While many Christian circles believe that the true Israel of Scripture can only be white, Adamic people, they will often disagree over whether or not all white people are Israelites.
Scripture is clear on the purity of the Israelite bloodline — if we have even one single ancestor who is not a white, Adamic person, then we cannot be an Israelite — neither can we be considered white or Adamic.
Disagreement arises over the contention that some white people are Israelites, while others belong to the Genesis 10 nations — just like it was in the Scripture.
However, what we should agree on is that Israel according to the flesh can be found among the people of white European descent.
Many white people may have Israelite mothers, but not Israelite fathers — like Timothy (Acts 16:1) — thus they are not Israelites themselves — whiles others may be Israelites through their fathers — by patrilineal descent — without even realizing it.
Some assert that all white people are Israelites — something Scripture never states at all. This view that all white people are Israelites is a solution to a doctrinal problem — but not a requirement of the Scripture itself. They conflate the idea that “all white people are Israelites” with the idea that “only Israelites are saved” — a Scripturally untenable position — and the idea that “all Israelites are saved” — another Scripturally untenable position.
In this triptych of doctrinal falsehood, two doctrinal positions have been taken — first that “only Israelites are saved” and second that “all Israelites are saved” — which both need the third position to be true — that “all white people are Israelites.”
Their doctrinal problem can be summed up as follows: If “only Israelites are saved” and “all Israel is saved” — but if all white people are not Israelites, then how would we know who is saved and who isn’t?
In other words, an Israelite would have no way to know whether they were an Israelite — yet their salvation is dependent on them being born an Israelite. If they were white, they might be an Israelite — but there’s no way to know for sure. Among white people some are saved and some aren’t — and there’s nothing anyone can do about their salvation or recognize it in the first place.
Thus they paint themselves into a corner — and their “solution” to this doctrinal conundrum is to baselessly whitewash the problem with the “logical” conclusion that “all white people are Israelites.”
Christians circles who hold those doctrines have indeed created an unsolvable conundrum for themselves in light of no genealogical records. Instead of recognizing the utter failure of their so-called “scholarship” to create anything useful — and an inability to actually prove their personal Israelite heritage — they rest their salvation on something they don’t have — actual proof that they — individually — are Israelites according to the flesh.
Much has been written to document the extensive dispersions of the true Israelite peoples primarily into Europe — and also some parts of Asia. Despite this overwhelming historical evidence that the “lost” ten northern tribes of Israel migrated up into Europe, we should stop short of concluding that all white people are therefore Israelites. To interpret history as such is nothing short of wishful thinking in light of the sheer number of non-Israelite nations during the time of Christ.
Without genealogical records, for example, they are forced into making such arguments as, “All Germans are Israelites. If your father was German, you are an Israelite, as long as your mother was white.” How do they know that every German male is an Israelite? They don’t know — and cannot know. Germany, as a modern nation, arose out of 300 different German-speaking entities. To assume that every person among those entities was originally Israelite according to their genealogy is merely begging the question.
After all, the Israelites were certainly not the first white people to migrate into Europe — evidence of the presence of white people in Europe dates back to at least 2,500 BC and earlier.
It may not be 100% accurate, but if one were to conservatively accept just 80% of Josephus’ account of the Genesis 10 nations in Antiquities (book 1, chapter 6), one would immediately have to give up the idea that all whites are Israelites — it just isn’t a credible position. “All whites are Israelites” is a ramshackle solution to the doctrinal problem — outlined above — arising from an incorrect view of Scripture.
On the other hand, many Christian circles today believe that white people are comprised only of the descendants of Japheth, son of Noah, who dispersed into Europe — and there is much circumstantial evidence to support this view, at least for the earliest white settlers of Europe. Yet at the same time, many of those who believe this Japhethite identity of Europeans often maintain that the real Israelites were “Arabic” — or brown-skinned descendants of Shem, son of Noah. However, Shemites and Japhethites must have had the same physical features — including their white skin color. Moreover, all the descendants of Noah looked the same, because they came from the same father and mother.
Nowhere in the Scripture do separate “races” — itself a concept not found in the Scripture — spontaneously appear. Neither do separate races spontaneously appear in observable reality.
These humanist egalitarian Christians must beg the question so they can artificially add “race” into the Scripture — to account for every hominoid on the planet. Their consciences have been so seared by Marxist indoctrination that they read what they’ve been taught about “race” into the Scripture itself. Because no one in the Scripture ever mentions “race,” many will falsely assume — against all reason — that these Bible characters were somehow “color-blind” — instead of accepting the simple fact that all Biblical peoples — except the giants — were white people who shared the same patriarch — Adam.
Furthermore, victims of this “color-blind” view have been tricked into believing that the modern-day Jews are the legitimate people of Israel. The New Testament authors trace the Lord Jesus’ patrilineal heritage — thus confirming that an Israelite is such only by their father — as with Jacob’s twelve sons. Yet the Jews deny the true Christ and His apostles, claiming instead Israelite identity is established matrilineally — and have done so since 200AD — thus proving they are not — and cannot be — Israelites. Neither are Jews white — by their own admission — thus doubly proving their ineligibility as Israelites.
No matter where one finds oneself on any of the above descriptions, there is a single glaring flaw we all face — no one can prove by means of patrilineal genealogy that they are Israelites. Even the Jews — who most certainly are not Israelites according to aforementioned criteria — cannot lay any claim to Israelite ancestry. Verily, no group on the entire planet may lay legitimate claim to Israelite ancestry by means of genealogy. We can state categorically who are not Israelites, but we cannot state categorically which individuals — within the white European nations — are Israelites.
Having said that, the beauty of what we will propose is that it doesn’t actually matter whether one sees all white people as Israel or not. As has been made evident by those who baselessly claim to be Israelites, the real problem is — and has always been — spiritual in the case of white Adamic people — just as it was with our ancient ancestors (Romans 9:32).
When we white people rest on the Jews’ unproven circumcision — believing we are Israelites — we also render our hearts uncircumcised. In doing so, we join Jews in their denial of the Lord Jesus — the basis of their identity. Furthermore, we unwittingly become arrogant toward the natural branches (Romans 11:21) — true white Israelites — and spoilers of the apple of God’s eye (Zechariah 2:8).
Conversely, when white people rest on an unproven circumcision — supposedly being Israelites according to the flesh — we also render our hearts uncircumcised. After all, if all Israel is saved — and I’ve accepted that I’m an Israelite just because I’m white — albeit baselessly — what need is there for me to do anything other than rest on my laurels?
In light of the true way in which Israelites are identified in Scripture, the idea that one is an Israelite by virtue of being white will seem banal and superficial to anyone who has set their minds on the good of Israel and the Kingdom of God. No matter where anyone finds themselves in the descriptions above, we will offer a challenge that will entirely invalidate it all.
WHY DO WE WANT TO BE ISRAELITES?
Before diving in, we’d like the reader to consider his motivation for claiming to be an Israelite. We know that many white people claim to be Israelites — and that they have Scriptural and historical motivation to do so — but what is really going on in your heart? Israelites who had genealogical proof were Israelites a posteriori — with empirical evidence — rendering motivation irrelevant. Whites who by Scriptural and historical motivation believe they are Israelites are — at best — Israelites a priori — by theoretical deduction.
But how do you believe you will benefit from being an Israelite to the point that you would deduce being Israelite a priori in the first place? Why would you even leave your eternal salvation to a theoretical deduction?
In Leviticus 26:1-13 and Deuteronomy 28:1-14, Israel are promised many material blessings on condition that they keep the laws of God. We have indeed observed many white people motivated by the material blessings granted to Israel — they keep the laws of God in the hope they will inherit Israel’s material blessings in this life. Sadly, we have seen Christian brethren fall away from the truth of Israel’s identity — and even Christianity entirely — because they have not received the material benefits of the law despite keeping the law — at least in their own minds.
When reading the Scripture, we see many heroes of faith who arose from the loins of Jacob. We see how they struggled, but ultimately pleased God — being rewarded for their deeds. For example, David was anointed king of all Israel — yet went unacknowledged and suffered persecution for a long time after his anointing. We see many Christians identifying with David’s story — themselves feeling like they deserve better despite their imagined persecution.
Herein lies another powerful motivator to be an Israelite according to the flesh — we may hope for something materially better despite our dismal circumstances. There are far-reaching implications for this motivation. Some of us believe Israel must receive some kind of worldly restoration, despite undergoing severe tribulation in modern times. Some of us believe our personal material circumstances do not line up with what we feel we deserve. In some cases our motivation is not necessarily material — some of us may believe we do not get the recognition we feel we deserve.
In all of the above examples, many of us feel we are undergoing a divinely delayed gratification — imagining it to be a trial of faith — the gratification which we will receive is either material or social gratification. Some of us are so convinced of the gratification we will receive that we actually try to convince others we ourselves could be accurately represented by actual Biblical characters.
Ironically, instead of actually behaving like those Biblical characters, we simply L.A.R.P our fantasy in our spare time. Yet the fantasy — which takes second place in our lives to the cares of the world — forms the basis with which we view our lives and treat others. Maybe we even tell ourselves we can serve God through our worldly desires. Some of us may even believe the financial support we receive — enabling us to do it “full time” — proves that we are serving the Kingdom instead of the world. When Paul elaborated on his declining material aid from the Corinthians, he said in 1 Corinthians 9:26-27,
26 Therefore I run in such a way as not to run aimlessly; I box in such a way, as to avoid hitting air; 27 but I strictly discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.
Through some remaining shred of self-awareness, we might only hint at who we believe we truly are — while others make overt claims at being a David, a Paul or a Daniel. Some of us are so desperate to lord ourselves over others that we may claim to have heard directly from the Lord Jesus in order to force our views on others. It is all too common for Christians to claim to have had supernatural experiences — whether dreams, audible voices, visions, etc — to legitimize their “authority” over others. Sometimes that “authority” is covered by a whitewash of “niceness” which quickly rinses away when their “authority” is challenged.
Some of us may engage tacitly in a lust for rulership over our brethren, never having to defend our views in the Scripture because we supposedly have a direct connection with the Lord Jesus or the Holy Spirit — similar to how the Pope claims to be the one and only vicar — or personal representative — of God on earth. Many may deny it in word, but the reality is we are defined by what we do — not what we say. Admittedly, this phenomenon is not specific to those of us who believe we are Israelites — yet this kind of behavior naturally would be more common in those who imagine themselves to be Biblical heroes.
We have also undertaken a revealing exercise — one we’d encourage others to do. We have posed the question to others: In these modern times where we do not know from which Israelite tribes we hail, what tribe do you think you are from? Also, why did you reach that conclusion?
Pause for a second and consider for yourself which tribe you are likely from and why. Read no further until you have answered both questions.
We have found the majority of people who claim to be Israelites answer that they are of the tribe of Judah. Is it possibly because Judah holds eminence of authority among his brothers? Yes, Judah certainly does — and many seem to want to ride on the coat-tails of that eminence. In a façade of humility, others are content to answer that they might hail from other tribes — content to ride on the coat-tails of “merely” being an Israelite.
In either case, we found that no one has given a satisfactory answer as to why they believed they were of the tribes they claimed. Sometimes they just guessed at it — not knowing why. Other times some may claim they are of Judah because they have German ancestry — while others may claim to be of Joseph because they have British ancestry. This belief arises among those who claim that only the preeminent Anglo-Saxons are true Israel — and they desire to bask in that historic eminence. In all cases, so long as they are Israelites — content to ride on what they perceive as the benefits thereof — they are happy with whatever tribe they are assigned to.
As a quick clarification, we are not suggesting that each person must know what tribe they are from — nor is theorizing over it necessarily bad. Rather we merely propose the question as an exercise in working out our underlying motivations behind our belief in our supposed individual Israelite heritage.
Some of us have even unwittingly politicized our view of being Israelites. Make no mistake — white people have been under severe tribulation at the hand of Jews and non-whites — the Lord’s rods of chastisement in smashing the power of Israel. But worst of all, white people suffer tribulation at the hand of other whites — something prophesied myriad times in Scripture yet stubbornly ignored by many who profess that all white people are Israelites.
Many feel understandably ashamed and degraded under the heel of Jews and non-whites — desperately trying to find a way to uphold their inflated sense of self worth while simultaneously explaining away the debased state of their predicament. As imagined Israelites, they want to find a place of eminence in the midst of a political pantomime — with Satan pulling the ethnic and socioeconomic strings.
It’s safe to say that “racism” and white-supremacy form the foundations of some would-be Israelite’s faith. The “truth” of their Israelite identity forms a guilt-free conduit for their pre-existing hatred for Jews, for assorted non-whites and even for their own white kindred. We must certainly acknowledge that non-whites — Jews included — are not Adamites and live accordingly — but we are not to exceed the scope of the commands of Scripture.
Do not confuse these statements with some kind of excuse to fraternize them or in any way validate them to the status of Adamic — especially in relation them playing “church” — lest we cause our brethren to stumble by them. Neither do we need to “leave the world” (1 Corinthians 5:10) to avoid them. Yet we certainly are not to take any fleshly pleasure or glory in trying to hurt them — or fantasize over them being hurt. That is not the only symptom of the problem, but it certainly is a common one.
In doing so we make ourselves like Balaam who embarrassingly struck his donkey in frustration. Wasn’t the donkey trying to save his life — and are the non-whites not there as a correction for us? Conversely, Satan also knows non-whites are not Adamites — and he uses that knowledge to devastating effect. Satan says, “Jump!” And they reply, “How high?” Then again — when consumed by hating them, so do we. “By what anyone is overcome, by this he is enslaved.” (2 Peter 2:19)
Some Christian circles have invented elaborate doctrines rationalizing that non-whites are the product of a “serpent seed” — fuel for the fire of a “racist” worldview — mere justification to live — and waste — a life being distracted by anger. Conversely, they especially believe that all white people are Israelites and that white people are somehow inherently good. Often these views could not exist without extra-Biblical sources like the targums, pseudepigrapha and ancient pagan texts.
These texts especially tickle the ears (2 Timothy 4:3) as the adherents of that doctrine feel they have attained to some esoteric knowledge which other Christians do not have — creating a sense of superiority. This phenomenon is especially gnostic in nature, as they reject the power of Scripture — which they often claim is merely the product of fallen man prone to error — to bring about repentance and righteousness — instead subscribing to a kind of impotent enlightenment.
Maybe the examples we gave in this section do not represent everyone. Maybe some may identify with a few — or fall somewhere in-between. God is witness that in the past we ourselves shamefully identified with some of the above points. Whatever the case, we recommend a deep introspection as to what our respective motivations are as individuals throughout the reading of this article.
With all these examples in mind — and in summary — often people’s motivations behind being Israelites have a certain fleshly, selfish or narcissistic quality to them. Many — in their minds — tacitly and sub-consciously ask the question: What can being an Israelite do for me? Such people ignore the lesson of the Lord Jesus in Luke 17:10,
So you too, when you do all the things which were commanded you, say, ‘We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.’
Being an Israelite certainly does come with great benefit, but material or social benefits are little more than friendship with the world. Incidentally, it was that same narcissistic quality — seeking glory from others and serving the ego — which caused many Israelites to reject the Lord Jesus. The Lord says in John 5:43-44,
43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, you will receive him. 44 How can you believe, when you accept glory from one another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?
If only we could ensure a good condition of our hearts — having correct motivation — and be Israelites a posteriori — simultaneously. Surely the answer lies in seeking “the glory that is from the one and only God”?
WHAT IS AN ISRAELITE?
In Romans 9:4, Paul gives a very succinct description of what an Israelite is:
…Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and daughters, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the Law, the service, and the promises
Paul then perceives a certain disjointedness between what Israelites are by definition — according to the word of God — and what they were in practice. According to Paul, Israel were not living up to the definition he provided in verse 4, and he says in response, “But it is not as though the word of God has failed.” (Romans 9:6)
In other words — according to Paul, if Israel are defined a certain way — and if all individual Israelites do not live up to that definition in practice — then the word of God is failing. However, the word of God cannot fail — and is not failing. For this reason, Paul needs to explain exactly how the following criteria can all be true simultaneously:
- Israel are defined a certain way
- Not all Israelites are living up to the definition of an Israelite
- The word of God is not failing
The first thing Paul does is he creates two distinct groups under which Israelites fall: Children of the flesh and children of the promise. Children of the flesh are all Israelites who have Israelite fathers — they are able to prove their Israelite heritage by patrilineal descent. Paul calls these “my kinsmen according to the flesh” (Romans 9:3) — children of the flesh. Children of the promise, on the other hand, are Israelite children of the flesh in whom the promises and definition of Romans 9:6 are being fulfilled.
Paul concludes that children according to the flesh who are not children according to the promise are not real Israelites. In other words, only children of the promise are real Israelites, regardless of whether they are able to prove their Israelite identity or not. He says “it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.” (Romans 9:8) The word in Greek for “descendants” is “sperma” (Strong’s G4690) — or “seed.”
Paul tells us that children according to the flesh who are not children according to the promise are not even regarded as “seed” or “descendants” of Israel — despite being able to prove their patrilineal descent. After all, the definition of an Israelite (Romans 9:6) must apply to all Israelites — so if it does not apply, then the patrilineal descent becomes irrelevant. Isaiah 45:25 says,
In the Lord all the offspring of Israel Will be justified and will boast.
The word for “offspring” in the Hebrew is “zera” (Strong’s H2233) — also meaning “seed,” “descendants” or “offspring.” In the Greek Septuagint, the word for “offspring” is the same word Paul uses in Romans 9:8 — “sperma” (Strong’s G4690). Therefore — according to Isaiah 45:25 and Paul, if only children of the promise are regarded as descendants, then only the children of the promise “will be justified and will boast.” To conclude then, a true Israelite child of the promise will exhibit all promises made by God to Israel — otherwise they are not true Israelites.
Yet God’s relationship with Israel is bi-directional — it’s a two-way street. There are things which Israel must do to fulfill their side of the promises — and there are things God must do to fulfill His side of the promises. This relationship can be condensed into 2 Chronicles 7:14,
[If] My people who are called by My name humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
We know that Israel will be restored at the second coming of the Lord Jesus — and we know all the true Israelites according to the promise will be included in that restored kingdom. No material wealth was promised to Israel between the Lord’s ascension and His second coming. When He does come, we will see that all the material blessings for Israel in the law and prophets were just copies and shadows of the real, heavenly blessing to come.
After all, even Abraham did not receive his material promises — but he was looking for the heavenly promises (Hebrews 11:10). At that point of heavenly fulfillment, the rewards for Israel and Abraham will begin to be realized. Genesis 18:19 even echoes this bi-directional relationship in relation to Abraham:
For I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him.
Therefore, all that’s left for Israel to do until such time is to uphold their end of the bargain. In faith Israel must look to God’s end of the bargain being upheld — just like Abraham did. However, God will always uphold His end of the bargain — hence Israel’s faith is in good and perfectly trustworthy hands — so long as Israel keeps its end of the bargain. Yet we should not be quick to imagine “keeping Israel’s end of the bargain” is something everyone else needs to do — not ourselves as individuals. There will be no national revival in the “end times” in any case.
With this in mind — tying back to Romans 9 — we can conclude that Israelites according to the promise are those who uphold their end of the bargain as individuals. Paul says that Israel “did not arrive at the law” (Romans 9:31) — so Israel did not keep the law. If they did not keep the law, they were not keeping their end of the bargain. If they were not keeping their end of the bargain, they were not children of the promise. If they were not children of the promise, they were not real Israelites.
This truth becomes all the more vivid when we consider that not only are Israel supposed to keep their end of the bargain, but Israelites are guaranteed to keep their end of the bargain. Paul says in Romans 11:26-27,
26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written: “The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.” 27 “This is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”
Paul says the Lord will remove ungodliness from them and take away their sins. If we claim to be Israelites — yet we are ungodly sinners — then we simply admit that we are not Israelites, because true Israelites have their ungodliness and sin taken away.
Therefore, an Israelite is someone in whom the promises of God are fulfilled — they are children of the promise. Israel were literally promised to keep their end of the bargain. In the bi-directional relationship, God essentially took care of both sides.
WHAT ARE THE PROMISES OF GOD?
Peter described true Israelites as follows in 1 Peter 2:9,
But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession…
As we already quoted, the Lord said of Abraham, “I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice.” (Genesis 18:19) Israel are not merely chosen by God to be the recipients of His blessings. God wants “cherubim” — executors of His will and keepers of His ways. Doing righteousness and justice in word and deed defines the very nature of a true Israelite.
