ma•kab•imꞋ priest-king, between the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ, with Rav Hi•leil´ ha-Za•qein´ (Sr.) as ha-Nãs•iꞋ of the "Συνέδριον" (≈BCE 30 to 10 CE) and Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ, committed to priestly kings as supreme authority in the Temple worship. These 2 partied vied in a battle only one could win for ultimate control of "Judaism"! As it turned out, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ won that battle—remaining in control of the names (Hellenist) "rabbis" & "Judaism" but, in 70 CE, lost that war as Rome destroyed their Temple!
The Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ strategy, spoken by Riy״by ("Give Caesar what is Caesar's, give xיהוה what belongs to יְהוָׂה!), would have, still would today, be permitted by other civilizations. (But Jews still persist with the same suicidal, and mistaken, "chosen" priests and insistence on a temple!)
Thus, the key takeaways are:
Just as then, from Moses (including QōꞋrakh) and all points in between until now, and for as long as the planet revolves, that is a trigger that has always, and will always, result in destruction. יְהוָׂה, the Creator, knows no "chosen"―it was Yi•sᵊr•ã•æl´ that chose יְהוָׂה, not the reverse! To reverse that is blasphemy, not Tōr•ãhꞋ!
The Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ began with a flagrantly ambitious overthrow scheme: all of the necessary legalities, paperwork, legally compliant meetings, etc. would be prepared in advance; ready for a time when the known presence of all of the VIPs of the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ could be predicted with certainty and without their defenses ― PësꞋakh!
This was only do-able with the collusion of the intermediary officials, because, while the Bãt•æꞋ-Din of the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ were Hellenist Roman-friendly lax, the Bãt•æꞋ-Din of the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ was unbending: their courts never convened at night, out of view of the public, much less on a Holy Day! Consequently, sealing their mutual collusion in a shroud of secrecy from the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ was the only path to their ostensibly-shared goal.
Even questioning him was (thinly) veiled and limited to public discourse. No non-public questioning under public arrest to tip their hand.
Documentation shows that 2 lines of questioning were authorized, each supported by one documented event. Of the interrogators ordered to entrap Riy״by: NHM 22.23-33, corroborated in Christian Hellenist Greek-Καινής Διαθήκης "Mark" 12:18–27; "Luke" 20:27–4) refers to one (of these 2) events (infra), in which the interrogators are, in the first instance, Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ, not Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ.
Concealing their Hellenist motives as too conspicuous, their questions challenged two widely debated theological apologetics (resurrection and the hypothetical woman married successively to seven brothers). Their intent was to flummux Riy״by with a hoped-for result of attracting (contra-Hellenist) Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ toward Hellenist-accomodation. We know that such trend is corroborated by Qa•nãy•imꞋ targetingn of "Hellenist-accomodationalists", to prevent the hemorrhaging of Bæt-Dã•widꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ to Hellenism!
The charge under Roman law, was that Riy״by, by proclaiming to be "King of the YᵊhūdꞋimꞋ", posed a clear and present danger of leading an uprising to depose Caesar. Even Pilate refused that as a conspicuous subterfuge. He realized that the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Beit Sha•maiꞋ, clearly in charge of the great crowd, were feigning protection of Caesar only in order to conceal their true intent: executing the Beit Hi•leilꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ barrier to their own QōꞋrakh-based takeover of "Judaism"! (This is discovered only via retrospect: to that point, Rav Hi•leil´ ha-Za•qein´ (Sr.) ha-Nãs•iꞋ (≈BCE 30 to 10 CE) controlled the "Συνέδριον" for Beit Hi•leilꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ. Between 10 & 30 CE, a power struggle festered between the 2: pro- vs anti- assimilation of Temple into the Hellenist Roman world! Ever since this event, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Beit Sha•maiꞋ have controlled "Judaism" under the guise of being "the Pharisee Rabbis". They even managed to portray themselves in Ta•lᵊmūdꞋ thereafter as "Sages" (not Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ), in both Ta•lᵊmūdꞋs; though they were unable to realign the mi•shᵊpãtꞋ in Ta•lᵊmūdꞋ Yᵊrū•sha•lᵊm•iꞋ (Ma•sëkꞋët Bᵊrãkh•ōtꞋ 1:4:4) describing obedience to Beit Sha•maiꞋ instead, incurred the death penalty! So thereafter, they became "the Pharisee rabbis"!
(Critical point: today, there are numerous Jews, from religious to non-religious, who still keep, as best they can, to the "Old Time" Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ, who had no hand in that fiasco and subsequent takeover of "Judaism"!)