Furthermore, Israel are literally “God’s own possession.” The prophets say myriad times that Israel are the inheritance of God — like in Deuteronomy 32:9,
For the Lord’s portion is His people; Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance.
According to Peter, all Israelites are called to be priests. John says the Lord “made us into a kingdom, priests to His God and Father” (Revelation 1:6). Isaiah 61:6 says, “you will be called the priests of the Lord; you will be spoken of as ministers of our God.” Peter said Israel are “a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 2:5)
Consider for a moment that the priests of Israel — sons of Aaron — represented but a small portion of their number. When we consider which of the priests fulfilled their office as they should have, there are even less. When Peter, John and Isaiah refer to all Israel being a kingdom of holy priests, we assume they are only talking about the kind of priest who fulfill their office — as opposed to the likes of Hophni and Phinehas — Aaronic priests and sons of Eli — who were cursed to untimely death by God due to their bad behavior.
The only conclusion we can possibly make is that each and every Israelite in the Kingdom of God will be like a priest who fulfilled their duty how they should have. In other words, they fulfill the promise of God for them to be priests.
We hope that any who claim to be Israelites are beginning to gain an appreciation for what they aspire to. Priesthood has no room for spare time, worldly desires, debased behavior, personal endeavors, not knowing and studying the Scripture and not praying. Priesthood requires a singular and razor-sharp focus on the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God. Nothing short of that was good enough for the sons of Aaron — neither should it be good enough for a true Israelite. If we settle for anything other than priesthood, we are not true Israelites — because multiple authors said that all Israelites are to be priests. Galatians 2:20 says,
I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me
If our old selves died, why are our old selves alive and kicking with all of their worldly desires? If Christ lives in us, why do we act contrary to the ways of Christ?
Peter also says we are to be a “holy nation, a people for God’s own possession”, to which end Exodus 19:5-6 says,
5 Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; 6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel.
We are the Lord’s possession. As priests, He is our portion, just as He said to Aaron, “I am your portion and your inheritance among the sons of Israel.” (Numbers 18:20) Therefore again, only priests will be His possession, because all Israel will be priests. However, priests will have Him as their own portion as well. Jeremiah — a descendant of the priestly line (Jeremiah 1:1) — said in Lamentations 3:24,
“The Lord is my portion,” says my soul, “Therefore I wait for Him.”
Sadly, many Israelites want to choose their own portion in this life — imagining themselves to be the curators of their own inheritance from God. Yet in presuming to choose our own portion, we deny the Scripture which said “He chooses our inheritance for us, the pride of Jacob whom He loves.” (Psalm 47:4) We have our portion in the Lord — and He has already chosen that portion for us. Peter said we have an “inheritance which is imperishable, undefiled, and will not fade away, reserved in heaven” (1 Peter 1:4). The Lord also told us he would “prepare a place” for us in His “Father’s house” (John 14:2).
Old Testament prophets who suffered greatly in their lives were well aware of this fact. Jeremiah said, “The Lord is my portion, therefore I wait for Him.” (Lamentations 3:24) Isaiah — who wasn’t even a Levite — said, “I have spent my strength for nothing and futility; nevertheless… my reward is with my God.” (Isaiah 49:5) Even David — also not a Levite — said in Psalm 17:14-15,
14 From people by Your hand, Lord, From people of the world, whose portion is in this life, And whose belly You fill with Your treasure; They are satisfied with children, And leave their abundance to their babies. 15 As for me, I shall behold Your face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied with Your likeness when I awake.
At some point during David’s trials, he realized that hope in a “portion in this life” was entirely unsatisfactory in the face of beholding the Lord’s likeness in righteousness in the next life. David knew he would awake some day to inherit eternal life. Elsewhere, despite being anointed king — and despite having the portion of Judah — David went on to explicitly say, “The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and my cup.” (Psalm 16:5) Furthermore, in his desire for — and knowledge of — his own everlasting life, he prophesied Christ Jesus’ resurrection in Psalm 16:10-11,
10 For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; You will not allow Your Holy One to undergo decay. 11 You will make known to me the way of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever.
Even Abraham “was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God.” (Hebrews 11:10) Abraham also “considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead” (Hebrews 11:19). Verily, speaking of all heroes of faith, the writer says in Hebrews 11:39-40,
39 And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.
All of us are priests to the Lord, whether we are descendants of Aaron or not — all of our inheritance is in the Lord and has been chosen by the Lord. We all inherit the portion of priests. Consider Isaiah 61:6 with verse 7 now added,
6 But you will be called the priests of the Lord; You will be spoken of as ministers of our God. You will eat the wealth of nations, And you will boast in their riches. 7 Instead of your shame you will have a double portion, And instead of humiliation they will shout for joy over their portion. Therefore they will possess a double portion in their land, Everlasting joy will be theirs.
In light of having the Lord Himself as our portion and inheritance, why would anyone in their right mind want anything other than that? Also if we are all to be made perfect together — and the likes of Abraham and the prophets didn’t receive their promises — what makes us think we would receive an inheritance before them? And in this life no less?
When Peter said that Israel will be “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation,” he did not mean it as a mere possibility — or something Israelites had the option of aspiring to. It was a statement of fact — something which would definitely be fulfilled. If we are not priests or holy, we are not Israelites, because He said that Israelites will be priests and holy.
Recall how we mentioned that God would take care of Israel’s end of the bargain as well. God taking care of both sides of the covenant agreement would not be considered as new or profound to even mainstream Christian doctrine. It’s just that most Christian circles believe that God took care of Israel’s side of the bargain by granting them some kind of automatic righteousness.
John firmly refuted that idea when he said, “make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous.” (1 John 3:7) Righteousness is not automatic — it must be practiced. Anyone who believes righteousness is automatic is distorting Scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16).
Probably the most defining feature of Gnosticism is the acknowledgement of the flawed nature of the flesh, seeking salvation in mere “knowledge” of the divine. In other words, as a gnostic you are “saved” if you know things about the divine that other people do not know. Most Christians circles elevate “I am the way, the truth and the life” to mere impotent knowledge granting some kind of automatic salvation. They claim because they “know Jesus,” they will be saved, while someone who doesn’t “know Jesus” will not.
Yes, knowledge of the Lord Jesus is critical, yet it is not enough. As James said, “You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.” (James 2:19) In other words, mere knowledge of the Lord Jesus puts us on the same level as the demons who readily acknowledged Him (Mark 1:24), yet they were cast into Tartarus — reserved for the day of judgement (2 Peter 2:4, 1 Corinthians 6:3).
The Lord said that many “will seek to enter and will not be able” (Luke 13:24) — and He will tell them, “Leave Me, all you evildoers.” (Luke 13:27) The Lord even explicitly stated in Matthew 7:21,
Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
Yes, those who enter are those who do the will of His Father — keeping their end of the covenants as Israelites. The Lord requires that we keep our end of the covenant promises — simply acknowledging Him is not enough. The idea that righteousness comes through mere knowledge or enlightenment — like “knowing” or “accepting” Jesus — a reductive “salvation by ‘grace'” — is gnostic heresy.
Likewise, the idea that white people have some inherent and unconditional deity within them — “salvation by race” — is also gnostic heresy. Those who hold this view believe — in utter blindness — that one could be saved without ever having even acknowledged the Lord Jesus. So an atheist would be saved simply because he is white? They have “exchanged the truth of God for falsehood, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25). Paul wrote in Titus 2:11-15,
11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously, and in a godly manner in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, 14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, eager for good deeds. 15 These things speak and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. No one is to disregard you.
We are to deny ungodliness and worldly desires, live sensibly, righteously and in godly manner. We are to look for — and hasten (2 Peter 3:12) — the appearing of the Lord Jesus — wherein lies the promise of our inheritance. He came to redeem us from every lawless deed and to purify for Himself a people. There is no automatic righteousness here — neither any racial salvation. The wonder of the Lord Jesus’ work will make us righteous — He will purify us. He will rescue us from every lawless deed, because He will put the law on our hearts.
The new covenant reinforced this promise to Israel as it says in Hebrews 8:10,
For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel After those days, declares the Lord: I will put My laws into their minds, And write them on their hearts. And I will be their God, And they shall be My people.
The Lord said that “the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart” (Matthew 15:18). Therefore, if the law is written on one’s heart, then they will only act in accordance with the law. They are then blameless because “sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4) — and they do not act contrary to the law.
When Paul concluded the passage in Titus 2, he said, “No one is to disregard you.” In other words, we are not to disregard a doctrine which requires us to be “redeemed from every lawless deed.” (Titus 2:14) If we disregard them, we are disregarding the commands of Paul — an apostle of the Lord Jesus. Deuteronomy 6:5-6 gives probably the most defining feature of an Israelite — and the first and foremost law (Matthew 22:37),
5 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart.
Israelites do not have the option of not keeping this law — it is not something to merely aspire to. True Israelites were guaranteed by God — by virtue of having the law written on their hearts — to be redeemed from every lawless deed. Not loving the Lord our God with all we have is lawlessness — it breaks the first and foremost law. True Israelites will love the Lord with all their heart, soul and strength.
If the law says to love God with all our heart, soul and strength, then anyone who claims to be an heir of the new covenant — having the law on their heart — must actually do so. If they do not, they are not Israelites — because God guaranteed Israelites to keep the whole law. If God guaranteed it to Israel, then anyone who claims keeping the whole law is impossible merely doubts the power of God.
CAN ISRAEL AFFORD TO “REST ON THEIR LAURELS”?
Let us stop for a second and reflect on the gravity of the reality we face. Step back and consider the context of the word of God and His promises we have covered so far. Outside of the confines of our reality and existence, there exists — if “exist” could even describe Him — a Being who is completely, utterly and eternally outside of the grasp of our understanding. So great is His divine intellect, He created a “Logos” to be the Divine Executor of His will (Proverbs 8:22-36, John 1:1, Colossians 1:15, Revelation 3:14, Revelation 21:6, Revelation 22:13) — through whom He created the universe by proxy (John 1:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, Colossians 1:16, Hebrews 1:2).
So great is His power, He created that which created us. Ourselves and our “creations” are merely the creations down a line of Creators much greater than ourselves.
The very purpose of us being created was to conform to the image of the Logos (Genesis 1:26, Romans 8:29, Colossians 3:10) — being divine executors of His will — “a kingdom, priests to His God and Father” (Revelation 1:6). The Infinite God then gave all of His own to the Logos — who in turn promises to give all His Father gave Him to His people (Revelation 3:21). To this end — out of all of the creation, He raised a people — Israel — for His own possession so they could be inheritors of all creation.
What lies before Israel in eternity is a Kingdom so vast and limitless, our minds simply cannot comprehend it. So great is its nature, it can only be represented by copies and shadows — mere allegories which pander to our meager understanding. We simply have to read Revelation 21:10-27 to understand that those copies and shadows do not hold back any luxury or glory by worldly standards. In fact, Revelation 21:11 literally says we ourselves will have “the glory of God.”
Does anyone seriously think they could live a worldly life and inherit this glory? Does anyone seriously think their lifestyle in this world doesn’t reflect whether or not they have conformed to the image of the Creator? Did the Lord not say, “You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things”? (Matthew 25:23) Indeed, how we live in this life shows our eligibility to inherit the next.
In light of the divine calling set before Israel, why do we believe we somehow “deserve” the promised glory without actually having to demonstrate the divine nature in our lives? Can we truly treat the God of the universe half-heartedly or with indifference and actually expect Him to fulfill His promises to Israel in us? Stop and consider for a moment how intensely narcissistic that is.
Yet as we already covered, many of us are — or have been — selfish and narcissistic in our motivation to be Israelites. The sorry state of our lives in relation to the priesthood required of us stands as witness against us. If our spouses or loved ones treat us with indifference, we are even able to recognize that — and we feel justified against them, thinking they do not love us. In doing so we witness against ourselves, because how much more can the God of the universe see our indifference when “all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him to whom we must answer.” (Hebrews 4:13)
Moreover, when we justify ourselves against others we make ourselves hypocrites. If we cannot even have grace toward others, how will the Lord have grace towards us? (Matthew 18:21-35)
That narcissism is no more evident than in those who by their doctrine look for excuses not to have to keep the whole law. In light of the overwhelming reality of creation, some see the law to love their God with all they have and immediately scan the Bible for an exit strategy. They actually want the God of the universe to bestow upon them a glorious kingdom, yet not have to love Him with all their heart. What an absurd idea!
By the power of the Lord Jesus and the Holy Spirit, Israel were guaranteed to love God with all they have — so why not cash in on that guarantee? Some believe in “salvation by race” — or “salvation by ‘grace'” — but what we should believe in is salvation by forgiveness from former sin and the promised redemption from lawlessness. Just as James said, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” (James 2:18)
You have “race” — so do we. You have “grace” — so do we. Do you have that which truly defines an Israelite — to love the Lord God with all you have? Is our life’s purpose the Kingdom of God, or is that something we do on the side? Like James said, “I will show you my faith by my works.” Comments on internet forums — bothering friends and family with politicized and powerless “religion” — and feelings of indignation at world events — are not works by faith.
The Kingdom of God is not found in our flesh, our “race” — or in our feelings — but rather in the Spirit and the Lord’s power to redeem us from lawlessness. Therefore, there are no laurels on which to rest in the first place. Incidentally, Paul — referring to his Israelite heritage — said in Philippians 3:7-11,
7 But whatever things were gain to me, these things I have counted as loss because of Christ. 8 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them mere rubbish, so that I may gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, 10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; 11 if somehow I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
Paul had laurels he may have been tempted to rest on, but he discarded them in favor of faith in Christ Jesus. Paul even warned against “vain” and “endless” genealogies which are “useless and worthless” compared with the “plan of God, which is by faith.” (1 Timothy 1:4, Titus 3:9) Israel must prove they are Israelites in the promises of righteousness — not in false doctrine or in historical “proofs” they are Israelites. In so doing, we make ourselves like the Israel who sought their own brand of righteousness just as Paul said in Romans 9:31-32,
31 …Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though they could by works
Genealogies, sacrifices and circumcision — all according to the law — are useless in bringing about righteousness — loving our God with all we have and loving our neighbors as ourselves. Rather, we have faith in the Lord’s power to purify us and bring about true righteousness in us just as Paul said, “for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness” (Romans 10:10) — and Galatians 5:4-6,
4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by the Law; you have fallen from grace. 5 For we, through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love [first for our God, then for our brethren].
It is deeply ironic that some Christian circles are vehemently against circumcision in their words, but in their deeds they cling to an ersatz circumcision by trying to prove they are Israelites according to the flesh — or by trying to prove they have automatic righteousness by “grace.” These gnostic beliefs in essence are no better than “salvation by circumcision.”
To further the irony — as we mentioned — no one can seriously prove they are Israelites in these times. Thus, the failures of the doctrine of “salvation by race” or “salvation by ‘grace'” have been perfected — they have distorted the Scripture to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16).
However, Israel finds itself in a most fortuitous time in relation to their own faith. In a time when Israel were able to prove their identity by genealogy, the “nations, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, but the righteousness that is by faith” (Romans 9:30).
The Genesis 10 nations were completely undistracted by such things as circumcision and genealogies, simply because they had no such thing. Imagine Paul’s frustration when Judaizers tried to get them to put faith in physical circumcision — works of the law — which are of no use against fleshly indulgence. By perfect grace — while yet sinners (Romans 5:8) — they were forgiven and predestined to become conformed to the image of the Son (Romans 8:29), but they hung their hats on things of the flesh and vain belief. Such views only served to “hinder them from the truth” (Galatians 5:7).
Therefore, in these times Israel find themselves in the same position as the nations were in the earliest church — unhindered from the truth — with no laurels to rest on. Either we pursue the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel by faith in his guarantee that Israel will uphold its end of the bargain — or just like those who go the way of foolishness, we die eternally like animals (Psalm 49:12-13).
At the end of the day, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We are either Israelites because we show the fulfillment of the promises to Israel in our lives, or we are not Israelites at all. Thinking we can be Israelites without acting like Israelites is little more than narcissism.
WHO ARE THE 144,000? — IT’S MORE SERIOUS THAN WE THOUGHT
The Revelation clearly shows that by the end of the great tribulation, 144,000 Israelites according to the flesh will be sealed — Revelation 7:4-8 lists their numbers according to their tribes. Yet nowhere does Revelation 7 state that all the 144,000 came out of the great tribulation — a designation reserved for the multitude of the nations (Revelation 7:14) — only that by the end of the great tribulation, the number would be completed.
Neither does the Revelation state anywhere that the 144,000 need to be alive simultaneously. Furthermore, nothing of Revelation 7 indicates that any of the peoples the chapter describes — whether nations or Israelites — need to be alive simultaneously. The chapter merely takes stock of those who are all co-heirs of eternal life — indicated by the Isaiah 25:8 quote also echoed in Revelation 21:4,
He will swallow up death for all time, And the Lord God will wipe tears away from all faces, And He will remove the disgrace of His people from all the earth; For the Lord has spoken.
Revelation 7:3 says the 144,000 were sealed on their foreheads — an obvious reference to two things. Firstly, Deuteronomy 6:4-8,
4 “Hear, Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! 5 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. 7 And you shall repeat them diligently to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, when you walk on the road, when you lie down, and when you get up. 8 You shall also tie them as a sign to your hand, and they shall be as frontlets on your forehead.
The seal on the forehead — or the hand — signifies an Israelite’s adherence to the law of God. Therefore, the 144,000 were sealed by their adherence to the law of God. Again, true Israelites according to the promise keep the law of God. Furthermore, Paul says in 2 Timothy 2:19,
Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His;” and, “Everyone who names the name of the Lord is to keep away from wickedness.”
Everyone who names the name of the Lord must keep from wickedness. Can the meaning of the seal of God be any more obvious?
Secondly, in Ezekiel 9 a “man clothed in linen” (verse 2) — the Lord Jesus — was commanded to “make a mark on the foreheads of the people who groan and sigh over all the abominations which are being committed in [Jerusalem’s] midst.” (verse 4) This ties into Deuteronomy 6:4-8 above, because one who has the mark of the law on their forehead would certainly “groan and sigh over all the abominations.” After him, six men with weapons were commanded to kill everyone else, whether “old men, young men, female virgins, little children, and women” (verse 6).
Only those who received the seal were left alive in Jerusalem, to the point where Ezekiel said, “Oh, Lord God! Are You going to destroy the entire remnant of Israel by pouring out Your wrath on Jerusalem?” (verse 8) In other words, in the vision in Ezekiel, the only survivors were those who received the mark. The vision of Revelation 7:3 refers to the same vision as in Ezekiel 9.
Therefore only those who received the mark recorded in Revelation 7:3 would be the ones to survive in Israel. As we already covered, all Israelites must have the law written on their heart — meaning they are keepers of the law. Then having the law written on the heart and being marked on the forehead are essentially referring to the same thing. It follows then that all Israelites must have the mark on their foreheads, like in the Ezekiel 9 and Revelation 7:3 imagery.
We can only possibly conclude then that Revelation 7’s Israelites are all Israelites across all time. This may be shocking and hard to accept for many, so we will provide more detail.
Revelation 7 as it relates to the nations tells a very condensed form of Isaiah 49, even quoting Isaiah 49:10 in Revelation 7:16-17. Early in Isaiah 49 it says in verse 6,
He says, “It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the protected ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth.”
Naturally the “Servant” is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, prophesied to bring salvation to the nations. Over and above His work in uniting and restoring the two houses of Israel, He was to be a light of the nations so they He may purchase people “from every tribe, language, people, and nation.” (Revelation 5:9) Later in Isaiah 49:14-19, Zion laments its bereavement only to be comforted that Zion will be “too cramped for the inhabitants” (verse 19) and that Zion will put these inhabitants on “as jewelry and bind them on as a bride.” (verse 18) Verses 20-21 continue,
20 The children you lost will yet say in your ears, ‘The place is too cramped for me; Make room for me that I may live here.’ 21 Then you will say in your heart, ‘Who has fathered these for me, Since I have been bereaved of my children And cannot conceive, and I am an exile, and a wanderer? And who has raised these? Behold, I was left alone; Where are these from?’”
Zion shows its surprise at these lost children, because in its own mind, it could not conceive. Zion does not believe it was even capable of having children in the first place — obviously not being aware of actually having any children. As if a mother could have a child and not even realize it. Yet Zion is presented with so many children there’s not even enough living space for them all. Verse 22 then reveals where these children come from,
Behold, I will lift up My hand to the nations And set up My flag to the peoples; And they will bring your sons in their arms, And your daughters will be carried on their shoulders.
Isaiah 60:3-4 tells the same story,
3 Nations will come to your light, And kings to the brightness of your rising. 4 “Raise your eyes all around and see; They all gather together, they come to you. Your sons will come from afar, And your daughters will be carried on the hip.
Ezekiel 36:12 ties everything together,
Yes, I will have people—My people Israel—walk on you and possess you, so that you will become their inheritance and never again bereave them of children.
Therefore, Revelation 7 goes further and even describes the picture of what Isaiah 49 being fulfilled looks like in practice. Isaiah 49 described a great many children from the nations, whereas Revelation 7:9 calls the children “a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation…” Furthermore, Isaiah 49 refers to Zion as the “tribes of Jacob” and “Israel” (verse 6) — so there is no doubt that in the Isaiah 49 narrative, Zion represents all Israel.
Herein lies an important prophetic principle represented by the Lord Jesus in Luke 20:37-38,
37 But as for the fact that the dead are raised, even Moses revealed this in the passage about the burning bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. 38 Now He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; for all live to Him.”
When prophets — and by extension the Holy Spirit — refer to Israel, they are referring to Israelites who “live to Him.” If Israelites are spoken of as being alive in the prophets, it must necessarily refer to all Israelites who attain to eternal life. As the Lord Jesus made clear in Luke 20:37-38, the Holy Spirit refers to those who “live to Him” as being alive in the present.
Isaiah 49 also refers to the Lord Jesus as “a light of the nations” (verse 6) — calling to mind His work of salvation to all nations. Thus Isaiah 49 is referring to all the individuals from the nations — the children — who were to be saved. All-in-all, Isaiah 49 prophesied the entire salvation plan for all peoples — Israel and the nations. Revelation 7 shows the result of the salvation plan for all the nations — “a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation.”
Likewise, the woman of Revelation 12 was described as “a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (verse 1). Joseph’s dream presents the very same imagery (Genesis 37:9), so the woman can only be Israel itself. Incidentally, Revelation 12:17 refers to those “who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” as the woman’s seed — or children — which is the same imagery we covered in Isaiah 49. Israel is the woman and the nations are her children. Therefore, Revelation 12 shows the same image as Revelation 7 and Isaiah 49.
If Isaiah 49 refers to all Israel and all the nations who would be saved — and Revelation 7 refers to all the nations who would be saved, we have one seeming anomaly left — the 144,000 of Revelation 7. If we were to overlay Isaiah 49 onto Revelation 7, we can only conclude that the 144,000 represents all Israelites according to the flesh who would be saved. Thus Revelation 7 and Isaiah 49 describe the “all Israel” of Romans 11:26: The remnant of Israel (Romans 11:5) with the fullness of the nations (Romans 11:25) added.
That being said, there are yet more ways to show this truth. Many interpret the Revelation as one chronological series of events, yet as is the case with many prophetic writings, it actually gives the same events from different perspectives. With this in mind, we can see that Revelation 12 – 14 actually rehashes the events of Revelation 4 – 11.
Revelation 4 – 5 begins with the death of the Lord Jesus, whereas Revelation 12 begins with His birth — more or less the same time. Revelation 11 ends with the beginning of the reign of the Lord, judgement of the dead and reward for His servants — His second coming (Revelation 11:15-18), whereas Revelation 14 ends with the harvest (Revelation 14:15) — also His second coming. Much more can be said, but this is very simple and intuitive.
Unfortunately all who believe Revelation to be one chronological series of events find themselves in the awkward position of having to explain away the very obvious timing of those events. For example, we know when the Lord Jesus died — placing a definite time for Revelation 5:6. We know when the Lord Jesus was born — placing a definite time for Revelation 12:4-5. If the Revelation is one series of events, we must explain why obvious references to events we know have already happened — and may be connected with one another — are referring to something else. Those who explain away these obvious events generally whitewash or gloss over them, never really offering anything substantive.
Ultimately then, the 144,000 in Revelation 7 are the same as those in Revelation 14. Revelation 14:4-5 offers some further descriptors of these 144,000 Israelites,
4 These are the ones who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are celibate. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These have been purchased from mankind as first fruits to God and to the Lamb. 5 And no lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless.
We know that if one lawfully marries a white women, they will certainly not be defiled by that woman — unless she is a lawless woman who becomes a thorn in her husband’s side. Therefore, we cannot conclude that their celibacy refers to literal virginity, but rather some other kind of defilement. Revelation 17:2 says that “those who live on the earth became drunk with the wine of her [Whore of Babylon] sexual immorality.” Naturally then, the 144,000 had no place with the whore’s lawlessness. Also Revelation 3:20-22 offers a very simple explanation,
20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21 I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her sexual immorality. 22 Behold, I will throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds.
This passage uses Jezebel — wife of Ahab, king of the house of Israel (1 Kings 16:31) — as a copy and shadow of communities led into sin by false prophets. 1 Kings 21:25 says,
There certainly was no one like Ahab who gave himself over to do evil in the sight of the Lord, because Jezebel his wife incited him.
The fact that Ahab died because of his fornication with false prophecy (1 Kings 22) makes the interpretation all the more sure. By definition, false prophecy always comes from fleshly and debased motivations, just as Jeremiah 23:26 says,
Is there anything in the hearts of the prophets who prophesy falsehood, these prophets of the deceitfulness of their own heart
False prophecy also provides no benefit for righteousness and only serves to mislead the people of Israel. Verse 32 continues,
“Behold, I am against those who have prophesied false dreams,” declares the Lord, “and reported them and led My people astray by their lies and reckless boasting; yet I did not send them nor command them, nor do they provide this people the slightest benefit,” declares the Lord.
Verse 22 gives the true standard of prophecy — announcing the Lord’s word and turning people back from evil,
But if they had stood in My council, Then they would have announced My words to My people, And would have turned them back from their evil way And from the evil of their deeds.
We would recommend a full reading of Jeremiah 23 for the full picture. Isaiah said that if anyone does not speak according to the “law and to the testimony,” it is because “they have no dawn” (Isaiah 8:20) — and they are going to be “driven away into darkness.” (Isaiah 8:22) False prophecy goes against the laws of God and it results in death.
Ezekiel 14:9 goes as far as to say that the Lord would send a deluding influence to prophets who are tempted to speak against His word and mislead Israel. Paul said that God would send a deluding influence upon all who do not receive a love of truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10-11). Furthermore, we should not be surprised that it was the Lord Himself who commanded Ahab’s prophets to be deluded by a lying spirit, that Ahab would go up to battle and die (1 Kings 22:19-23).
Therefore, if any think they have received a revelation from the Lord — no matter how real it may seem — they must beware that they do not spread lying spirits, because they prophesy the “deceitfulness of their own heart” (Jeremiah 23:26). Deuteronomy 13:1-10 gives us yet more precedent that false prophecy may be given by the Lord to test whether we are secure in Him or not. The story of the prophet murdered by false prophecy in 1 Kings 13 makes this reality all the more frightening.
Suffice to say that the 144,000 are neither promulgators nor followers of false prophecy — they are completely chaste from its whoredoms. It could be no other way if true Israelites are followers of the law of God. In a way, this truth ties into the next descriptor which says “they follow the Lamb wherever He goes” (Revelation 14:4). John 10:4-5 says,
4 When he puts all his own sheep outside, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5 However, a stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers.”
As Christians we assume we follow the Shepherd because of our personal faith — yet, in reality, we do not because we are utterly confused and do not know what to do in these modern times. Most modern interpretations tacitly assume that all “true Christians” are sheep — yet they do not assume that one cannot claim to follow the Shepherd and not know where oneself — or the world — is going. If we truly follow the Shepherd, we have peace that we know where we are going. Revelation 19:10 also tells us that “the testimony [or evidence] of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” In other words, if we claim to have Jesus’ testimony, we must also know God’s will.
Furthermore, sheep are not misled by their own desires or the false prophecy and evil teaching of strangers — they love the Lamb with all that they have, fulfilling God’s promises to Israel. They go only where He goes because they care only about His will — not their own. They do not assume the Lord Jesus is a supporting character in their own lives — rather, they assume they are supporting character’s in the Lord Jesus’ life. Narcissists want the Lamb to follow them wherever they go — supporting their own worldly, material and fleshly desires — which they often confuse and conflate with the will of God to their own destruction. In their relationship with the Lord Jesus, they have lost sight of who is the King of kings and who is the worthless slave (Luke 17:10).
Revelation 14:5 says that “no lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless“, almost like-for-like with Zephaniah 3:13,
The remnant of Israel will do no wrong And tell no lies, Nor will a deceitful tongue Be found in their mouths; For they will feed and lie down with no one to frighten them.
They “do no wrong” and so “they are blameless” — thus the covenant made with Israel to have the law written on their hearts is fulfilled in these 144,000. Psalm 15:1-2 says,
1 Lord, who may reside in Your tent? Who may settle on Your holy hill? 2 One who walks with integrity, practices righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart.
Tying back to the 144,000 not lying — when we lie to ourselves, we practice one of the worst kinds of lies and deceit. The only way we can walk with integrity and practice righteousness — being blameless — is if we speak truth in our hearts. If we cannot even be honest with ourselves, how could we ever be honest with others? When we lie to ourselves, we can rationalize all kinds of evil to serve our dark desires. Therefore, in order to be blameless, “no lie was found in their mouths.” We offer this explanation over and above the obvious interpretation that they do not lie to others either.
Also see how the passage plainly calls them the “remnant of Israel.” It may seem intuitive to interpret the “remnant of Israel” as the true Israelites who are alive in the end times, yet that is not the case. In Romans 9:27 when Paul explains who are Israelites according to the promise, he quotes Isaiah 10:22 which says,
Though the number of the sons of Israel may be like the sand of the sea, only the remnant will be saved
The context of Romans 9 was eternal salvation — so we may retrospectively contextualize Isaiah’s statement in the same way. Recall also how God is not the “God of the dead, but of the living; for all live to Him.” (Luke 20:38) When Isaiah said that “only the remnant will be saved,” he was referring to all Israelites who would be eternally saved — the children of the promise. In other words, Israelites according to the flesh — children of the flesh — were like the sand of the sea. Yet out of them, only a remnant — children of the promise — would be saved. Paul says in Romans 11:3-5,
3 “Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they are seeking my life.” 4 But what is the divine response to him? “I have kept for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice.
Paul says that just as there was a remnant during Elijah’s time, there was also a remnant during his own time. The remnant of Elijah’s time was the 7000 who did not bow to Baal — and the remnant in Paul’s time were those Israelites who truly followed the Lord Jesus. Yet according to Isaiah 10:22 and Romans 9:27, there is only one remnant of Israel — not multiple remnants — because the remnant of Israel are all those who will be saved. For this passage to make sense, we must assume that the remnant of Elijah’s time and the remnant of Paul’s time are all part of the same remnant of Israel.
As confirmed by Zephaniah 3:13, the 144,000 are also the remnant of Israel. The remnant during Elijah’s time, the remnant during Paul’s time, and the remnant of Zephaniah 3:13 are all a part of the same remnant. Therefore, in order for everything explained so far to make sense, the 144,000 Israelites must be the whole remnant itself. To this end, Isaiah 4:3-4 says,
3 And it will come about that the one who is left in Zion [the remnant] and remains behind in Jerusalem will be called holy—everyone who is recorded for life in Jerusalem. 4 When the Lord has washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion and purged the bloodshed of Jerusalem from her midst, by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning
The remnant of Zion are all those “recorded for life in Jerusalem.” For good measure, consider Jeremiah 31:7 in relation to the remnant of Israel and their children and inheritance in the nations from Isaiah 49, Revelation 7 and Revelation 12 we covered earlier,
For this is what the Lord says: “Sing aloud with joy for Jacob, And be joyful with the chief of the nations; Proclaim, give praise, and say, ‘Lord, save Your people, The remnant of Israel!’”
Moreover, the descriptors used for the 144,000 in the Revelation are basic descriptors for all true Israelites according to the promise. In other words, the way the 144,000 are described doesn’t set them apart from Israelites according to the promise in any way. From that perspective, they aren’t all that special — proving again that they are all Israel, because they are described simply by showing the fulfillment of the promises to Israel in them.
Revelation 14:4 says the 144,000 “have been purchased from mankind as the first fruits to God and to the Lamb.” Jeremiah 2:3 says,
“Israel was holy to the Lord, The first of His harvest. All who ate of it became guilty; Evil came upon them,” declares the Lord.
James says to the “twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad” (James 1:1) — Israel, “we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures.” (James 1:18) The writer of Hebrews calls the “heavenly Jerusalem” — or “the holy city, new Jerusalem” (Revelation 21:2) — the “general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven” (Hebrews 12:22-23). The Lord says quite plainly in Exodus 4:22, “Israel is My son, My firstborn.”
Yes, in many cases the Lord Jesus Himself is referred to as the “firstborn” or “first fruit”, however these two interpretations are not mutually exclusive. Revelation 14:4 plainly calls the 144,000 “the first fruits to God and to the Lamb.”
The dispensationalist mindset has taken us away from the truth of the “church” of the New Testament. Neither the church nor the bride of Christ were something which began with the Lord’s crucifixion. John the Baptist made it plain that he was happy to see the groom meet his bride — Israel (John 3:29-30). It was always the plan for Israel itself to be “the church” — just as Paul tells “the nations” they were “grafted in” amongst Israel (Romans 11:17). The root already existed — Christ Jesus the Creator, who came from heaven (John 3:31) — and there were already natural branches — Israelites — which grew from that root.
The church — and the spiritual temple the Lord must complete — is a restoration of Israel itself. Just as the first temple was to be destroyed and replaced by the second, the second temple was destroyed to be replaced by the spiritual temple — “new Jerusalem” (Revelation 21:2) and “the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel” (Revelation 21:12). Every single Israelite who had their faith in God’s promises to Israel across all time will all simultaneously have that faith rewarded in the heavenly city — New Jerusalem. Amos 9:9-11 says,
9 “For behold, I am commanding, And I will shake the house of Israel among all nations as grain is shaken in a sieve, but not a pebble will fall to the ground. 10 All the sinners of My people will die by the sword, Those who say, ‘The catastrophe will not overtake or confront us.’ 11 “On that day I will raise up the fallen shelter of David, And wall up its gaps; I will also raise up its ruins And rebuild it as in the days of old;
Israel being shaken among the nations — bringing them into the covenant — was done with the expressed purpose of rebuilding Israel. James even acknowledged this in Acts 15:15-18. Grain being shaken by a sieve is the final purification process in making flour, so the passage is saying that there will be zero impurity in the rebuilt Israel — because “all the sinners… will die by the sword.” (Amos 9:10) The Lord promised the second temple builders, “The latter glory of this house will be greater than the former” (Haggai 2:9) — a promise they would see fulfilled in the resurrection.
Tying this back to Revelation 14:4, Israel itself is the firstborn — and first fruits. They were the first branches — and they are the church — but not the Catholic Church as Catholic dispensationalists insist. The tabernacle, first temple, and the second temple all represent the final city of which they all form a part. When nations become Christians, they are joining Israel. When we read such language as “purchased from mankind as first fruits,” it is referring to all Israel. Therefore, the 144,000 are the whole remnant of Israel — not merely a subset.
Surely it is no coincidence that the heavenly city of New Jerusalem has a length, breadth and height of 12000 stadia wall thickness of 144 cubits (Revelation 21:16-17)? The measurements are not literal measurements of an actual structure — but are symbolic of something else. The closest thing we have in the entire Scripture are the 144,000. “144 cubits” for 144,000 and “12000 stadia” because each tribe of the 144,000 had 12,000 members. Therefore if this were to be accepted, it would again point to the 144,000 being all Israel — because the holy city of Revelation 21 itself is all Israel.
Revelation 21:9 refers to the city as “the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” Are we to assume that King David, Daniel, Elijah or Moses are not part of the wife of the Lamb? Isaiah 62:5 says to the Lord Jesus — the Creator and Begetter (John 1:3, Isaiah 64:8, 1 Corinthians 10:4 / Deuteronomy 32:18, Isaiah 9:6) of Israel — “For as a young man marries a virgin, So your sons will marry you. And as the groom rejoices over the bride, So your God will rejoice over you.” Jeremiah 3:14 says, “‘Return, you faithless sons,’ declares the Lord; ‘For I am a master [or husband — Strong’s H1166] to you…”
All true Israelites were released from the old covenant in death, being raised in Christ so they may be wed to Him (Romans 7:4). All Israelites according to the promise are a part of that bride, because the Lord promised Israel they would be His bride. According to Hebrews 11:39-40, we will all be perfected and receive our inheritance at the same time. Micah 2:12 says, “I will certainly assemble all of you, Jacob, I will certainly gather the remnant of Israel. I will put them together like sheep in the fold.”
In other words, the bride consists of the entirety of the remnant of Israel across all time. When all is fulfilled, that remnant happens to be 144,000 strong. That is quite an incredible standard of righteousness required for Israel if only 144,000 would constitute its remnant. Given everything we have presented, that should be no surprise — especially given the myriad times Israel are called stubborn and stiff-necked. Yes, the standard of righteousness for Israelites is very high.
Ezekiel 14:14 says that “though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God.” That is to say, each person who enters the Kingdom will do so because they — as individuals — loved God with all they had. No one will enter the Kingdom riding on anyone else’s coat-tails. If any aspire to the Kingdom, we must know we aspire to stand in the company of the likes of Noah, Daniel and Job.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 10:5 of the Israelites in the wilderness, “with most of them God was not pleased; for their dead bodies were spread out in the wilderness.” Jude says that “after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, [the Lord] subsequently destroyed those who did not believe” (Jude 5).
The writer of Hebrews uses those who died in the wilderness as an allegory and lesson for eternal life (Hebrews 3-4), of which only a few were found righteous in that generation. Moses said of those prophets, “If only all the Lord’s people were prophets, that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them!” (Numbers 11:29) Paul said that “all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons and daughters of God.” (Romans 8:14) Only children of God will be saved, so only those who have the Holy Spirit are saved.
Therefore, only the prophets Moses referred to would have been saved. There were 70 elders (Numbers 11:25), Eldad and Medad (Numbers 11:26) and then Aaron and Miriam (Numbers 12:2). Then add Moses and Caleb, giving us a total of 76 individuals who could have attained to eternal salvation in the wilderness — referring only to the first generation who entered the wilderness.
Even then, though Israel in the wilderness was like the stars of heaven in number (Deuteronomy 1:10), only a few survived. The Lord said in Matthew 8:11-12,
11 And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; 12 but the sons of the kingdom will be thrown out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Yes, He was not messing around or speaking lightly when He said that. Being an Israelite of the promise means being just one of 144,000 individuals — out of tens of millions of Israelites across all time since Israel’s inception.
WHAT IS THE BENEFIT OF BEING AN ISRAELITE?
The only real difference between Israel and the nations is that Israel were guaranteed to have some children according to the promise — whereas no such promise was given to any other people out of the Genesis 10 nations. Yet God guaranteed to provide Israel with children from all of the nations. Furthermore, Paul wrote in Romans 10:12-13,
12 For there is no distinction between Judean and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Each individual white Adamic person — whether Israel or nations — has the potential to be an heir of the promises through Christ. Paul tells us the nations attained to the promises to Israel — thus joining Israel — by faith in the Lord Jesus’ ability to complete that work in them (Romans 9:30). Shamefully, Israel tried to cling to salvation by the law of circumcision — not much different from “salvation by race” (Matthew 3:9) and “salvation by ‘grace'” (Romans 9:31-32).
Yet Paul himself sought to answer the question, “what advantage does the Judean have?” (Romans 3:1) To this he answers, “they were entrusted with the actual words of God.” (Romans 3:2) Consider that the entire Old Testament was written by Israelites who were always meant to be the “cherubim” of our age — the custodians of God’s promise of salvation to mankind. Note also that the entire New Testament was written by Israelites as well. Therefore, we can safely conclude that Israel have indeed been entrusted with the actual words of God.
It is Israel’s responsibility to help the nations and be an example to them — because after all, Israel were the only ones guaranteed to have a remnant among all the nations — and Israel are chosen to be the custodian of God’s promises. In dark times — when the whole world has fallen away from the word of God — Israel were guaranteed to have those who would continue to follow God. For the sake of God’s own promises and the glory of His own name, He will always raise up a remnant in whatever form from Israel. Therefore, if Israel doesn’t do it, who will?