But Pilate could not afford to appear to be protecting a threat to Caesar. So, to prevent an immediate uprising by the very Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Beit Sha•maiꞋ who were bringing the charge against Riy״by, accusing him of being the leader of an uprising against Caesar, [ in order to avoid the uprising they were pretending to put down;!] he caved to the demand of the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Hellenist Beit Sha•maiꞋ bloc's demand: accepting their charge and authorizing the execution. To make it clear that he was only averting a clear and present public rebellion led by Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Hellenist Beit Sha•maiꞋ, Pilate publicly "washed his hands" of the charge!
Nobody (but me) dares to realize that the terrible truth is not that "the Jews did it", nor the Romans did it! The terrible truth is that by this time, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ & Hellenist Beit Sha•maiꞋ had hijacked the Beit Hi•leilꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ―and the future of "Judaism"!
The entirety of this account, like the entirety of the Roman Hellenist Greek-Καινής combined with the Διαθήκης, were edited and censured by Roman Catholic bishop-popes over the subsequent 3 centuries before settling on their "permanent story" in א and β!
Hence, the previously-prepared, Roman-law charges emerged overnight: Crimen Maiestatis—a treasonous claim to kingship, namely “King of the Jews”; with a side-order of sedition. Pre-planned conviction was rubber-stamped (sealed) with issuance of the arrest warrant, physical arrest and imprisonment. These were quickly followed within a couple of days by subsequent public conviction and crucifixion of Riy״by. The suddenness and fait accompli finality of this time-frame with subsequent crucifixion could not have been achieved without their shared collusion.
This also exposes why the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ convened exclusively their own Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ courts―maintaining secrecy from the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ Nãs•iꞋ and "Συνέδριον", convened their own Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ courts on PësꞋakh and at night! Both of these practices were unequivocally prohibited by the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ―and so documented in Ta•lᵊmūdꞋ!)
But the partnership of the Hellenist Romans and Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ remained ongoing.
with the crucifixion of Riy״by, executing every living heir to the Royal Throne of Dã•widꞋ ha-MëlꞋëkh! As each became Pã•qidꞋ of the N´tzãr•im´, they were hunted down—with the collusion of the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ—and executed in the same way, by this same partnership! In 135 CE, the last living Royal Heir-Apparent, Pã•qidꞋ 15 YᵊhūdꞋãh Bën-Dãvid, was likewise betrayed, similarly charged, arrested, convicted and executed. There were no more physical heirs to the Davidic Throne. This partnership even destroyed their yō•khas•inꞋ! From that last execution in 135 CE, there could never be a future Mã•shiꞋakh!
With savage intensity, the Hellenist Romans, informed by their Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ partners, hunted-down and executed every last Davidic heir to the royal throne―the Davidic Mã•shiꞋakh. Thus, by 135 CE, the execution of the 15th N´tzãr•im´ Pã•qidꞋ, the raison d'être of the Bæt-Dã•widꞋ, Beit Hi•leilꞋ Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ was dead and, by then, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ had gradually displaced the Bæt-Dã•widꞋ-Beit Hi•leil´ ha-Za•qein´ (Sr.) ha-Nãs•iꞋ (≈BCE 30 to 10 CE) Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ and reshaped it from within.
with Hellenist-replacing its original Bæt-Dã•widꞋ loyalty with Hellenist-Roman favored, Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ/Beit Sha•maiꞋ politics, while keeping the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ Ma•qab•imꞋ priest-kings ended in BCE 37 when the Roman Senate transformed the Ma•qab•imꞋ-priest-kings into a client kingdom of Rome, designating Hellenist client Ë•dōm•iꞋ Herod the Great as "King of the Jews"!
By 135 CE, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ/Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ/Beit Sha•maiꞋ movement presenting itself as Ta•lᵊmūdsꞋ!
The Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ "wolves" in Hellenist Paul "on the road to Damascus" ≈30 years later (≈60 CE). Paul engineered and marketed a similar translation in religious form―connecting Rib´i Yᵊhō•shū´a, his mother ( MiꞋrᵊyãm→ Hellenist "Mary") and his N´tzãr•im´ ta•lᵊmid•imꞋ as familiar Roman-Hellenist Pantheon-style characters so that the movement would appeal to the Hellenist Roman world.