Thus the benefit of being an Israelite is indeed being entrusted with the actual words of God. Isaiah 2:2-3 says,
2 Now it will come about that In the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let’s go up to the mountain of the Lord, To the house of the God of Jacob; So that He may teach us about His ways, And that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go out from Zion And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
Instead of blaspheming the name of God among the nations (Romans 2:24), Israel are to be a light to the nations. Paul quoted Isaiah 49:6 in Acts 13:46-48 — referring to his own mission to bring Christ Jesus to them,
46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first. Since you repudiate it and consider yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the nations. 47 For so the Lord has commanded us, ‘I have appointed You as a light to the nations, That You may bring salvation to the end of the earth.’” 48 When the nations heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed.
When the seventh seal of the Revelation 8 is broken, the full number of Israelites according to the flesh will have been sealed — the last one will have been born. That seventh seal has not yet been broken, so the full 144,000 has not yet been reached. When the seventh seal is broken, God’s wrath will be poured out on the nations who caused calamity for the true Israel.
Therefore, whoever believes that they are Israelites according to the flesh — who display the promises of God — keeping their end of the bargain — keeping the law in righteousness — at the time when God’s wrath turns to the nations, we will know for certain they are Israelites a posteriori. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
Yet no one should think they have received any validation as Israelites — or being a part of Israel — until they receive validation from the Lord Himself. True Israelites do not seek validation from themselves or other men who reassure them they are Israelites just because they are, say Anglo-Saxon or generically white. In this life, “we see in a mirror dimly” and we “know in part,” but there will come a day when we will know ourselves “just as [we] have been fully known” by God (1 Corinthians 8:3,1 Corinthians 13:12).
If anyone thinks the standard of righteousness to attain to salvation is a tall order and finds themselves in fear — then they have responded appropriately. All who scoff at the requirement — especially those who espouse salvation according to the flesh — do so because “they have no dawn” (Isaiah 8:20).
Remember, we have Christ Jesus who is “faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9) — so “be strong.” (1 Corinthians 16:13) The Corinthians were also weak in their flesh, but strong in the Spirit — as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:11,
Such were some of you [unrighteous]; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God
We would be foolish to think that we can accomplish these promises ourselves in our own weak Adamic or Israelite flesh. The Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit have all power to accomplish this work in us.
All we have to do is ask Them to do it.
part of my ancestry is from the noble house of Flavel , Flavel is a saxon name saxon was previously saac sons originally from the israelite tribe issacs son , i am also from an ancient irish noble clan https://www.houseofnames.com/flavel-family-crest
You are making a severe logical error. You said this:
“two doctrinal positions have been taken — first that ‘only Israelites are saved’ and second that ‘all Israelites are saved’ — which both need the third position to be true — that ‘all white people are Israelites.'”
But that is a complete non-sequitur. The argument “only Israelites are saved” and “all Israelites are saved” does NOT require the third argument “all white people are Israelites”. There is simply no logical connection at all.
Your argument is:
1. Only Israelites can be saved.
2. All Israelites are saved.
3. Nobody knows whether they are an Israelite or not.
4. It is necessary to know whether you are saved or not.
5. That is a contradiction, therefore premise 1 and/or 2 must be false.
However, that does not follow logically. Your premise number 4 is incorrect. There is no requirement for people to know 100% whether they are saved or not. And so the contradiction disappears.
We do not judge whether somebody is saved or not. God knows who is saved and who isn’t, it is God who judges.
You clearly have a strong emotional desire to have guaranteed assurance that you (or other people) are saved. But that is just your feelings and desires, it is not truth. Truth is not based on what you want, or what makes you feel good. Truth is not based on what is “useful” to you.
You implicitly assume that knowledge of salvation MUST be guaranteed, but you provide no proof of that. Please show me a verse in the Bible which says that everybody is guaranteed to know whether they are saved or not.
The Bible simply says that God opens the Book of Life, and anybody whose name is found in the Book of Life is saved. God knows who is saved, the Book of Life records who is saved, that is what is important. It is not important for humans to know who is saved and who isn’t.
If you wish to prove that non-Israelites can be saved, you shouldn’t need to use logical errors, you can just provide the evidence for your viewpoint.
Mystiker ………………
Forgive me, but your “name” is not familiar to me. I don’t know where you are coming from — what are your Core beliefs etc., etc.
I’d like to know more about the “overall” point you are trying to make with this comment of yours.
When you say — “…If you wish to prove that non-Israelites can be saved …..”
Are you suggesting that they can’t? As an example.
I would enjoy learning from you a few basic Doctrinal beliefs that most of us here at CFT share —
Adam and Eve were White. The Bible was written to the descendants of Adam and Eve which naturally would be “White” as well. The Israelites were White. Jump forward — Europeans and all White people scattered throughout the world at the turn of the 11th century — circa 1000 AD — were White descendants of Adamites/Israelites.
We believe that the non-white races circa 1000 AD were PRE-ADAMITES created — Genesis 1:25.
Where do you stand regarding those statements?
This would help to understand the motivation of your comment.
To answer one of your questions about Assurance of Salvation —
Paul wrote — “…..Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified/reprobate. But I trust that you will know that we are not disqualified/reprobate…..”
Now, you are correct in that God and God only makes the Final Judgement. But we on earth have an obligation to 1) know ourselves as to whether we are in the Faith and 2) have a pretty good idea if those around us are as well.
I’m not going to personally “judge” someone to Outer Darkness. But I am going to judge their Character as to whether they are exhibiting the Fruits of the Spirit. This is important to me as I have been asked to deal with those who do not differently from those who do.
Your comment is Intriguing, but honestly, I’m unclear as to the bigger issue that lies beneath.
Have you commented here before? I don’t recognize your name; but then again, I don’t read every comment and I took a good 6 months away from CFT for personal reasons. I may have missed something else you wrote.
I hope you respond.
Allow me to clarify:
1. DSL believe only Israelites can be saved.
2. DSL believe all Israelites are saved.
3. Nobody knows whether they are an Israelite according to the flesh or not.
4. DSL adherents want assurance of their salvation.
5. DSL assume all white people are Israelites.
6. In order to assure themselves of salvation, DSL must conclude that all white people are Israelites.
Essentially you are criticizing the DSL argument, not mine. Now I will concede I may be incorrect on point 4, and thus incorrect on point 6. However, the rest are facts. You may disagree as to why DSL believe all white people are Israelites. If you do, then I’m curious to hear what you think.
I’m not committed to being right on point 4, but I’m not convinced I’m wrong either. You seem unaware of just how important an issue “assurance of salvation” is in Christian history. Entire denominations like Methodists (see Wesley on the boat with the Moravians) and Lutherism (see Luther’s own struggles with assurance of salvation as a monk). Tetzel allowed Catholics to buy assurance of their salvation. These are cornerstone issues in Catholicism and Protestantism, the spiritual progenitors of the vast majority of Christianity today, including DSL.
I will show you that it is a cornerstone concept in the NT teaching as well.
However, ultimately it is not an argument against “only Israelites will be saved”. Rather, it is a postulation as to why DSL came to the conclusion it did. Personally, I dislike this need people seem to have for assurance of HAVING BEEN SAVED. Why? Because people want to assure themselves of salvation without adhering to the Lord’s commands. They want to have their cake and eat it.
With the above in mind, the criticism which followed thereafter doesn’t apply. However, I offer the following regardless:
1. Christians must seek to be saved with fear and trembling (Phil 2:12, 2 Cor 13:5). Here we find some tension between the fact that we’ll know whether we’re saved or not only when we stand before the Lord Jesus (what you alluded to), but that we must strive to stand before Him spotless and pure (2 Pet 3:14, Phil 2:15,1 Thes 5:23,1 Tim 6:14).
2. Christians must show discernment towards others who claim to be Christians (Matt 7:20, Matt 12:33, Luke 6:44). After all, how can we have fellowship between light and darkness? (2 Cor 6:14) How are we to know whether we fellowship with darkness, unless we discern who are likely on the path to salvation? Furthermore, if we build God’s house, how do we gauge the material with which we build? (1 Cor 3:10) If we produce only mud and straw, then we must reflect on our own techniques.
Ultimately, when the Lord Jesus opens the book of Life, our work will pass through the fire of His judgement (1 Cor 3:13). Personally, I don’t seek to see any specific person saved, but I carefully try discern the quality of my work. I seek to judge rightly so that I may not be judged and disciplined (1 Cor 11:31-32), and that my work may withstand the fire of judgement.
Consider Peter’s words in 2 Peter 1:8-11,
8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they do not make you useless nor unproductive in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For the one who lacks these qualities is blind or short-sighted, having forgotten his purification from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brothers and sisters, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choice of you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; 11 for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.
According to Peter, it seems like the path to salvation is awfully important. He spends most of his second epistle talking about it. While your criticism is unintentionally a straw man argument and you didn’t address what I actually believe, you still seem to disregard core NT concepts as untruth and feelings.
Regardless, Peter doesn’t advocate the assurance of HAVING BEEN SAVED, but rather assurance of the PATH TO SALVATION. He says to regard the Lord’s patience in that journey as salvation (2 Peter 3:15), and that constant improvement is a sign of the journey taking place. As they say, perfection is a journey, not a destination. The destination is when we stand before Him. The journey doesn’t stop before then. When the journey stops, we’ve entered into self-righteousness.
As for “only Israelites can be saved”, the articles linked in the above article conclusively debunk that notion from multiple angles. Here’s a couple more:
https://christiansfortruth.com/did-christ-come-only-for-the-lost-sheep-of-the-house-of-israel-and-what-does-that-mean-for-prophecy/
https://christiansfortruth.com/does-amos-32-prove-god-will-ever-only-know-israelites-and-only-israelites-can-be-saved/
One of the major stumbling blocks of “two seedline” Christianity is that it demonizes any “spiritual” interpretation of the scriptures as “universalism through the backdoor”.
If you propose a spiritual rather than racial interpretation of some of their go-to verses, they will accuse you of being a “Jew”, which is ironic because Jews don’t have spiritual discernment, as Jesus repeatedly points out to the Pharisees.
The gospels were necessary for the Israelites because they lacked spiritual discernment, and their Law was impossible to keep, and their bloodlines in an of themselves could not stop them from turning away from God.
The gospels are clear about who Jesus came for (Matt 15:24), so there is no need to belabor the point. Because if we belabor the point, we will miss the most important point: the path we are given to salvation.
I really don’t see much difference between “two seedline” Christianity which claims that “all Israel will be saved” unconditionally, and mainstream judeo-christians who believe “once saved, always saved”. Their only disagreement is over who is guaranteed salvation.
“What is it about your own miserable works and doings that you think you could please God more than the sacrifice of His own Son?”
Martin Luther
“If a person who is blind guides another who is blind, both will fall into a pit.”
The Son of God
I see no reason that the 144,000 number should be taken literally rather than symbolically. Symbolically, it represents the completion of the regathering of the 12 Tribes of Israel, 12,000 from each tribe. We create so many unnecessary complications and explanations of Scripture when we cannot discern between the literal and the metaphorical.
https://sheldonemrylibrary.famguardian.org/TheAnsweringService/Q&A%20No.%207.pdf
I feel the “WHO ARE THE 144,000?” section provides plenty of reason why the 144,000 are not symbolic. Of course, nothing in the Revelation says, “The 144,000 is a literal number and should in no ways be taken metaphorically.” Neither does the Revelation say, “You have to take absolutely everything in this book as metaphorical.”
I’ve seen “the 144,000 are symbolic” repeated ad nauseam across many Christian groups, yet I’ve never seen a satisfactory explanation for what the symbol means. I count myself lucky when I see ANY explanation for what the symbol means.
I do appreciate yourself and Pastor Emry for giving me SOMETHING, but unfortunately neither of you have provided any basis for your view. With respect, you’ve merely stated you see the number as metaphorical, and that “symbolically, it represents the completion of the regathering of the 12 Tribes of Israel, 12,000 from each tribe”.
However, “symbolically” and everything that follows after that in your statement, stand in contrast to one another. You state “symbolically”, then follow it with specific numbers. You haven’t provided anything more than how the Revelation describes the 144,000. You haven’t provided anything more than what the literal interpretation takes for granted.
Moreover, why does the metaphor exclude the tribe of Dan? What is the metaphorical value in that little detail?
Referring to Pastor Emry’s comments directly:
* 144,000 is not the number for completion and perfection. Seven is the number for completion and perfection. In Hebrew, the characters for “seven” and “complete” are almost identical. It’s like they took the word for “complete” and made it the number seven (or vice versa). We also have examples in the seven day creation, seven spirits of God, seven times punishment, etc. We also find the oft-repeated three and a half in Revelation, which would then denote incompleteness. Seven perfectly fits the description for completeness. Pastor Emry doesn’t offer any evidence at all for WHY 144,000 denotes completeness. I’m not against numbers being taken metaphorically, like seven and three and a half. However, if there’s no reason to take a number as metaphorical, it logically follows to take it literally.
* To be honest, I don’t understand why Adam, Methuselah and Abraham have anything to do with the 144,000. They obviously aren’t part of the 144,000.
* Pastor Emry argues that taking a literal 144,000 means people will compete. The Lord Jesus taught many times the one who seeks to be the greatest must be servant of all. The apostles themselves were competitive, and they were never rebuked for that attribute. They were merely taught how to compete better. Applying the Lord’s teaching, intense competition looks like a bunch of people trying to out-serve one another. If seeing the 144,000 as literal creates competition, and if that competition results in people applying the Lord Jesus’ commands MORE, then that sounds pretty good to me. Bring on the competition! If people compete in ways other than what the Lord commands, then that’s their own fault and not any indication as to whether we should compete or not.
Unfortunately that’s about all I could glean from Pastor Emry’s comments. With that in mind, I would say there’s really no reason NOT to see the 144,000 as literal, and that there’s no reason to see the 144,000 as metaphorical.
Seeing the 144,000 as literal requires more righteousness. That’s reason to see the number as literal. Seeing the number as metaphorical lowers the standard. I don’t see any value in lowering the standard. One who seeks to compete with all they have has very little shame when in the company of those who seek to justify competing less.
Imagine believing it to be literal and arriving at the Kingdom gates only to find out it was metaphorical. No big deal. The conscience is clean. Now imagine believing it to be metaphorical and arriving at the Kingdom gates only to find out it was literal. The likelihood they strived well enough to be granted entry is lower. The likelihood they came to accept their own level of righteousness is higher.
(Of course I’m relying on the assumption that the metaphorical view necessarily means more than 144,000 Israelites will be saved. Yet there’s nothing about the metaphorical view which means it can’t be less than that. Interesting how we naturally gravitate to more, not less.)
Now of course one will not be granted entry merely based on the belief that the 144,000 are literal in and of itself. If one were to strive for the promises made to Israel, and the qualifiers detailed in the Revelation, and they were to attain to those things through faith in the Lord Jesus, then by all means please believe whatever you want either way.
The book of Genesis wasn’t written by Moses. The book of Genesis was already common knowledge in the region of Goshen. That region is Alexandria. I’m ignorant of the name changes since then.
The Torah, according to the Talmud worshipers. The first 5 books in the Bible are Torah. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy are figments of Moses’s imagination. To Talmud worshipers.
The 12 tribes from Jacob/Israel emigrated to Egypt. There were 75 souls protected by Jehova/YWHA at the completion of Genesis. Those souls started from Abraham who was 70 when YWHA spoke to him. Ending with Joseph, bar none the biggest underdog in mankind.
YWHA saves by grace through faith.
God bless brothers
Sounds like you’re some sort of gnostic, espousing kabbalistic “secret knowledge” about the “real” Bible. Sorry, no sale.
I have reached out privately to CFT to point out some flaws in their 144,000 doctrine and was directed back here. So I will point out why their ideas concerning the 144,000 are not in line with scripture.
Firstly, the claim the author of the article makes is that, because Paul quotes Isaiah 10 in Romans 9, Paul is therefore preaching to the Romans about eternal salvation, because apparently Isaiah is speaking of eternal salvation in Isaiah 10. The crux of the issue for the article being that a “remnant” refers to an eternal remnant and not a temporal remnant.
However this is entirely false. Isaiah 10 is discussing the temporal remnant of Israel after the Assyrian rod has come against them. There is nothing in Isaiah 10 referring to eternal salvation. Nothing. It isn’t there. And yet the article makes a passing statement “and since Isaiah is talking about eternal salvation” and then moves on. Any one reading this should take 1-2 minutes and read Isaiah 10 themselves.
This is all done in order to support the idea that Revelation 7 is talking about an “eternal remnant” as well. The author of the article says that nothing in Revelation 7 indicates the 144,000 are alive simultaneously. Well, nothing indicates they aren’t, if you want to use that logic.
But using Revelation 7 and Revelation 9 we can refute the authors claims.
Rev 7:1-3
“And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
2 And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,
3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.”
Why is he saying “hurt not the earth?” Similar language is used in Revelation 9, which shows clearly that the sealed are alive simultaneously, as well as the not sealed being punished, not eternally damned.
Rev 9:4-5
“And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.”
Revelation 9 clearly indicates a time when those sealed and those not are alive simultaneously, and nothing in the text of either Rev 7 or Rev 9 indicates eternal damnation of those without the seal.
In fact towards the end of Revelation 9 there is an interesting statement:
Rev 9:20-21
“And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:
21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.”
So those that were not killed were the ones who did not repent. Recall that earlier in Rev 9 it says that man would seek death and not find it. So the punishment for those that did not repent was continual suffering.
In other words, the torments upon men that were not sealed were to bring about repentance. God chastises and punishes men to bring them back from wickedness. Those that are sealed are blameless, and not subject to the suffering from the 4 angels.
Returning back to Isaiah 10. By reading on to Isaiah 11 we get a good witness that refutes the idea that “remnant” is “eternal.” (please forgive me, i do not know how to embolden or italicize text on this website – please be diligent, however, and read these verses slowly):
Isaiah 11:10-12
“And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.”
It is quite obvious that Isaiah is talking about remnants of Israel and Judah being brought back together, united, here on earth. “Remnant” does not refer to only those that shall see the kingdom, but to those still left on the earth.
Just as there were 7,000 untainted by Baal in the time of Elijah, there will be 144,000 left undefiled in the latter time prophecy of Rev 7. It is consistent with scripture to view it this way. No better example is in 1 Peter 3, which is fitting for our latter days are said to be “as in the days of Noah.” Well:
1 Peter 3:19-20
“By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”
So eight souls were saved temporally, not eternally, otherwise what need would Christ have of preaching to those not saved from the flood in prison (hades)?
So we see that just because certain men are destroyed in the flesh at various times of national punishment, doesn’t mean they have lost salvation. This is found nowhere in scripture and completely defeats the image of Christ washing away sin. Of course, not all souls make it, but neither do only 144,000 Israelites make it.
1 Corinthians 5:5
“To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
That is all for now. I could go on. There is still Romans 9 and 11 to speak of, but I’ll stop here.
We’ll break the contentions down into seven categories — and we have summarized what we understand your contentions to be:
1. Romans 9 isn’t referring to eternal salvation, therefore the remnant is temporal, not eternal.
2. Isaiah 10 isn’t referring to eternal salvation, therefore the remnant is temporal, not eternal.
3. Revelation 7:1-3 and Revelation 9:4-6 are referring to the same event, therefore the 144,000 cannot be all Israel across all time.
4. Revelation 9:20-21 refers to temporal punishment, therefore all punishment is temporal.
5. Isaiah 11:10-12 refers to a temporal regathering, therefore all remnants are temporal.
6. 1 Peter 3:19-20 refers to dead souls in prison, therefore those souls will be saved later.
7. 1 Corinthians 5:5 refers to an immortal soul being preserved eternally, whereas the mortal body was destroyed.
1. We believe there are multiple angles from which we can prove Romans 9 refers to eternal salvation: (a) As we argued in “Will All Israel Be Saved — Or Just A Remnant?”, Paul argues in Romans 9 that the nations attained to the righteousness of faith (Romans 9:30). Multiple witnesses attest that in the context of the New Covenant — and nations attaining to the righteousness of faith — that this righteousness can only refer to faith in the Lord Jesus.
Paul says the same thing in Romans 10:8-9 — then concludes that this faith results in righteousness in conjunction with salvation in Romans 10:10. Furthermore, conscious faith in the Lord Jesus is the only way to eternal salvation (John 3:14-15). Paul then argues that Israel did not attain to the righteousness according to faith (Romans 9:31-33), thus Israel did not attain to eternal salvation, because one must attain to the righteousness of faith in the Lord Jesus in order to attain to eternal salvation.
If Paul concludes his argument in Romans 9 by concluding that Israel did not attain to eternal salvation — and expounds upon that conclusion in Romans 10, then Romans 9 refers only to eternal salvation. Just because Romans 9 uses allegories not relating to eternal salvation to explain eternal salvation, doesn’t mean Romans 9 is not about eternal salvation.
On the contrary, the heavenly fulfillment of the Law and Prophets requires us to use temporally salvific allegories — or copies and shadows — to come to the eternal and heavenly truth of salvation. Verily, how could they otherwise have predicted it in the first place? 1 Peter 1:10-12 and Hebrews 1-11 — among others — confirm this principle.
(b) In (a) we could see by looking at Romans 9 and 10 alone, it refers to eternal salvation. The whole discourse of Romans 1-8 refers to eternal salvation, culminating in Romans 8:19, “For the eagerly awaiting creation waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” Reading Romans 8 it is clear that only sons — or children — of God are eternally saved.
In Romans 9:8 Paul says, “That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.” Only the children of the promise are children of God, so only children of the promise are saved. This is the purpose of Paul’s discourse.
In Romans 9 he shows how Israelites according to the flesh are not counted as Israelites according to the promise — thus being saved eternally. The point of Romans 9 is to show two different kinds of Israelites according to the flesh — children of the flesh and children of the promise. If you disagree on that point, we would recommend reading and addressing “Will All Israel Be Saved — Or Just A Remnant?”
(c) In (a) and (b) we showed explicitly according to Paul’s own words how Romans 9 refers to eternal salvation. Now we will show implicitly why this can only be true. God gave Israel the Sabbath to keep as a sign that He would consecrate Israel (Exodus 31:13) — a promise to remove their sin.
Paul calls the Sabbath a shadow of what is to come (Colossians 2:16-17). The Hebrews author explains the Sabbath as a shadow of eternal salvation in chapters 3 – 4, which the Israelites failed to enter into because of sin (Hebrews 3:13,17), disobedience (Hebrews 3:18) and unbelief (Hebrews 3:12.19).
Therefore, if one does not have sin removed, one does not enter into the Sabbath rest — eternal life. This confirms that the Sabbath was a sign for Israel to be consecrated. Therefore, any Israelite child of the promise must have this promise fulfilled in them, otherwise they are not children of the promise — because the promises pertain to Israel (Romans 9:4).
2. Yes, there is no doubting the original context of Isaiah 10 is Assyria and Israel specifically. Yet like Peter says, the prophets were not serving themselves — rather, they were revealing the mystery of salvation (1 Peter 1:10-12). It shouldn’t be surprising to us that if something like the bronze snake in the wilderness can refer to salvation (John 3:14-15), that a prophecy about Assyria could also refer to salvation.
There are many such cases strewn across the New Testament — prophecies which have already been fulfilled have a yet greater fulfillment awaiting them. Revelation 17 alone is littered with them.
If Paul quoted Isaiah 10:22 in a discourse on salvation, we can only conclude that the Isaiah 10 prophesy is a shadow of salvation. Paul is directly attributing Isaiah 10:22 to salvation prophecy. He quotes Isaiah 10:22 to prove that despite the numerousness of Israel according to the flesh, the children of the promise would only be a subset. He then goes on to quote Isaiah 1:9 that if the Lord had not done this of His own choice, we would all have been destroyed.
Paul says the Israelite children of the promise are according to God’s choice (Romans 9:11). Then He confirms the remnant are according to His choice (Romans 11:5). Children of the promise relate specifically to salvation — and only the remnant are children of the promise — so according to Paul’s discourse — using the revealing of the salvation plan in Isaiah 10:22 — only the remnant of Israel will be saved.
3. By the time Revelation 9:3-4 comes around, the earth, grass and trees had already been partly destroyed in Revelation 8:7. The command in Revelation 7:3 is to hold off the event of Revelation 8:7, not Revelation 9:3-4. We can assume only that Revelation 9:3-4 refers to destruction over and above what already happened in Revelation 8:7.
Regardless, we assume that a subset of the 144,000 will indeed be alive during this time. However, the full number of the 144,000 needed to be sealed before the Revelation 8:7 event. In the end of the end — at the exact time when the seventh seal is broken, logically there must be a subset of the 144,000 alive. Otherwise how could the number have been reached? Thus that subset would be the ones referred to in Revelation 9:3-4.
4. We do not deny that there will be temporal punishment between the breaking of the seventh seal and the return of the Lord Jesus. Neither do we deny that there will be temporal punishment before that. We would recommend reading this article: https://christiansfortruth.com/are-we-in-the-end-times-and-if-so-when-did-they-begin/
It’s a common theme in our articles that we must undergo temporal punishment. However, that punishment must produce righteousness in this life. One cannot make a case that temporal punishment in this life produces righteousness in the next life without it having produced righteousness in this life first. The parable of Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) taught this very lesson.
5. As we said in point 2, a literal or temporal application — whether fulfilled or not — doesn’t rule out the heavenly fulfillment. Incidentally, compare Isaiah 11:6 to Isaiah 65:25. Isaiah 11 and 65 are both prophecies concerning Revelation 21.
6. 1 Peter 3:18-20 indicates to us that Christ went by the Spirit to proclaim to those before the time of the flood. Those who He preached to disobeyed when the patience of God kept waiting in the time of Noah. As a result, only eight were saved. Whoever they are, they are currently in prison at the time of the writing of Peter’s letter.
We have shown many times that the Lord Jesus pre-existed His earthly birth, so this is easily possible. Therefore, our interpretation does not make any assumptions we cannot prove. Moreover, our interpretation is a valid interpretation of the text from a grammatical and comprehension standpoint.
On the other hand, lets assume your interpretation is also valid from a grammatical and comprehension standpoint. You have made an assumption that at some point the Lord Jesus would preach to dead souls. In light of competing and valid interpretations, you must first prove that the Lord did this act. Yet nowhere in Scripture does it state that He did, so this passage cannot be used to prove that He did. This would be begging the question.
Our interpretation holds to assumptions which we can prove, so we believe our interpretation is the correct one.
7. We’ve seen this one raised a few times and it always gets picked up in the comments: https://christiansfortruth.com/how-do-i-know-im-an-israelite/#comment-64738
Regarding your thoughts on 1 Peter 3, I can’t fathom your logic. Peter states explicitly that Christ preached to those that were not saved from the flood. Why would He do so if not to offer the gospel so that they might be saved?
Peter says explicitally that the souls Christ preached to in hades were disobedient, the ones NOT saved from the flood.
Another testament against your claim that righteousness in this life is all that matters comes from Paul at Romans 11:5-6
“Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.”
Not by works, but by grace. And later Paul mentions that those not saved by grace, but blinded (for the sake of the gentiles) may too be grafted back in, and the gentiles therefore must not boast.
Paul even speaks to saving some of them:
“If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?”
And at verse 23 read what it says of those not already saved by grace, but blinded for their unbelief (or unrighteousness):
“And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.”
Are you blinded, Clock, by a preconception of your own? Read on still. Paul is contradicting you:
“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:”
Key sentence “until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.”
Therefore I would conclude that those Israelites saved by grace – the remnant – refers to men like Paul, who were not blinded and cut off the vine.
Paul continues to refute your thesis:
“As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes.”
Well?
“29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.”
In no way is Paul stating anywhere in this chapter that those Israelites blinded and not part of the remnant are condemned eternally. His words are crystal clear.
In a way, what you guys are proposing is almost like boasting against the branches. Those afflicted with blindness shall obtain no mercy in your doctrine, which is counter to what the scripture says.
In 1 Peter 3:19 there are no verbs to describe the imprisonment of the spirits, making the timing of their imprisonment ambiguous — because tenses in Greek are determined by verbs. All we can tell is that the preaching is in the past tense. So the Lord preached — past tense (aorist) — to spirits in prison — no tense. The 2020 NASB — a literal translation — captures it in all its ambiguity, “in which He also went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison”. In the 1995 version, they rendered it “now in prison” — but to maintain the “literal” designation, they understandably removed it in the 2020 version.
In verse 18 it said He was made alive in the Spirit, in which He went to make that proclamation. Yes, the Lord was filled with the Spirit when He did His work on Earth — and we assume He does everything in the Spirit because He only does the will of His Father (John 6:38). So far up until verse 19 it’s still ambiguous.
Then it says that those spirits “were disobedient when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah”. Now we have context for verses 18-19. To what were they disobedient? The patience of God — the proclamation which the Lord made to them. Thus if the proclamation was made — and they were disobedient to it — then we conclude that they are now in prison. Furthermore, if eight persons were saved, we have a positive outcome for the situation to further contextualize the negative outcome of their imprisonment.
Then in verses 21-22 Peter implies that the whole ordeal was a copy and shadow of the Lord Jesus’ work on earth — signified by baptism, further contextualizing the whole narrative of verses 19-20 as a far past event. In other words, everything happened during the time of the flood — and the spirits are currently in prison. With that in mind, we cannot see another way to comprehend it — without even taking into account the assumptions each interpretation comes with as we mentioned in our previous comment.
The salvation doctrine we believe is not a “works based” salvation. Children of the promise are according to God’s choice and grace — there is nothing they could have done to “earn” it. Paul’s discourse in Romans 2-4 makes that very clear — where he explains faith in the grace of the Lord Jesus. Yet Romans 5-6 make the outcome of that faith painfully clear — we are to cease from sin. Yes, works do not save us — faith saves us, but works are the evidence of us having been saved (James 2:14-26) — of being children of the promise. We would suggest reading this article to better understand our view that children of the promise are the product of grace: https://christiansfortruth.com/will-all-israel-be-saved-or-just-a-remnant/
Apologies, we are struggling somewhat to follow your Romans 11 argument — however we will highlight three critical elements of the text itself:
1. “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Romans 11:29) — Only for the children of the promise. This is the point of Paul’s argument in Romans 9 — one can only be an Israelite according to the promise. If one is a child of the flesh — but not of the promise — then one has no claim to the gifts and calling of God. As we explained in the above article, God guaranteed that Israel would have children of the promise.
2. Paul acknowledges that the natural branches being grafted back is predicated on them not continuing in unbelief (Romans 11:23). Paul explained what faith and belief means in Romans 4-10, so they would have to reveal Romans 4-10 in their lives before being grafted back in. In other words, they would have to be children of the promise — who have faith in the Lord Jesus and cease from sin.
3. Romans 11:30-32 is a past event, not a future event — Paul is summarizing his argument in Romans 2-3. The nations were shown mercy because of Israel’s disobedience (v30) — receiving that mercy in the New Covenant. The New Covenant existed because the Old Covenant was not free of fault (Hebrews 8:7) — but the fault was with Israel (Hebrews 8:8). Therefore, a New Covenant was sought through the fault of Israel and the Old Covenant — guaranteeing mercy to the nations.
But if the nations were given mercy, is Israel still under condemnation for their failure? No, because given that the nations were shown mercy, Israel may also be shown mercy — “For there is no partiality with God.” (Romans 2:11) Therefore, “because of the mercy shown to you [nations] they also may now be shown mercy [Israel].” (Romans 11:31) Then in Romans 11:32, he’s almost quoting Romans 3:9 — a summary of his argument. This is all an explanation of New Covenant theology which is already in place. Mercy is available to Israel — so Paul desires that they do not continue in unbelief according to point 2 above.
To conclude, Romans 11 is not about some future, all-encompassing mercy to unrepentant Israelites. Such a view can only come from disregarding where Romans 11 fits within Paul’s overall discourse. In much the same way, one could probably take a paragraph from our article above and read it in isolation — coming to an entirely different view to what we intended. In the context of the book of Romans, Romans 11 explains how mercy is available to Israel should they discontinue their unbelief. Simultaneously, God guaranteed that Israel would have those who do not continue in unbelief. As you mentioned, Paul is just such a one.
It’s very easy when quoting from 1 Peter 3 to lose focus of what that chapter is about, which is how husbands and wives conduct themselves in marriage….and specifically that it is better to suffer for being sinless than for sinning…..a shadow of Christ’s suffering. This is the point of the chapter, not whether or not the dead can be converted and saved.
People who want to believe that the unrepentant can be saved — especially those in the “all Israel is saved” camp, will also quote 1 Peter 4:6, “For the gospel has for this purpose been preached even to those who are dead, that though they are judged in the flesh as men, they may live in the spirit according to the will of God.”
They quote this passage also out of the original context which is the disposition of martyrs, not just anyone. But those trying to cling to the notion that all and any white people will be saved unconditionally — or that even the unrepentant have a chance — have no choice but to take all these verses out of their original context so as to create the false illusion that scripture supports this liberal, more universalist view, vis a vis Adamkind — “every knee will bow” and even the unrepentant will “come around” and eventually enter the Kingdom.
I don’t mean to suggest that is what Kevin is advocating here — clearly, he’s not promoting that idea — he wants clarification on the 144,000 idea. But I find it interesting that many of the Christians who object to “only” 144,000 Israelites being saved have no problem with God saving only 8 Adamites on the ark. Other Christians cannot accept that God would save only 8 in the Flood — what kind of “loving God” would do such a thing? What about all the innocent children and infants who died in the Flood? What kind of God would do such a thing? None of us deserve salvation or God’s mercy — and perhaps God is cutting Israel a lot of slack by allowing even 144,000. Regardless of the exact number, if it doesn’t motivate you to reinvigorate your whole-hearted commitment to Christ, nothing will. It’s certainly a sobering thought.
“…. Regardless of the exact number, if it doesn’t motivate you to reinvigorate your whole-hearted commitment to Christ, nothing will. It’s certainly a sobering thought…..”
Amen.
8 people saved in the ark was a temporal salvation, so i dont understand your comparison Danae.
And the fact is Christ went to Hades to preach to those NOT saved on the ark. Period. No amount of rhetoricizing scripture can change that.
It doesnt mean I believe all our kin our saved without first having to repent. True repentance is deeper than saying sorry or even admitting fault. One is chastised and must die to Christ. All debts are paid before one is deemed clean and fit for the kingdom.
So even if all Israel were saved to a man, each and every one of them would pay their debts in suffering. Clean means clean. Sometimes a thing must be scrubbed vigorously to be cleaned. And then refined, as a smith refines a sword or door handle, with fire and water, and hammering etc.
Peter says “corresponding to that [the flood]” (1 Peter 3:21) — comparing the flood to salvation in the Lord Jesus. He says if God “did not spare the ancient world, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly… then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from a trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment” (2 Peter 2:5,9) In 2 Peter 2 he compares a few temporal examples to the coming day of judgement.
Yes, they are all temporal, but they are all shadows of what’s to come. If we are able to understand the shadows, we have a much better idea of how the heavenly fulfillment will play out. Therefore, Danae’s comparison is completely valid — because Peter made the same comparison. Incidentally, he uses Sodom and Gomorrah as well — where only 4 survived.
Peter never says that the Lord went to “Hades” — he uses the generic Greek word for prison (“phulaké” — Strong’s G5438). As we have shown, one cannot claim categorically that Peter said that the Lord went into that prison to preach. A case would have to be made firstly in terms of the context of the passage — secondly by proving elsewhere that the Lord Jesus did such a thing.
We are not sure what you mean by “rhetoricizing”, but we hope you do not begrudge us arguing our case — as opposed to presuming to tell you what to believe without bothering to make a case — or acknowledging and addressing your own case.
I agree with that quote from Danae that westwins replied to.
It is something that has helped me find deeper wells of repentance and prayer.
I also agree with this sites view of accepting that many eill not make it, as Christ says of those wailing and gnashing their teeth.
It was enough for me before the 144,000 debate.
Concerning the wailing and gnashing, i find it interesting what they say to Christ “we cast out demons in your name.” Is that a clue of something to avoid?
I cannot help but think of 2SL and how pretty much the only thing about the gospel that concerns them are verses they think are about seperating ourselves from beasts. Little else is ever discussed.
I find that interesting.
Concerning CFT’s response about Romans 11, I think we are going to have to settle on disagreement here.
“As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes.”
I am unconvinced that the 144,000 are all time. But we will agree that the path is narrow and many are not chosen.
Fear God.
Forgive me if I have come off stubborn and if I am indeed ignorant of the truth. I imagine I am.
Still I must realize the truth through the proving of it.
I am prompted to revisit our discussion on Christ preaching to the spirits in prison by this verse from Ephesians 2:
“1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;”
In light of 1 Peter 3:
“18….being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;”
Could the Adamic nations that existed prior to knowing Christ – who before times were not a people; not yet sons of God – be forgiven specially for that reason, and thus why Chrjst preached to them in prison?
Hence the uncountable.multitudes of nations saved in Rev 7.
Thoughts?
Not directly answering the question, but I have three somewhat related thoughts…
Firstly, has mainstream theology rigged the game in most people’s minds? Is the Kingdom of God just about being forgiven? Is all of this just about having sin not counted against us? I mean, if someone has done evil all their lives and then they die… Then hypothetically Christ preaches to them beyond the grave and they are “forgiven”… Is that enough? Does that make one a priest, or eager for good deeds (Ephesians 2:10, Titus 2:14)? Does it fulfill Christ’s mandate to produce people in His own image (Genesis 1:26, Ephesians 4:24, Colossians 3:10, Romans 8:29)?
Secondly, why should every Adamic person “get a chance”? If we have not yet attained to the image of Christ, then the creation event will only be completed at the end of the age. Christ says, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (John 5:17)… They are still creating what was intended in Genesis 1:26. Have we put too much value in our bodies that we think every body must get a chance? Have we elevated what we are to something more than what we are? Does the Bible say that everyone should get a chance, or are we projecting some ingrained Marxist/humanist desire onto the Bible?
Isaiah 40,
5 And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.
6 The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field:
7 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.
8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Psalm 103,
15 As for man, his days are as grass: as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth.
16 For the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more.
17 But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children’s children;
18 To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.
Isaiah 45,
8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the Lord have created it.
9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?
There’s no such thing as “eternal suffering.” “The wages of sin is death.” Maybe that helps to contextualize… And maybe the myth of eternal Hell has helped to push us into the humanist direction?
Thirdly, why does Satan rebel against Christ? If he has an angelic body, not subject to the lusts of the flesh, what is missing in his character that he would rebel? What makes us think Adamic people merely “forgiven” (not yet tested and tried) wouldn’t go the same route? Shouldn’t we show eternal characteristics in ourselves before being given eternal bodies?
… Do we work WITH Christ towards His goal, or do we work towards our own goals? What choice did Satan make?
Humanism is love of the world. He who has not the Son has not life, as John says.
I think we all agree. So this debate shouldn’t be about whether we think the other doesn’t understand that.
If Peter didn’t say that Christ, with his quickening spirit, spoke to those of Noah’s time in prison, then I wouldn’t persist. And when Paul told the Ephesians that Christ, with his quickening spirit, quickened them who were dead, I found that interesting.
If those in Hades await resurrection unto judgment, then perhaps some may live yet. Perhaps very few, I don’t know.
I am not the gatekeeper of heaven. But even if some exceptions to the rule are made, they are God’s to make in perfect judgment, and would not invalidate the effect of what the shadows and copies represent.
That “he hath quickened” in Ephesians 2:1 looks like an embellishment on the part of the KJV authors — it’s not there in the Greek. Even if it were in the Greek, the word for “quickened” in the KJV 1 Peter 3:18 is “zóopoieó” (G2227) — or “made alive” as many translations put it. The verse refers to how the Spirit resurrected Christ (Romans 8:11). Therefore Peter is saying, “Christ preached by the same Spirit which resurrected Him” — exactly the same manner in which He preached in His life as a man (Luke 4:14-15). This is just more evidence against the idea that the Lord preached to spirits already in prison — at the time of the preaching itself.
Also Peter didn’t say Hades, he said “prison.” The fact that he said “prison” is rather jarring, because the dead are not conscious and they don’t need to be guarded or watched — which is where the Greek word for “prison” comes from. Revelation 20:13 says “death and hades” gave up the dead — so “death and hades” are the same thing — death, which has no consciousness. Incidentally, Hades is not a prison — but Tartarus — another concept used by Peter — is indeed a prison. Here’s what we propose instead:
1. The Lord preached to these spirits — likely through Noah (2 Peter 2:5) — who “walked with God” (Genesis 6:9) i.e. The Lord Jesus — Who said to Noah, “The end of humanity has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of people; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.” (Genesis 6:13)
2. They disobeyed that preaching “in times past” (1 Peter 3:20) — Strong’s G4218 — when the patience of the Father said, “My Spirit will not strive with man forever, because he is also flesh; nevertheless his days shall be 120 years.” (Genesis 6:3)
3. Antediluvian sons of God were all resurrected and given eternal life (Psalm 82:6) — despite the disobedience of those who sinned before the flood. Angels must have been antediluvian men, because angels sinned (2 Peter 2:4) — sin came from Adam (Romans 5:12) — and Satan committed sin only a man could commit (John 8:44). Note how salvation at the end of this age is connected only with Noah’s descendants (https://christiansfortruth.com/who-are-the-nations-in-scripture-and-who-they-are-not-and-why-it-matters/).