Beginning with the crucifixion in 30 CE, the Hellenist Tzᵊdōq•imꞋ of Beit Sha•maiꞋ, carried out a takeover-from-the-inside that usurped the Bæt-Dã•widꞋ-Beit Hi•leil´ ha-Za•qein´ (Sr.) ha-Nãs•iꞋ (≈BCE 30 to 10 CE) Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ (!!)—and, with the further Roman installation of 37 CE, arrogated the Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ institutional identity while rapidly transforming it into the post-37 CE movement later known as the "Pharisee Rabbis" of the Ta•lᵊmūdꞋ >Bã•vᵊl•iꞋ!
)If he had not been the royal heir-apparent, he would most certainly have been challenged, displaced—and perhaps executed for the attempted usurpation of the rightful heir-apparent and deception of the people! This would have been an immediate action, from the very first, by the heir-apparent. Clearly, there was no argument―from any Jew―regarding that specific point―and that demonstrates the legitimacy of Riy״by as the sole candidate-Mã•shiꞋakh of his era. That recognition was demonstrated even beyond the borders of YᵊhūdꞋãh, by the visit of the "μάγοι from the east" was never challenged, nor subsequently!
Most Christians assume (and Jews simply parrot Christian mythology that is unimportant to them) that the followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa were originally called "Christians," based on the Hellenist (Greek) Πραξεις Αποστολων 11.19-26. However, the evidence is blatant how the (Greek-speaking) Hellenist Roman Church, compounded by the KJ/V English, used Ναζαρεθ to bury the Hebrew-speaking, Jewish Pharisee (non-Hellenist) rival: the Ναζωραιος – completely burying the even more conspicuous term, Ναζαρηνος.
In contrast to RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original followers—who were Yᵊhud•imꞋ Pᵊrush•imꞋ (Pharisee Jews) living and teaching Tor•ãhꞋ, in Yᵊhud•ãhꞋ (Judea), Christians were 2nd-4th century C.E., Hellenist (including gentile), followers of the apostate Hellenist Turkish-Jew, Paul—in Hellenist Turkey. As followers of an excised apostate, the original, Pauline, Hellenist proto-Christians had no continuity, legitimate connection nor roots whatsoever to RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and his original Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ Pharisee Jewish followers… nor to authentic (non-Hellenist) Judaism in Yᵊru•shã•laꞋyim.
The situation was opposite in Syrian – Hellenist – Antioch, "(now Antakya, Turkey), founded by Seleucus I Nicator (B.C.E. 300) and named for his father Antiochus… Antioch had an important Jewish community.
When the deterioration of the Seleucid dynasty led to the Roman occupation of Syria (B.C.E. 64), Antioch became the capital of the new province of Syria… As a prosperous commercial center Antioch was a meeting point of the Greek and the oriental civilizations. When persecution broke out in [Yᵊru•shã•laꞋyim] following the death of Stephan, many of [his min] fled to Antioch. Some of these undertook the customary preaching to the [Hellenist] Jews in the city. Others who were "Hellenist" (Greek-speaking) Jews, finding themselves in a Greek city, began to preach to the Greek-speaking Gentiles (Acts 11.19-21), some of whom had been attending the synagogue services, attracted by the Jewish ethical teaching; one of these may have been Nicolaus of Antioch, an early proselyte and one of the seven [deacons from Yᵊru•shã•laꞋyim] (Acts 6.5).
Following the success of the first preachers, Barnabas and Paul began to work in Antioch, and it was here that the name Christians was first used (Acts 11.22-26), the term apparently having been adopted by the [Greek-speaking Hellenist] Roman authorities as a means of describing the group. We hear of an ekklesia [Greek, not Aramaic, term]…" (Geoffrey W. Bromiley, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: A-D, Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ., 1979 p. 142-3)
It is clear from the above that the primary language used by Paul and these original Hellenist churches in Turkey was Greek, not Aramaic and certainly not Hebrew.
Terms for "Christian" | |
| PᵊshitᵊtãꞋ Aramaic: |  113x36.gif "''Christiane'' (Peshiteta Aramaic)"){kind=small} |
| Hellenist Greek: | Χριστιανος |
| Hebrew term "Christian" |
נֹצְרִים or
נוֹצְרִים נָצְרִים and not Hebrew transliteration of PᵊshitᵊtãꞋ Aramaic: כרִסטִיַנֶא |
This is confirmed in the PᵊshitᵊtãꞋ where the text states that those in the Hellenist Diaspora city of Antakya, Turkey, who were preaching the NT teachings of the apostate Hellenist Turkish-Jew, Paul were called, in Aramaic, "Christiane"—conspicuously not the Aramaic מְשִׁיחִי used in Jewish circles. Rather, this was a transliteration of the Hellenist Greek Χριστιανος (Khristianos). These were Hellenist Christians, of Hellenist Turkey, followers of apostate Hellenist Turkish-Jew, Paul—who had been excised for his Hellenist—Reform—syncretizing (assimilation) by the original Pharisee Jewish followers of RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa!!!