4. They were given inheritances — Deuteronomy 32:8 in the DSS and LXX say “sons of God” and “angels of God” respectively. Yet despite receiving inheritances, their ultimate purpose was the salvation of Adamkind (Hebrews 1:14).
5. They abandoned their proper dwelling (Jude 1:6) — or mission — disobedient as they had already proven to be.
6. They were cast into Tartarus/prison — “held for judgement” (2 Peter 2:4, Isaiah 24:21-23) — therefore, currently in prison (1 Peter 3:19).
7. Ultimately, they will be destroyed (Psalm 82:7-8)
There isn’t a thing you wrote, Grass, that I don’t agree with.
But Peter said what he said, so I am going to continue moving like a turtle through this topic, if you guys permit me.
We know that the dead are resurrected for judgment. Otherwise why do they persist in Hades? Why aren’t they just dead?
I am not feeling a humanist hope for unrepentant sinners. I am not sad if only 144,000 Israelites make it all time. Rather, I am learning from past mistakes to take it slow and ask relevant questions from scripture.
Paul says some interesting things about the blinded, the enemies of the children of mercy – those Israelites unlike himself who were not turned around, indicating hope:
“As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father’s sakes.”
As a shadow and a copy, was Paul’s own blindness after his vision on the road to Damascus a clue? Christ healed the blind, is that a shadow and a copy of things possible for some that were blinded?
Were not the gentiles themselves heathen idolaters? Yet mercy was shown them at the expense of Israel. 2,000 years later, have not those of the nations done as Israel in times past and left their first estate? Have they not now done as Israel had in times past?
Again I agree with you not to look at this humanistically. However, we could have made that same mistake 2,000 watching apostles reach out to “undeserving” heathen. That may have seemed humanistic back then.
@CFT
Galatians 3:29
“And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Certainly.
However i am confused about your comments regarding Psalm 82. You are saying antediluvian men ‘were’ resurrected and then left their first estate and therefore that is who Peter and Jude are referring to? They were not defending the poor and the fatherless etc, so the author of psalm 82 knew this somehow? Sounds more like normal Adamites that were abusing their power in the world. Just seems like quite an extrapolation from psalm 82.
Seems to me that the serpent – whoever he was – was punished for his deeds, suggesting his actions were sinful. This happened before Adam partook.
Regarding 1 Peter 3, yes I hear you about ‘hades’ vs ‘tartarus,’ but I can’t be convinced yet that Peter is referring to Christ in the distant past-tense, long before He was born of a virgin and became known as Christ.
However, these points aren’t terribly important. Interesting at least.
I wonder though what you think about the remnant of Israel in Ezekiel 39/Rev 20 whom seem to be surrounded by the heathen (nations). Israel was to be scattered among the nations.
I am building up a fresh understanding of things post 2SL, and it seems to me that modern white populations are by and large non-Israelite Adamic, with Israelites being scattered among them, given that the nations that received the gospel were all non-Israelites, and that so few Israelites were shown mercy at that time.
Thanks for your continued efforts and suffering of my many questions.
John 10:34 confirms that Psalm 82 is talking about gods — “theos” Strong’s G2316 — an obvious reference to angels — and the Lord Jesus’ own divine nature. Simultaneously, they are “sons of the Most High” (Psalm 82:6) — or sons of God. The psalmist must have known he was talking about gods, because why else would he say, “Nevertheless you will die like men.” All men die like men — unless he knew they weren’t men?
How could the Psalmist have known? Even Eliphaz said, “Behold, He has no trust in His holy ones, And the heavens are not pure in His sight” (Job 15:15). The Father knows all things — and His servants know all that He imparts to them by His Spirit.
Even beasts of burden are “punished” (Exodus 21:28) — so how much more a crafty serpent? It doesn’t mean there was any sin — unless oxen can sin?
The Lord Jesus is the first of all creation (Colossians 1:15). He created all things (Colossians 1:16, Hebrews 1:2, John 1:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6) — and He is before all things (Colossians 1:17). He existed long before He was born — coming in the flesh (1 John 4:2) from heaven (John 3:31). It’s easy for us to imagine Him acting as the prototypical agent — the Logos (John 1:1) — of His Father’s will at any point in the history of the universe.
We wrote a small section on Ezekiel 38-39 in this article: https://christiansfortruth.com/genesis-6-what-really-happened-between-the-sons-of-god-and-the-daughters-of-man/
@CFT
Christ said of the judeans that were about to stone him:
“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?”
These Judeans were not angels, so how does John 10:34 prove that Psalm 82 is talking about angels?
I did notice the verse about “die like men,” and that is interesting.
In John 10:34-35 the Lord says, “If he [the psalmist] called them [the subjects/audience of the psalm] gods, to whom the word of God came [the subjects/audience of the psalm] (and the Scripture cannot be nullified) [a cure for disbelief at His “outlandish assertions”], are you saying of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?”
The Lord calls Psalm 82 “the word of God”, placing the characters of the psalm under the authority of His Father. The characters are “God” — the Lord Jesus — and those He judges in the midst of — His angels/gods (Psalm 82:1). It’s not uncommon for psalmists to address the Lord Jesus in their writings and pronounce the will of His Father over Him — in a way that breaks the fourth wall, so to speak. Such as Hebrews 1:8-9 (Psalm 45:6-7), “Your throne, God, is forever and ever… Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of joy above Your companions” — a chapter dedicated to comparing the Lord Jesus with angels.
Therefore, by quoting Psalm 82 in such a manner, the Lord is proving to His disbelieving Judean audience that there are indeed heavenly actors — a God and the gods He judges amongst — who are also subject to “the word of God.” Some of them are even called “sons of the Most High” (Psalm 82:6) — or sons of God. To reiterate, He follows this up by saying, “the Scripture cannot be nullified” — as if aware of the strangeness of His words.
The Lord continues in John 10:36, “are you saying of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?” He just proved that there are literal gods in heaven who are sons of God and subject to His Father. So why should they be offended at one of these characters being sent into the world — even Himself — claiming to be “the Son of God”?
He confirms what He says — and His identity as one of the characters of Psalm 82 — by referring to the testifying works He does in the power of His Father — “If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me” (John 10:37).
Furthermore, Philo of Alexandria — an Israelite living in Egypt and contemporary of that time — documented in depth the theories about a divine son of God called the “Logos”, which they borrowed from Greek philosophy. Amazingly, these theories came remarkably close to the truth. Hebrews 1:1-4 is essentially a summary of their contemporary Logos theory. Therefore, none of this should have been a surprise to them.
Yes, when we arrive in the next life we should not be surprised at the truth of reality — heavenly bodies do little to help us perceive the Infinite God and Father. Only His Holy Spirit guides us, whether in this life, or the next — where we are — and will be — directed to follow the Lord Jesus.
@CFT
Actually, the Greek Logos concept was a huge stepping stone on my path towards Christ.
When I dropped university, the only thing that I learned of value were the Socratic dialogues assigned in my classical studies courses.
I backpacked for twenty months, homeless so to speak, with this idea that our race had a progenitor and that Socrates was pointing to Him when he spoke of the logos, because it seemed apparent to me that many bought university marxism, while few had a very natural and clear and logical mentality to refute it. One one hand many accepted doctrine given to them by men, on the other hand some had a very natural thought process coming seemingly from without themselves or anyone else.
Even Paul said – i think to the Corinthians, or perhaps Romans – that they, not knowing the law, had still strived at times to those things which are good, that are of the spirit.
So I certainly see your point about the logos.
As an afterthought — and logical follow on, we consider 1 Peter 1:12,
“It was revealed to them that they [the prophets] were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look.”
Why would angels long to look into the Word of God revealed through His Spirit to His servants the prophets, unless the Word of God applied to them as well? Yes, it does apply to them just as it applies to us — as Psalm 82 applies to them. In the same way, the Hebrews author makes the Lord Jesus to say in Hebrews 10:7 (Psalm 40:7-8),
“Behold, I have come (It is written of Me in the scroll of the book) To do Your will, O God.”
In the heavens and on earth, we must all follow the Father’s will by His Holy Spirit. After all, the angels — the Lord Jesus included — appeared to Moses in the bush and on the mountain (Acts 7:30,38) — and passed the Law on to him (Acts 7:53, Galatians 3:19, Hebrews 2:2). Indeed, they were doing the will of God. The Spirit says through Paul in Philippians 2:9-10,
“9 For this reason also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth”
And so we would contend that Satan must submit — and he is not doing the will of God — though he would hate to hear it. Yet he is blinded by his own self-righteousness, else why would he be a false accuser — and take it upon himself to test even the Lord Jesus — unless he thought he was better than everyone? He would even stand before the Lord Jesus and say, “for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I want.” (Luke 4:6)
Who would hand it to him in his own mind, unless it was the Father? But the Father said to the Lord Jesus, “For You possess all the nations.” (Psalm 82:8) Not Satan, but the Lord Jesus — the Father gave Satan nothing, but he sought to take what wasn’t his.
For the moment, the Lord Jesus reigns at the right hand of His Father in the midst of His enemies — Satan — until the Father makes them a footstool for His feet (Hebrews 1:13). We do not know who the Lord’s sheep are, but we will know one day. Yet there is one who the Lord designated as the enemy — even “Satan”, the adversary himself.
We are not so short sighted as to seek an earthly revolution. No, we are looking to a heavenly revolution — we will make sure that all knees bow before the Lord Jesus. Yes, we are coming to take the very heavens themselves in the Lord Jesus’ name…
Paul says the Lord will remove ungodliness from them and take away their sins. If we claim to be Israelites — yet we are ungodly sinners — then we simply admit that we are not Israelites, because true Israelites have their ungodliness and sin taken away.
Who takes sin away. Christ in His fulfilment of a Law that no man could keep.
My righteousness by that Law is not worthy of said wages.
It is by grace (free Gift) you have been saved. Ephesians 2;8 For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9not by works, so that no one can boast.…
Have been implies past tense. Salvation is all of Christ and not of works. Then and thereupon you die and Christ will dwell in you. My end of said bargain was a free divine sacrificial gift and entry into the body of Christ.
So there are sons of flesh and sons of promise.
Who are the gentiles then that are grafted on? Are they non Jews or Jews according to the flesh?
Please Grass, kindly do not trouble me as I cannot understand you and find you to lack in manners becoming of a Christian.
I seek only to understand entirely.
birnie wrote, “Who are the gentiles then that are grafted on? Are they non Jews or Jews according to the flesh??”
This subject has been explained many times at CFT.
Do you not know and acknowledge that “gentiles” is a latin term that did not appear in any early manuscripts? Jerome made it up in the 4th century as a way of translating the Greek “ethnos” into latin.
“Ethnos” as the writers of the NT used it meant “nations”, but does not and cannot mean “non-Jew” as most Christians mistakenly believe. “Ethnos” or nations refers to the Genesis 10 nations and their legitimate descendants. The gospel goes first to the Israelites (not Jews), and then to the Genesis 10 nations, including the lost ten northern tribes of Israel who had lost their identity as Israel since the Assyrian captivity.
This “grafting” that you speak of does not refer to anyone from just any old race or tribe, but rather specifically to the Genesis 10 “ethnos” or non-Israelite peoples descendant from Noah. Period. No one else. You cannot squeeze other peoples into the promises and salvation by misunderstanding English terms in the NT like “all men” or “the whole world”. When the Bible speaks of “men” or man, it is referring to Adamkind only — in fact, the word “man” is often translated from “Adam”, not just anthropos. When it refers to “nations”, it means the Genesis 10 nations or people. Nations in the Bible are not geographical entities as they are today….they are people, the generations of Adam. Only.
All of the motivations held by those claiming to be Israelites which you’ve listed here are self-justifying and self-aggrandizing. You are not being charitable in your representation.
I believe that our people are substantially composed of Israelites because I see that the prophecies pertaining to Israel have been, and are being, fulfilled in our people. I am familiar with the ancient history which suggests that Europe was populated by people from the east several centuries before Christ. Taking the evidence into account, it is the best explanation for the origin of our people.
Are you saying that out of the many millions of Israelites who have ever lived, only 144,000 will be saved? Do you draw a distinction between different levels of being “saved”? Or do you worship a God who allows 99.99% of His people to be dragged into hell?
“….Or do you worship a God who allows 99.99% of His people to be dragged into hell? …..”
What an awful way to characterize God and His Will! Why do the likes of you always have to do this. You make a valid argument and then you ruin it with a statement like this!
How do you explain Sodom and Gomorrah? How do explain the Flood???
Temporal destruction to make way for more righteous persons is a different thing from eternal destruction and torment in hellfire. In 1 Corinthians 5:5, Paul said of a Corinthian degenerate,
“to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
So as Paul understands, temporal destruction is the price of sin. As all have sinned, all would eventually face their mortality in this life, sooner or later. And in some cases, everlasting contempt in the world to come. But the punishment of a wicked man in this life opens the door for God’s mercy in the next.
Only sinless Jesus Christ had the power to live forever! Our faith is that Jesus Christ died to take away our scarlet sins and ultimately leave us white as snow.
Curious what you’ve inferred about “the likes of me” on the basis of one short comment.
“….Temporal destruction to make way for more righteous persons is a different thing from eternal destruction and torment in hellfire….”
What happened to the men and women who died in the flood?
I too am skeptical of the 144,000 idea this article presents. I continue to study to prove what is true, but at present i don’t see how Rev 7 is referring – beyond a shadow of a doubt – to the final number of those saved for all time.
In Romans 11 Paul seems to be indicating the great mystery of God and His judgments. And it is implied that those blinded towards unbelief will have their chance to be grafted back in, and that to show God’s great mercy at the end.
Romans 11
“or as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!”
Personally, I take a very, very, very slow and skeptical approach to salvation doctrine. However, we should still strive for the kingdom and realize the wisdom in fearing hell.
Paul warned the Romans not to speak to who we think will be raised up to heaven and who will descend into hell.
Romans 10
“But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above)
7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)
8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
There is no doubt in my mind that God raised Christ from the dead, and we should always keep in mind the mystery of God, that He leads us with steps ahead of infinite number.
I find the “All Israel is saved” doctrine to be a cushiony way of rejecting responsibility towards God as a way to stay in the world with no worry.
But that doesn’t mean I reject the possibility of His mercy on all.
We shall see when we see.
“We shall see when we see.”
I find that people use this term when they want to publicly cling to an idea they’re unable to prove. I think if we can defend something, we should do so. If we are unable to defend it, we should admit to ourselves foremost, “I don’t know.” There’s a lot of value in that.
“I don’t know” means there’s a journey of prayer, study, meditation and hopefully discovery ahead. Knowing what we don’t know is important. “We shall see when we see” or “We’ll know one day” is a little lie we tell ourselves which discards the journey. It cuts short the journey, and it closes us off to those around us. It’s a one-way glass on our hearts, where we cannot see outward, but others may see inward.
As for your Romans 11 reference, verse 23 says, “if they abide not still in unbelief”. It’s conditional and far from certain. Yes, they’ll have their chance, but not if they continue in unbelief. For all of us, the opportunity ends when we die.
As for your Romans 10 reference, I don’t see what you’re saying at all in the text. Perhaps you need to be more specific? Don’t you think Paul specified the context quite clearly when he said, “But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise”?
I think you are reaching, Grass. “We shall see when we see” is virtually identical to “I don’t know,” and regardless of what others mean when they use it, the context of why I use it speaks on its own.
I don’t understand what you are implying about verse 10.
Also, I don’t need to have an answer for everything, especially regarding a topic so enigmatic as salvation. All I have to know is that the road is narrow and no man on his own can walk it without the holy spirit.
I don’t need to be certain what percentage of us make it. And I am not convinced regarding Rev 7.
I have made the mistake once of accepting the conclusions a sect put forth, and I dont mean to make that mistake again.
We shall see about salvation when we see. How unsearchable are His judgments – absolutely. They are His to make, and don’t think mystery of God is behind us. He has an infinite amount of steps.before us, leading us in ways we dont get. In that light, enigmatic aspects of scripture are just that – enigmatic. For reasons only God knows.
Certainly many are called and few chosen.
But what i am still uncertain about is the outer darkness vs the lake of fire. Is the outer darkness part of eternity, just outside the gates? Whereas the lake of fire the second death?
And if 144,000 are sealed – 12,000 per each of the 12 tribes of Israel, what then of those nations that were grafted in? Are those among them that gain the kingdom grafted into specific tribes? Scripture never says that. But i doubt Christ would have sent Paul to them if none were to make it.
And as Christ says in Matthew, He had taken the kingdom from Israel and given it to a nation that would bring forth its fruit.
Are the 144,000 then merely those of Israel that will be grafted back in? If so, then they would be in addition to those of the former wild branch that make it in.
See what i mean about enigmatic? I am just trying to be careful.
Compare these verses: Matthew 8:12, Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50, Matthew 22:13, Matthew 24:51, Matthew 25:30, Luke 13:28.
I think you’ll find it quite undeniable that the lake of fire and outer darkness are one and the same.
The 144,000 represents the Israelites who will be saved (Rev 7:1-8). The great multitude represents those from the nations who will be saved (Rev 7:9-17). I believe your contention is valid, but I feel that distinction you desired is present in the article.
Then Revelation 21:12-17 represent the 144,000… then in Revelation 21:24-26, the nations are again accounted for in the salvation plan referring to Isaiah 60:3-5. Look at Isaiah 60:4 in particular, and compare with Revelation 7, 12 and Isaiah 49.
Kevin, not knowing, not being convinced and not having an answer is fine. No one can or should force you to believe anything. The point I’m trying to make is that “not knowing” is not a position which should be defended. We can’t claim something is unknowable and place our flag therein.
We have a promise in the Spirit… “But he that is spiritual judgeth all things” (1 Cor 2:15). 1 Thes 5,
19 Quench not the Spirit.
20 Despise not prophesyings.
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
You’ve just begun an epic journey. Don’t short-circuit it. Don’t sell yourself short… Don’t quench the Spirit. “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:” (Matt 7:7) Please, think about what I’m saying.
As for Romans 10, I’ll clarify… Paul was referring to Deuteronomy 30:12-14, where Moses exhorted the Israelites that they had no excuse to keep the law, because it was near to them. The law was written in proto-Semitic, an alphabetical revolution which made it far easier to learn to read. Paul uses that passage to exhort Christians they have no excuse but to follow the righteousness of faith, because Christ is in our hearts. We don’t have to fetch Him from the heavens or the earth, because He is in our hearts. What Paul was talking about isn’t remotely close to “warned the Romans not to speak to who we think will be raised up to heaven and who will descend into hell.”
“For reasons only God knows.”
Kevin, just because you personally have not figured something out doesn’t make that something “unknowable.” To make such a statement is an example of “begging the question.” Because you haven’t figured it out, no one else can either, at least to your satisfaction. In the sense that you are using it, “unknowable” is extremely subjective.
Jews created the concept of the “unknowable god”, so much so, that they dare not write or utter its name. He is the “ineffable”. They superstitiously call him “Hashem”, which means “the name.” This is a bogus trap that cuts you off from the true God.
With the right heart and faith, if you knock on the door, it will be opened to you, but only with diligence. To decide ahead of time which doors will never be opened to you is self-defeating. Yes, be cautious, learn from your mistakes, but if you learn from your previous mistakes, and why you made them, you can move ahead with confidence and righteousness in faith.
Chesterton,
Whether or not a man knows or believes how many Israelites will be saved – an exact number – has nothing to do with faith.
Try walking in the wilderness depending on ones faith for food, water and shelter for 3 years and come back to me with an idea of faith.
Not knowing something, or being reluctant to except non-essential knowledge immediately – before I have checked it fully myself – is in no way a detraction of faith, and comparing that to the unknowable god of jews is borderline defamation.
Sometimes we get so puffed up in knowledge we lose sight of what is important.
Kevin, many have seen death eye-to-eye. Many have walked their own wilderness. You can’t know what another man has been through. Feeling the need to compare subjective experiences is self-righteousness, don’t you think? Let’s all be thankful for our wildernesses instead of using them as a weapon against others.
No one is trying to defame you. Even if they were, what good does victimhood do us? My advice, stop being defensive… Don’t be offended. You don’t have to agree, but taking offense is fleshly.
Let’s not begrudge a brother’s duty to admonish. We need one another, and we need to be able to challenge one another. If we can all stop being defensive, we can have Spiritual unity and learn from one another.