Of 31 instances translated into English as "Nazareth," only 12 of these instances in the Greek source texts of the NT, properly refer to Ναζαρεθ. Yet, of the remaining 19 instances, which properly refer to Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ—Ναζωραιος (from which gentile sects derived 'Nazoraeans' or distorting Pã•qidꞋ Ya•a•qovꞋ ha-Tza•diqꞋ Bën-Dã•widꞋ to be a Nã•zirꞋ) and Ναζαρηνος, Christian versions typically render only 2 passages faithfully as "Nazarene" (Mt. 2:23 & "Acts" 24:5).
See for yourself the many instances where this identical term—Ναζωραιος—in the earliest extant source documents deliberately avoids acknowledging the Jewish Pharisee Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ in the gentile Roman Christian campaign to DISPLACE the original Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ: Mt. 2:23; 26:71; Mk. 10:47; Lu. 18:37; 24:19; Jn. 18:5, 7; 19:19; Ma•a•vãrꞋ 2:22; 3:6; 4:10; 6:14; 22:8 and 26:9.
The Christian Displacement Theology is also evident in their redactions to LXX. In their campaign of Displacement Theology, the Hellenist Christians attempted to paint themselves as "gentile Nazirites" perhaps by perverting Nã•zirꞋ and morphing it with αγιος (agios; "holy") to form Ναζωραιος. These post-135 CE Roman gentile Christian redactions are documented in Codex Alexandrius:
Κριται (Kritai; Judges) 13:7 and 16:17 —redacting αγιος (agios; holy) to read instead Ναζειραιος (Nazeiraios; cf. A Handy Concordance of the Septuagint, London: Samuel Bagster, SBN 85150 174 5, 1970-71, p.3 ) and
Θρηνοι (Thrænoi; Lamentations) 4:7—נְזִירֶיהָ (Nᵊzir•ëyꞋhãꞋ; her Nᵊzir•imꞋ, "her 'Nazirites'") is redacted into Codex Alexandrius as Ναζειραιος (Nazeiraios) rather than the correct Ναζιραιος (Naziraios) as found in all of the other source documents and instances in LXX.
Through this documented redaction, Codex Alexandrius thus makes Ναζειραιοι (Nazeiraioi) distinct from Ναζιραιοι (Naziraioi; ; her Nᵊzir•imꞋ). The then-apparent—but incorrect and misleading—similarity in the Greek between distinct Ναζειραιος (Nazeiraios; Nã•zirꞋ) and Ναζωραιος (Nazoraios; Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ) is the only plausible basis for the frequent confusion between the terms —totally unrelated in Hebrew —נָצְרִים (Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ; offshoots) and נְזִירִים (Nᵊzir•imꞋ; consecrated [ones; pl. masc. noun]). This is especially true of Christian misconceptions that our first Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ Pã•qidꞋ, Ya•a•qovꞋ Bën-Dã•widꞋ, was a "Nazirite." All evidence indicates that Pã•qidꞋ Ya•a•qovꞋ Bën-Dã•widꞋ was not a "Nazirite." He was, however, a Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ
 basal suckers (Tuscany) 0250x188.jpg "ccc") |
 basal suckers (Tuscany) 1600x1200.jpg "Click to enlarge"){kind=small} Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ - Mediterranean Olive (Olea europaea) basal suckers, scions (Tuscany) |
נְצָרִים is the masc. plural of נֵצֶר, which, in turn, is related to the Aramaic נִצְרָא—"wicker (woven straw, as from these offshoots – basket, hat, chair, etc.)". As can be seen from Yᵊsha•yãhꞋu 11.1 and 60.21, inter alia, NeiꞋtzër referred more specifically to the basal-sucker offshoot(s) from the root or trunk of an olive tree—which stood around the mother tree like little sentry-guard(s)—and transplantable young green shoots sprouting from the trunk… used (according to the dictionaries) to weave wicker-baskets.