Grass,
Not trying to be self rigjteous. I am trying to reach Chesterson on a more Christian playing field.
Ascribing righteous faith to this non essential knowledge, as he did, is wrong.
And you are wrong to claim i am playing the victim by pointing out defamation. We must rebuke each other when one of us veers down that path.
This isn’t buddhism, it’s Christianity. The narrow road has sharp edges, as it must to keep us on the path.
I quoted Paul’s words about God’s unsearchable judgments and he compared me to following a jewish god. I had no choice but to oppose him.
What’s important above all is the gospel. Christ does not care how much knowledge a man attains, but that a man learn true agape love.
If we hope to be of the 144,000 (assuming for the sake of argument it is true) let’s not rest our laurels on winning debates by even the slightest form of defamation. Accept fault and return to the topic in patience and good faith.
Those who find the humility of Christ and the status of children, who believe in spirit and truth His conquering of death are saved, as the gospel says. That is what is important.
Knowledge without that is meaningless.
So if I err in those ways that are essential for salvation, I pray God chastise me.
Kevin, I am sorry that I must not have made myself clear, but in no way did I mean to equate righteous faith to non-essential knowledge. What I was trying to convey is that our knowledge of the Scripture should never be limited by a presumption that something is “unknowable” — again, that is a logical fallacy, self-defeating, and classic “begging the question.”
https://christiansfortruth.com/begging-the-question-and-distorting-scripture-in-biblical-exegesis/
I am the last person who would ever advocate for material “knowledge” as a path to righteousness. That’s gnoticism.
https://christiansfortruth.com/will-you-be-destroyed-for-the-lack-of-knowledge/
Nor did I mean to accuse you of being “Jewish” in your view — I used the rabbinical presumption of the “unknowable” as a warning against of engaging in it — whether we like it or not, Jewish modes of thinking have infected all of us — myself included — and it is easy to fall into if not vigilant. The entire Talmud is based on this illogic — this begging the question. That is why two seedline, which you apparently have recently left behind, is Talmudic in its “logic” — and those who defend it have no idea that they are engaging in this logical fallacy. We have to change our own thinking process that made us susceptible to two seedline “logic” in the first place. This applies to all of us, not just you. But it’s not just two seedline, as even born again evangelicals also engage in it. No matter what Christian sect, it’s a common stumbling block.
Chesterton,
Is the postulation of only 144,000 Israelites ALL TIME a matter of scripture, or of opinion? Certainly I would agree with you that nothing written in scripture is beyond our apprehension, or it wouldn’t be there.
My doubt was not with scripture, but with the findings in the article above.
Granted, I may come to agree with it. But for now I am skeptical.
How unsearchable are God’s judgments. You really don’t need to reach into your bag of “that’s talmudic,” or “weren’t you recently dual seedline” in order to engage me as per what I wrote.
If Paul agrees that man cannot ever fully search out God’s judgments, then I am justified by scripture itself in what I said.
If God’s will is that none would perish, but ultimately some will the same way the angels that left their first estate (who once receiving eternal salvation, gave it away), then it is right to be skeptical of the claim you guys have brought before us: that just about every Adamite ever born is going to eternal hell.
I guess if God is willing that none should perish He should have willed harder. I mean gimme a break.
We have witnesses from Christ about harlots attaining the kingdom, even pharisees and publicans, though in a lower rank.
And how many Israelites have ever existed through time? Let’s say millions. And let’s assume that Israelites in modern times are far less in faith than many of the past. “Shall there be any faith left on the earth?” Well, one might assume that the majority of the 144,000 would not come from our age.
So perhaps 100 or so Israelites today will make it in that line of thinking.
It’s understandable for any to be skeptical that God’s mercy be so wispy, or that He be unable to save more from the grips of a fallen angel.
Typically I never outright oppose a postulation, but seek to study myself. However, that will take some time, and simultaneously I feel justified in voicing my concern, because yeah, I was at a 2 seedline congregation for a time (so were a few of the CFT team), and I learned the dangers of postulations becoming dogma to a group.
So at the least I will echo Paul and my own conscience, as well as the repetition in the NT about God’s mercy, and Christ’s indominable patience for man who is lost. He came to save the lost, not destroy almost all of them.
When I say “we shall see” I mean it. We will. We are not the gatekeepers of heaven. No man should assume such knowledge.
I want anyone who reads these comments of mine to consider what Paul said about God’s unsearchable judgments before then buy hook line and sinker what this article postulates, because I know from experience that the majority will NEVER study to the depths to be able to prove or disprove what has been state, rather, they will agree or disagree.
How many decent folk agree with 2 seedline because they found it on the heels of being hitler woke or what not? I don’t care about sect doctrine, I care about the gospel. I care about not being party any longer to detracting from Christ’s will.
So if you think i am being talmudic by saying “I don’t know” God’s ultimate judgment here, fine. But you better be right.
Kevin wrote, “If Paul agrees that man cannot ever fully search out God’s judgments”
Paul writes that after explaining God’s judgements. It’s the conclusion to his whole discourse since Romans 1. He’s praising God for the wonder of His judgements. Consider 1 Corinthians 2,
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
Paul is saying the exact opposite of what you think he’s saying… Which is an incredible and blessed truth. Like I said, don’t sell yourself short. As for the rest of what you said, I can only really address what comes from the Bible.
“I learned the dangers of postulations becoming dogma to a group”
I don’t think that’s the right lesson to learn. What about, “What caused me to fall for the dogma in the first place? What have I changed going forward?” Our lives must be based on the Bible. 2SL is not the Bible. If we have an argument to make and it’s not based on the Bible, it’s not an argument worth making. A life not based on the Bible is not a life worth living.
I must admit a fault of mine, that I did not appreciate the vastness of the nations in my thinking.
It appears the article is saying that many will be saved of Adam kind – of uncountable measure -, but very few of Israel.
That is far more fathomable than what I was thinking. Though I will study this myself before speaking to it again.
I would like to apologize to Chesterton and Grass for the minor dust up. Their points are well taken.
Whatever God’s will is, we must conform ourselves. Die to ourselves in Christ. Otherwise we can never be devoted entirely in love to our Father.
Amen, Kevin. I understand where you’re coming from on the “winning debates” point you made. I really do. So I appreciate you hearing me out all the more, despite your experiences.
Hopefully with time, we can earn one another’s trust in that regard, that we can trust one another’s intention to build each other up in true love. Trust is earned after all, so I’m glad you have given me the opportunity to earn it even though your instincts understandably told you not to.
Grass,
I certainly have no reason to mistrust a man based on experiences with other men. That would be silly.
And errors in scriptural dissection in and of themselves are not indicators of ill intent or agendas. Discerning the spirit of a man is a process.
That said, i did finally have time to assess the article against scripture. I had posted a long rebuttal last night but it timed out. This site seemed to be down for a few hours.
But i think i might send it privately anyway. I did find a few inconsistencies that I can’t ignore.
In terms of building each other up its probably best to avoid the potential for defensive backlash from onlookers (not specifying anyone, but it is an open forum and this is babylon).
God bless.
Kevin, yes, the site was down for a number of hours because of a technical issue, which is why you couldn’t post your comment.
Walter wrote, “Or do you worship a God who allows 99.99% of His people to be dragged into hell?”
Ugh, these kinds of arguments are boring. The Bible isn’t a reed which should shake at the breath of your offended sensibilities.
“Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matt 7:14)
You’re welcome to offer a Scriptural critique at your convenience…
Sure, 1 Corinthians 5:5, where Paul says the proper course of action for dealing with an apparently unrepentant degenerate:
“to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
What does this mean? It means that Paul would have understood Jesus’ remark in Matthew 7 to refer to physical destruction, not spiritual destruction. That the righteous, studious, Godly life, is indeed rare and lived by relatively few men is apparent. Also apparent is that all men have fallen short and all are in need of salvation by Jesus Christ.
Claiming that only 144,000 Israelites throughout all time merit salvation is an insult to the merciful and benevolent nature of our Lord. As I see it, the 144,000 constitute the very best, cream of the crop of the Children of Israel. But by no means are they the only ones whom God has saved.
Walter… 1 Cor 5:5… I’ll just quote another comment on this very same article:
1 Corinthians 5:5 “destruction”/”olethron” (Strong’s G3639) doesn’t mean death… It means continual ruin. When Paul says “may be saved” it is in aorist subjunctive, meaning that Paul desires them to be saved, but it’s not guaranteed. So they have been delivered up into worldly and fleshly ruin (but not death), with the hope that their experience will result in their salvation. Same is used in 1 Timothy 1:20.
It’s not saying what you think it’s saying. As for the rest, all I saw was your own thoughts and sensibilities. No Scripture to speak of…
If someone is motivated by fear of hell, especially an eternal torture kind of hell like the one that Allah inflicts, then they have already fallen short, an actually benevolent & loving God would not want his children to serve him out of terror. God spoke about the slander that is Baal-worship, which is also associated with Saturn and the idea that God is a Demiurge.
If someone is motivated out of the desire for material well-being, it doesn’t matter if that’s in the present or in the future, or after death, they simply desire to be magically spoilt by God or live in a utopia that then requires little or nothing from them. I doubt this is the right approach either.
I am motivated by the desire to see restoration. To see my kin happy & healthy. To see the innocent or righteous who suffered at the hands of scum restored back to life, and welcomed into a safe and happy world. That would be a triumph against all of those who despise us, and wilfully sin.
I was dedicated to figuring out the true, explicit interpretation of the Bible, so that I could figure out what people were doing wrong. Ever since I was a child, I wanted to know why there were miracles from God in the past, even restoring people from death, but now there are non. I now assume it is because God’s miracles are a divine intervention that magnifies the person associated with the miracle, and if that person doesn’t have the truth, then the miracle would be promoting falsehood. So if there are no miracles, nobody must have the truth of the matter, although I can believe that God watches over specific people in more subtle ways. I also realise that miracles or supernatural experiences can come from the other side too, but I think that there must be limits to that.
You have to wonder what the purpose of this situation is. I do not think a physical being would be resurrected into a spiritual or non-material existence, I can’t even relate to, or imagine such a thing, but I can understand the intended beginning being restored. Although there would need to be something eternal & external about consciousness, related to whatever the Book of Life is.
If God just intended for the dead to be sent to some kind of perfect, immaterial heaven, then there would be no reason to demand moral perfection from his people, nor any reason to make people suffer like this.
The reason people must live a certain way and have certain values and learn from painful experiences is because the maintaining of that Paradisiacal setting is dependant on the qualities of the individuals that inhabit it, even when entropy is not a factor.
We need to understand what the end-goal and hope really is, and what will be expected of the Israelites vs other peoples.
As for the racial purity issue:
It is impossible, at this point, for anyone to have solely blondes and redheads, with blue eyes, in their ancestry, and dark hair/ eyes seems to come from a little bit of admixture between racial groups.
The Celtic populace that came from Phoenicians were not all Blonde & blue eyed “Aryans”, they were of the “Atlantid” phenotype, being in-between Mediterranean and Nordid, with mostly red, brown and black hair.
You will also find that the Hyksos are represented as having black and red hair with blue eyes, their red hair is one of the reasons they were associated with Seth by the Egyptians.
Mediterraneans are closer related to Arabic populaces than whites, and we know that the populaces from the North of Africa to the Levant, to Pakistan & India are a massive mixed multitude of Caucasoids.
Blonde-haired people also pre-existed the Phoenicians or Israelites. The Babylonians were originally Blonde haired and blue eyed like the people of Aratta to the north of them, before mixing with the Dilmun migrants of the east, according to their own records. The Nordids or Germanic/ Scythian tribes had a much higher frequency of blondism than Celtic populaces because instead of being Phoenician colonies, they mixed with the populace of the steppe, which, presumably, had been scattered from Aratta, the first civilisation, predating Sumer.
In my understanding, there are three main extremities of genetic divergence within the human species. This correlates with the three progenitors. The three progenitors were placed in a hierarchy by the blessings provided by God in response to their actions, and Canaan was cursed for being the product of incest.
I see no evidence of “Pre-Adamic” peoples in the Bible, only what macro-evolution provides in terms of Homo-erectus and so on.
Shemites can only be the proto-typical European and Caucasoid.
The Bible has the record of Tamar, the Aramean, and she was considered a valid mother to Judah’s heirs, despite the trick she used, where as the Canaanite woman was not. So we already have a precedence set, where Shemites can be grafted in, because they are of the same ethnos or stock and racial hierarchy. Not only that but God sent his prophet to Assyrians, and they did what Israel could not. That being said, Jeremiah 31:33 makes it clear that Israelites have the laws of God written in their ‘hearts’.
Dan said, “If someone is motivated by fear of hell, especially an eternal torture kind of hell …..then they have already fallen short, an actually benevolent & loving God would not want his children to serve him out of terror.”
How to you square — “… In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power…” 2 Thessalonians 1:8
Notice this passage speaks to two different categories of men —- those who do not know God; and those who do not obey.
This is not about sending fallen angels to the pit.
Of course FEAR of hell is not the sole reason we follow Christ. You made a Straw Man argument.
But growing up, I certainly feared my father’s belt. Nothing wrong with that. Try raising a child without a little fear instilled in him.
There are several words used in the Greek anbd Hebrew of the Bible that mean race. The Bible is the very book of the race of Adam Genesis 5:1. Christ divides the world by ethnos at Matthew 25. The word genos is used by Peter at 1 Peter 2:9 “an elect race”, so the concept was certainly used by Peter. Christ used the word genos when speaking of the parable of the net, where the world is divided into good races and bad races; good fish and bad fish. Just as at the parable of the wheat and the tares.
Covenant theology itself is a racial construct. Race is all through the Bible, as a concept and in the defiknition of words. Yet strangely CFT claims race was not taught by the Bible.
Sure they do. Just as the bible itself is about the race of Adam.
It’s not about the beasts though. They aren’t people. They do not collectively create nations. They didn’t build castles and canals or build cities, anymore than they do today unless we instruct them.
Problem with dual seedline is it imagines beasts were as prolific in the temple periods as they are today. Actually beasts have never been so vast in numbers as they are today, thanks to the Adamic nations that dies and mixed out (turning in to arabs) and the British Empire propping up beast herds as people and giving them technology and a semblance of order.
That is how they numbers have risen in modern times.
Nor does the biblle teach that david hung out with beasts when he dwelt with gibeonites (because they were adamic as gen 10 says), or that Abraham communed with beasts when he did so with the sons of Heth.
Nor does the bible say that Rahab was of zerah, or that fornication makes one wise like God Elohim. I could go on but the point is that “one seedline” (a mere label) is not universalist, but rather much more narrow than dual seedline.
Whether or not eve slept with the serpent, it isnt being discussed in Genesis 3.
There are many things that dual seedline claims that the bible says nothing about. It is full of interpolations that are alien to the given context in order to support a preconceived belief.
Like in Matthew 3 where John is clearly warning the pharisees NOT to hide behind the emminance of the Abrahamic lineage by saying “God could raise sons from these stones!” Dual seedliners claim that John “meant to say” that those stones would not be of jacob, which is non sensical if not utterly absurd. He says exactly what he says.
I prefer following Christ and the word of His prophets over the agendas of men.
“Race” is a modern concept designed to dupe the world into believing they are all different kinds of “humans”. Sadly your conscience has been seared by that word. God didn’t care about scientism/evolution based taxonomies when He created Adam. When Moses wrote Genesis 1, he didn’t need “race” to distinguish between Adam and everything else. Neither did Paul… “For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish.” (1 Cor 15:39) No mention of “race”, “genos”, “ethnos”, or any of the rest.
“The Bible is the very book of the race of Adam Genesis 5:1”
Just have one look at this link: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_8435.htm
Let’s just drop the idea that Genesis 5:1 refers to race, okay?
“Christ divides the world by ethnos at Matthew 25”
So Matthew 12:21 says, “and in his name the RACES will hope”? You probably need to rethink that view.
“The word genos is used by Peter at 1 Peter 2:9 “an elect race””
So Acts 7:13 says, “And on the second visit Joseph made himself known to his brothers, and Joseph’s RACE became known to Pharaoh.” Pharaoh already knew Joseph was a Hebrew (Gen 41:12), and if it was indeed “race”, it would have been self-evident in Joseph’s appearance, no? Again, your view needs rethinking.
“Christ used the word genos when speaking of the parable of the net”
He doesn’t mention genos in that parable at all.
“Yet strangely CFT claims race was not taught by the Bible.”
Yet you haven’t proven anything. Still waiting for your reply on my previous comment to you, 4ntioch.
4ntioch wrote, ““Yet strangely CFT claims race was not taught by the Bible.”
We have never made such a statement because we aren’t that inarticulate and imprecise.
Let’s make this really simple. The word “race” did not enter the English language until the late 16th century. It meant a people with a common ancestor, which is why in English at that time “race” and “family” could be used interchangeably. It did not become a pseudo-scientific taxonomic word until 100 years later. To impose that word on the Bible would be intellectually irresponsible and anachronistic. The writers of the Bible did not have our marxist-inspired concept of “race” and all of its negative baggage — which you obviously still carry.
The same goes for the word “gentile”, another word that does not belong in the Bible for the very same reason — it was invented 400 years after Jesus Christ died. Why would you agree that “gentile’ has no place in the Bible but insist that “race” has a place when it’s 1,000 years newer than “gentile”? That’s preposterous, inconsistent, and agenda-driven.
The writers of the Bible did not use “race” because there was no need to. There was Adam and his descendants — the generations of Adam. The tribes and nations of Adam. The so-called “race” of Adam if you can’t help yourself. It is implicit in the Bible, so there is no need for the writers to constantly be explicit about it. The Bible is the story of those people and only those people.
Jesus Christ came only for those people — as promised — His followers didn’t need Him to instruct them about how to tell the difference between an Adamic Man and an African, Asiatic, or Arab. And He certainly didn’t need to constantly reassure His followers that non-Adamic people were not part of the Kingdom. 2,000 years ago, Adamic people had much stronger tribal identities of who they were than they do today. There was no reason for the Bible writers to harp on about it. It was implicit, tacitly understood.
The Bible is not a racial manifesto. It is a spiritual manifesto for only one people — the generations of Adam.
A man should not speak falsely of another, even an enemy. Like Paul said it is better to be defamed than to be a defamer.
Which is the bigger issue here, that dual seedliners often make false claims about other sects even when they have been shown repeatedly what those sects actually believe.
When it comes to satan or diabolos, the greater understanding is in his character. In fact that is the only aspect of identifying a diabolos that the bible speaks to.
I wish 4ntioch would examine his words and those of whom he follows. We should do so on a daily basis, for we are tempted continually. Repentance is the key to growth, not knowledge. Knowledge is wasted otherwise.
“Repentance is the key to growth, not knowledge. Knowledge is wasted otherwise.”
Yes, great point. Seeking knowledge, especially esoterica, as a form of salvation is the basis of gnosticism. It never ceases to amaze me that people who advocate two seedline doctrine cannot see it as a textbook example of gnosticism. The very idea that Eve copulated with a serpent comes out of Babylon occult circles, and certain Christians believe that this hidden “truth” is the “mystery” hidden from the foundations of the world that Christ came to reveal (Matt 13:25). Some have gone so far as to claim that it is impossible to understand the hidden meaning of Genesis — the sexual seduction — without the revelation of Jesus Christ. This view is as about Kabbalistic as you can get.
It speaks volumes that the English word “race” as in family was available to the King James translators, but they NEVER used in that sense. The only sense they used “race” was in the context of a competition. And, no, there was no “conspiracy” among the KJV translators to “hide” the “racial” message of the Bible, as some have baselessly suggested.
Even the word “caucasian” didn’t enter the language until the early 1800s from the work of German anthropologist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach. The categorization of different “races” was largely his idea, and it was pseduo-scientific in that he attributed “racial” differences to have arisen from environmental factors, such as diet, geography, and behavior. In that sense, Blumenbach was a proto-Darwinist . I strongly suspect that Blumenbach, like Darwin, was a Mason.
An Englishman at the time of the KJV would have understood Adam and the generations of Adam to have referred to themselves, not exotics from the nether regions of Africa. In fact, many of the European aristocracy believed they could trace their genealogies directly back to Noah. They did NOT see themselves as part of the dubious and generic “white race”. To them a “Christian” was synonymous with European, as an extended, inter-related family. When they spoke of “the world”, they understood it to mean history starting with Adam’s creation.
CFT wrote
“Nowhere in the Scripture do separate “races” — itself a concept not found in the Scripture — spontaneously appear. Neither do separate races spontaneously appear in observable reality.”