Thus, the question arises, are these terms related to the shorꞋësh נָצַר? Because נָצַר is a synonym of שָמַר, the distinct meaning of נָצַר must be teased out in order to understand how it might be related to נֵצֶר and what connotations that might imply… particularly to cognates נָצְרַת and נָצְרִים.
נָצַר and שָמַר are synonyms that seem to be interchangeable with only one distinct and consistent thematic exception. (Additionally, this distinction lends new meaning to many passages.)
The only time both synonyms are found in the same verse is in Mish•leiꞋ ShlomꞋoh 4.6: "אַל-תַּעַזְבֶהָ וְתִשְׁמְרֶךָ; אֱהָבֶהָ וְתִצְרֶךָּ:" (Don't let go of [Tor•ãhꞋ, v. 2] and she will שָמַר you; love her and she will נָצַר you).
The Tar•gumꞋ sheds futher light on this contrast: "לא תשבקינה ותסרינך, ותנטריך; רחמה דתשגביך, דתשגבינך, contrasting נָטַר (guard, observe secundum Jastrow) with שִׂגֵּב (elevate, lift up, exalt, strengthen secundum Jastrow).
The PᵊshitᵊtãꞋ also illuminates the distinction: "תשבקיה דתנטרך רחהיה דתשוזבך," contrasting נָטַר (guard, observe secundum Jastrow) with שֵׁיזֵב (release, save secundum Jastrow; i.e., deliver).
NeiꞋtzër probably evolved from calling the sentry-like basal-sucker offshoots "sentries"; wicker used for weaving baskets, etc. (The correlation with "offshoots" is clear in the two Biblical passages and dictionaries.)
There are five references in the Bible to נֵצֶר, the plural of which is נְצָרִים, from נָצַר.
Yᵊsha•yãhꞋu 11.1: "Shall go forth a staff from the trunk of Yi•shaiꞋ; and וְנֵצֶר from his roots shall bear fruit." (corroborated in 1QIsa)
Yᵊsha•yãhꞋu 14.19: "you have been sent from your grave כְּנֵצֶר." (corroborated in 1QIsa)
Dãn•i•eilꞋ 11.7: "Then will stand up, מִנֵצֶר of her roots, on his pedestal…" (see also The 1993 Covenant Live-LinkT )
Tᵊhil•imꞋ 141.3: "Place a watchguard for my mouth, י--ה, a נִצְּרָה over the door of my lips."
"The NeiꞋtzër" was the title of the prophesied Mã•shiꞋakh (Yᵊsha•yãhꞋu 11.1 and 60.21) and historical RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa (The Nᵊtzârim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matitᵊyâhu (NHM, in English) 2.23). The plural, Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ, describes his original Pᵊrūsh•imꞋ Jewish followers, including the first 12, who were specifically identified in NT by the name Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ (cf., for example Ma•a•vãrꞋ 24:5, but also the numerous additional instances in the earliest Greek cited).
The term NeiꞋtzër was displaced by apostate Hellenist Turkish-Jew, Paul's Χριστιανος and, later, the telltale terms in the Greek mss. were de-Judaized (Hellenized) by the post-135 CE Christian NT redactors —unsupported by LXX —to Ναζαρηνος
Pᵊrūsh•imꞋThe plural, Nᵊtzãr•imꞋ (referring to his followers), was de-Judaized (Hellenized) in the NT to Ναζωραιος (nazoraios) where it is clearly translated as "Nazarenes" in Ma•a•vãrꞋ 24:5 (as well as confused, elsewhere, with Nazoraeans / Nazirites).
Another distinct cognate, n. & adj. (implying a distinction between the two groups requiring distinct names) is נָצְרִי(ם(—Χριστιανός—reflecting the meaning of the shorꞋësh (נָצַר). Thus, while the נְצָרִים continued to live harmoniously among their fellow Pharisee Jews, the נָצְרִים were Hellenist gentiles, outside and alien to the Pharisee Jews and understood by Pharisee Jews as gentile Hellenist sentries of the Hellenist Roman occupiers. Further, significantly, it was the נָצְרִים who incited the most vitriolic antinomian—misojudaic—libels, labeling נְצָרִים "lost to the 'law' of sin and death, enemies of God and the Church and servants of Sã•tãnꞋ" (see Eusebius)—demonstrating inarguably that the נָצְרִים were not only mutually exclusive from the נְצָרִים with no connection whatsoever, the נָצְרִים Church was the most bitter enemy of the נְצָרִים, whom they loathed as Jews.
 |
|
 |
Red: Hellenist (Roman Occupiers & Hellenized Jews)