And this is false, as I explained. This also explains you continual contextual error with Romans 9 where Paul is contrasting Jacob and Esau.
This reply did not address anything I actually said. Christ speaks of dividing the world by ethnos and gemos …unless you think the fish of the parable were actual fish, or the nations of sheep and goats were something other than groups if genetically related people.
This replay, while lengthy, does nothing to counter my assertion.
Jacob and Esau are the same “race”, both are Adamic. They cannot be separated by race if they are the same stock, except in your mind or in your Babylonian occult Kabbalah two seedline imagination. It’s you who haven’t proven otherwise.
https://christiansfortruth.com/edom-in-the-old-and-new-testaments/
I see many answers in the comments to this 4ntioch fellow’s arguments, but he doesn’t bother to engage or prove anything. Then he concludes he’s correct… Despite not having proven it. It’s like he’s in a psychological prison of his own making.
4ntioch, how about you address the counter-arguments presented to you? Until you do so, you’re not going to come across as very persuasive…
“In other words, an Israelite would have no way to know whether they were an Israelite — yet their salvation is dependent on them being born an Israelite.”
This is what the Jews today bang on about; salvation is of race and of course of faithfully adhering to and implementing the Law.
This is utter nonsense and Paul makes everything quite clear, yet the ‘official’ churches don’t care about Paul (nor the Apostles). They sell their own rubbish (Synagogue 2.0) about slave-ation.
Repent and be baptised Properly in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. We cannot save ourselves. All we can do is bear witness to Him, which is actually all OT Israel were ever chosen to do anyway.
Kent,
Are you implying that non-white peoples have access to God through Jesus Christ? I don’t want to assume anything.
To compare this site to what Jews say is rather disingenuous. Have you spent much time reading articles here?
Metaphysical Israel is nonsense. It makes no sense and contradicts both the OT and NT.
To promise something to the offspring of a progenitor and then go ahead and give it to someone else, for whatever reason, is inherently deceptive, and it is written that God is a keeper of his word and of promises.
Jews are not a race, but a few ethnicities, they are just another part of the mixed multitude, the Ashkenazi are not far off from the Palestinians they despise.
CFT wrote:
“Yet God’s relationship with Israel is bi-directional — it’s a two-way street. There are things which Israel must do to fulfill their side of the promises — and there are things God must do to fulfill His side of the promises. This relationship can be condensed into 2 Chronicles 7:14,”
Yet the promises to Abraham were without condition and Christ came to keep the promise to the fathers, the new Covenant is based on the unconditional promises made to Abraham that had to be upheld:
Luk 1:72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
Luk 1:73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,
The father of John the baptist on the purpose of the Messiah. This is why Christ had to die, so that the unconditional promises to Abraham could be upheld.
And this is what Paul is alluding to at Romans 9. It is strange that CFT reframed Romans 9 which is clearly speaking about Jacob and Esau:
Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Ofcourse I already pointed this out on the first CFT article.
Two-seedline is not based on paganism or targums, John 8 is a salient example when examined closely and one asks “who was that murderer from the beginning”. Also one seedline cannot explain how cain was “of that wicked one” 1 John 3:2, with respect to the Greek. And many other things ofcourse. This are just two examples.
Racial salvation is objective and true. It depends on the will of God entirely. It exists apart from the will. of man and what any man supposedly believes.,m which is subjective And that is the justice and mercy of God. It is His purpose for His creation from the beginning. And His will cannot fail.
A man claiming he is doing the will of God, that is not only subjective but self-righteous. But those who seek to keep His commandments and do His will will have greater rewards in the KINgdom:
1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
In the same epistle Paul told the Corinthians, of a fornicator, to:
1Co 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
How would CFT explain this?
Once again temporal salvation vs eternal salvation must be considered. A sinner is not going to be preserved in this life yet still has an immortal spirit from God because of his race, his descent from Adam. “If there is a natural body, there is a spiritual body.”
Christ came to redeem Israel. He was a Kinsman Redeemer. Salvation is by race, as Isaiah said “all the seed if Israel shall be saved”, “As in Adam all die, in Christ all shall be made alive.”
I dont think Isaiah can fairly be considered in any other way but racial salvation.
Believing in this, in His true gospel and keeping His commandments is the best sign one is an Israelite and saved because of God’s will.
You are basically asking us to argue two seedline with you again. We have thoroughly addressed all of your contentions elsewhere, such as:
https://christiansfortruth.com/genesis-6-what-really-happened-between-the-sons-of-god-and-the-daughters-of-man/
https://christiansfortruth.com/will-all-israel-be-saved-or-just-a-remnant/
https://christiansfortruth.com/what-really-happened-between-eve-and-the-serpent-in-the-garden-of-eden/
https://christiansfortruth.com/edom-in-the-old-and-new-testaments/
https://christiansfortruth.com/edom-in-the-prophecy-of-malachi/
https://christiansfortruth.com/a-closer-look-at-deuteronomy-23-prophetic-fulfillment-of-the-assembly-of-the-lord/
https://christiansfortruth.com/begging-the-question-and-distorting-scripture-in-biblical-exegesis/
Yet the promises to Abraham were without condition
I quote from the article itself: “In the bi-directional relationship, God essentially took care of both sides.” Did you read carefully, 4ntioch?
And this is what Paul is alluding to at Romans 9. It is strange that CFT reframed Romans 9 which is clearly speaking about Jacob and Esau:
No, It’s about children of the promise and children of the flesh. Jacob (promise) and Esau (flesh) are just one example of that. Otherwise Paul wouldn’t have used the example of Isaac (promise) in Romans 9:7. Paul gives the same example in Galatians 4:23, “But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh (Ishmael – Gal 4:29), while (the son of the free woman was born through promise. (Isaac – Gal 4:28).”
It is you who reframes Romans 9 to fit your own agenda, and your agenda is made all the more evident by the flimsy rebuttal you’ve given here. It shows how little evidence you yourself need to be convinced.
John 8 is a salient example when examined closely and one asks “who was that murderer from the beginning”. Also one seedline cannot explain how cain was “of that wicked one” 1 John 3:2, with respect to the Greek.
You haven’t bothered to try and PROVE that’s what it says. No Greek (not even the CNT to which you apparently ascribe) bothers to say “that”. Without any proof or even one specific translation to reference, it looks like you wrote “that” and hoped everyone would believe it… Kind of like how you believe everything merely because one man said it, you want everyone to believe merely because you said it. That’s very dishonest and lazy of you, 4ntioch…
John 8:44 says “He was a murderer from the beginning”. You’re trying to presume which murder and which beginning he’s referring to without proving which murder and which beginning. You’re begging the question.
1 John 3:12 puts “evil” in masculine singular. The “one” is artificially added… It’s objectively and undeniably an artificial addition, which most translators acknowledge. For that very reason, the “one” is italicized in some translations. Genesis 4:7 explicitly states Cain was overcame by his own sin nature, therefore “the evil” anthropomorphizes the innate sin nature. Same can be seen obviously in Matthew 5:37, unless 4ntioch you’re willing to admit that every time you’ve ever lied in your life, it was witness to yourself being of the “serpent seed”.
But CNT renders Matthew 5:37, “Now your word must be yea, yea, no, no, and what is in excess of these is from of evil.” Matthew 3:37 and 1 John 3:12 both have literally the same Greek word in the same genitive masculine singular “πονηροῦ”. CNT implicitly admits “πονηροῦ” in Matt 5:37 is an anthropomorphized evil. But according to CNT in Matt 5:37 it’s “from of evil” and in 1 John 3:12 it’s “the Wicked One”. These inconsistencies are embarrassing. CNT should render Matt 5:37, “what is in excess of these is from of the Wicked One.”
Funny how “Christos” in Galatians 3:16 is also in masculine singular, but CNT renders it, “which are anointed.” Yet it insists 1 John 3:12 (also masculine singular) must be rendered “the Wicked One”. Obvious double standards… designed for those who have no desire to scrutinize it, but only blindly accept it as truth. In that case to avoid double standards, CNT should render Galatians 3:16 “who is the Anointed One.”
4ntioch, I suggest you stop being lazy and take some personal responsibility by studying this for yourself, instead of relying on someone else to do it for you. That may sound harsh for you, but you do seem unaware of your own ignorance on these matters. But you’re talking here as if you aren’t ignorant. It’s a strange mix…
1 Corinthians 3:15 Paul is saying himself and Apollos will be saved even if the Corinthians (their work) are not saved. This verse proves that the Corinthians may be burned and eternally damned and contradicts your case.
1 Corinthians 5:5 “destruction”/”olethron” (Strong’s G3639) doesn’t mean death… It means continual ruin. When Paul says “may be saved” it is in aorist subjunctive, meaning that Paul desires them to be saved, but it’s not guaranteed. So they have been delivered up into worldly and fleshly ruin (but not death), with the hope that their experience will result in their salvation. Same is used in 1 Timothy 1:20.
1 Corinthians 15:44 in context makes the earthly and the spirit exclusive with one another. Paul is explaining our bodies to come… First the earthly, then the spiritual. You’ve misapplied that verse.
Salvation is by race, as Isaiah said “all the seed if Israel shall be saved”
The article addressed this argument of yours, but on a few points you’ve made I get the feeling you didn’t pay much attention while you were reading. Maybe you skimmed the article in a rush to give your own views… Again, lazy.
As in Adam all die, in Christ all shall be made alive.”
1 Corinthians 15:22 is not unqualified. John 3:15 says “that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” Therefore, the “all” in 1 Cor 15:22 is all those who believe in Christ. But in your view, one doesn’t even need to believe in Christ, which contradicts the Bible.
4ntioch wrote “temporal salvation vs eternal salvation must be considered”
Really, says who? You need to prove that such a difference actually exists outside of your own mind. Just because you don’t drop dead at any point in your life doesn’t mean that you have achieved some sort of “salvation” in this life. That’s preposterous, and you completely made that up. It’s nowhere in Scripture. You are forced to believe in a “temporal” salvation because you’ve painted yourself into a doctrinal corner with your bogus doctrine of unconditional salvation by race. “Temporal salvation” is a bogus concept and easily refuted. Read here:
https://sovgrace.net/2020/03/27/temporal-salvation-a-bogus-or-biblical-concept/
Normally I let things slide… but Peter, your comment to me was rude. You’re an argumentative time-waster. You just want to argue with everyone. People are giving you truth here, and you’re just spitting it back in people’s faces, and by rejecting truth you’re spitting in Christ’s face. Good day to you.
I’ve heard so many explanations of the 144,000 that I’ve lost track and I’ve never been able to ascertain it through my own study. I have no idea (of course) if I’m an Israelite of the flesh but if I am and this interpretation is right – I doubt if I’d make the cut. Got some thinkin to do
WaffenSSman, none of us have the strength in the flesh to do it. Only the Holy Spirit can give us the power. If you are in doubt, that means you still need to ask for the Spirit. That’s very good news for you… Just pray and ask…
“how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him” (Luke 11:13)
Instead of blaspheming the name of God among the nations (Romans 2:24), Israel are to be a light to the nations. Paul quoted Isaiah 49:6 in Acts 13:46-48 — referring to his own mission to bring Christ Jesus to them,
46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first. Since you repudiate it and consider yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the nations. 47 For so the Lord has commanded us, ‘I have appointed You as a light to the nations, That You may bring salvation to the end of the earth.’” 48 When the nations heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed.
As CFT wrote above.
I have just got questions please:
Are we to conclude Israel of the flesh who repudiated and were unworthy are Israel?
Were they not cut off? Why did the apostles turn to the Gentiles?
If so how can they be a light if they were the light snuffer?. 1 Thessalonians 2:15 Enemies of all mankind stopping the light of salvation by gospel.
How can Gentiles who are non tribes people become grafted on?
I have appointed you as a light unto the world and commanded US, Is that the apostles and church or a fleshly nation who hates Gods prophets, Son and gospel.?
Are there not two Israels one of flesh and one of the promise?
Do we understand ALL men and All nations to be just that All meaning every?
Why change All to suite a hypothesis when clearly the sheep are divided from the rebellious goats?
Israel is a light unto the nations therefore the Church is the Israel of God.
Peter lists all the titles of Israel on the Church. Holy nation, Royal Priesthood, formerly not a nation.
Ephesians says gentiles are fellow citizens. Are they the Israelite’s?
Thanks for your great efforts permit me some clarity as it remains a little obscure?
Birnie, why do you so stubbornly ignore that this site doesn’t subscribe to the modern “Jews and Gentiles” paradigm?
You’re so obstinate on this idea, I’m seriously questioning either your motives or your sanity.
The simple answer Grass is there is a paradigm born out in scripture. The biblical world view was Israelite’s and Gentiles a holy separation. The apostle above acknowledges and confirms this separation. Who carries the light the apostles and the gentiles or the fleshly Jews who killed the prophets. They rejected Christ the light and the gospel so the apostles turned to the gentiles.
I seek truth not emotions. Proofs not hypothesis and facts not ad hominem clouding.
So all Israel was not of Israel. Were there two different groups read in the scripture and if so why confuse the Spiritual for the Fleshly Israel.
Cowering behind feigned ignorance… Will you ever come out from back there, Birnie?
Well, if you insist… Will you do us a favor and explain Romans 11:17-24?
Roman 11:1_24 is self explanatory what exactly do you not comprehend? If I were to say that Jews are sons of devil would I be cut off. Or you brood of vipers, sons of murderers and white washed tombs. Hardly as Christ as well as the apostles were using such language.
My original point however is that the division in the Israelite world view at the time of Christ was that the are Jews exclusive and separated from Gentiles. What is your doubt specifically. Please elaborate as all commentaries I read as well as the text seem to accept that as a given.
Birnie, you haven’t actually explained anything, have you? If it’s self explanatory, it should be simple enough without dancing around it, surely? It would hardly take any time at all.
Someone so confident as you are in their Bible views should easily explain one measly passage. Let’s hear it then… Give us the Birnie exposition verse for verse.
! Timothy 4:10 God is the savior of ALL men, 1 Timothy 2:4Who will have ALL men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. 2 Peter 3:9. God is not willing that any should perish.
And who was Paul referring to when he used the term “all men”? Do you honestly believe he meant Black Africans by that term? You can’t be serious.
I have never received an answer from the likes of Peter when I ask them to explain to me how we can get 4 primary tribes of people out of ONE homogenous couple. They all simply ignore the question.
SMH
How do you get all the different dogs out of one dog, or cat or anything else? Christ died for the sin of the whole world. Not just for white people
Is this your answer Peter? This is your explanation for the 4 Primary Distinct groups of people?
Adam and Eve were White. Noah, his sons and their wives were White.
Are you promoting Evolution Peter? Blacks simply “evolved” from White people?
Question — When will we see Black people emerge from the loins of Icelanders?
When will White people emerge from the loins of the Chinese?
I suppose the good news in your theory is that all of those Somalis who were sent to Minnesota and are wrecking that State — eventually, Minnesota will turn White again! How long will that take I wonder.
You are not White I am guessing….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XatoDTlXRgY This explains the creationist view of how the various species and sub-species of animals came to be from one pair of each kind.
It starts with a progenitor pair that contain many possible genetic expressions to pass on, and the offspring branch off with various specialisations, growing more specialised with each generation because they lose access to gene expressions that the older generations or original pair had.
So the assumption is that there was quite a lot of variety in pre-flood humans.
There are three primary tribes with one unique one.
The reason why Africans and East Asians are so different to Caucasoids is because of the wives of the progenitors. Canaan was the product of incest so he would be different again. There would also be considerable adaptation processes after that point too.
“Anthrōpos” probably meant “adam” meaning descendants of Adam, much like how “man” is refers to “Mannus.”
If there is such a thing as Pre-Adamic and Adamic, then why is it there is breeding between all human races?
There is genetic divergence between a horse and a donkey but they can still breed, but when you suggest that there was a separate set of progenitors for a separate humanoid, they should not be able to breed with the new type.
Even if you believe Eve had sex with a figure that was called the “Serpent,” and he beguiled her with words and perhaps even mimicked Adam’s likeness- although that’s not mentioned. That doesn’t refer to any pre-Adamic man, it is likely the spiritual adversary of God. Pre-Adamic man sounds like a Biblical rationalisation of things like homo-erectus rather than anything that was intended to be interpreted from the Bible.
That being said, the Bible still outlines that there is hierarchy between the three progenitors and Canaan, with the blessings and curses. It is also instructed in Pro 5:1-23 for to stick to your own stock or racial group and explains why.
For Israelites this includes Shemites, like the Aramean, Tamar.
And in Lamentations it also points out the horror of being ethnically mixed away by divergent & genetically dominant groups.
It is also fact that all people are products of their ancestors desires, choices and habits, so thousands of years of poor, sinful habits are not going to create the same calibre of populace as ancestors who generally tried to avoid those practices & habits. I also understand that culture is downstream from genetics, even though children also absorb & adopt the culture around them.
Dan,
Help me understand your position. Sometimes you say things that I simply don’t understand.
Simple Question — Do you believe in Pre-Adamites?
This will help me understand your comments. Thanks.
Just quoting the script, you can disregard it if you like. I think Phillip was referenced preaching to an Ethiopian. Do you consider Black Africans not to be Men?
Taking advantage of a bad or misleading English translation isn’t “just quoting the script.”
The original Ethiopians were White descendants of Cush, who was White. They were overrun by black Nubians just like the Egyptians. There were both black African and white Adamic Ethiopians at one time. So in the Bible, depending on the context, an Ethiopian can be white or black….it’s pretty easy to figure it out by the context…especially if one is on the way to Jerusalem to visit the temple. Blacks would not have been allowed into the temple.
Also during that same time, The Greek historian, Diodorus Siculus wrote about the Ethiopians being both white and black:: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/3A*.htm
So which parts are misleading and which parts aren’t. Are you the great picker and chooser. In the original manuscripts Hell is not even mentioned. That was added in later to put fear into people. Also there are plenty of other verses to support the ones I chose. So You can just slough them of if you like but that just makes you a false prophet.
Blacks, browns, yellows, reds, greens, purples, blues, etc, are NOT MEN!
MEN are white in colour, mind, temperament, and nature!
Adam was white, Eve was white, their kids were white. Noah, his wife, his three sons, their three wives, were ALL white!
God made the animals of the land… AND THEN MADE ADAM… thus if you’re NOT white, you’re NOT a MAN!
🙂
Do you have scripture and verse for that ridiculous statement?
This seems like a severe rationalisation in response to racial tensions.
What do you think of White people who are 70IQ or so?
Only idiots would deny their existence, but you can’t really blame them for being born incredibly stupid.
The racial tensions are natural & inevitable, children are born with an innate sense of racial belonging and heavily distrust those who do not look like family.
Even as adults we instinctively know that we are not in the same boat as those of another race, no matter how many idealistic platitudes we swallow. They will always have different issues, adaptations, inheritances, histories, cultures, languages, characteristics, and so on. They may not even be able to relate with one another, which is not really the fault of either party.
When surrounded by aliens, and atomised by the individualistic consumerist society, there is no longer that tribal security & local community that makes someone feel generally needed/ purposeful, happy & safe. Sometimes these differences are incompatible & inconsolable.
Nowhere in the Bible does it promote multi-racialism in the sense of multiple divergent peoples being forced to live amongst each other where there is no trust or connection with one another.
The ‘political’ structure OT is all about having strong family ties and family units, genealogical records and a ethno-state led by a monarchy chosen by God.
Even if there is allowance for multi-racialism, it would be gradual assimilation for individual exceptions rather than mass flooding, and even then… what would be the point in giving people genetically recessive features if they are not to promote isolative separation from those with dominant genetics?
My point is you do not have to go to such extremes to assert a racial identity using the Bible.
Great, now please reconcile your views with Luke 13:24. Unless your Bible only contains 1 Timothy 2:4, 1 Timothy 4:10 and 2 Peter 3:9?
They will not be saved until they have reaped what they have sown. Are you saying the Bible contradicts itself?
My Bible also contains verses that state Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost. Since it also states all men are lost then all shall be saved. It also states that eventually ALL knees shall bow, that Christ took away the sin of the world. Do you think Him not capable. Does Man’s will override God’s Will?
You still haven’t answered my question… How do you reconcile Luke 13:24? How can some seek to enter the Kingdom and not be able… While others are able?
If “all men” are saved, why do we need Christ? If we are all saved just by being born, why bother with the Bible at all? How are “all men” getting through the “narrow gate” of Luke 13:24? How are “all men” getting through the 12 gates of the Kingdom which are equated with the 12 tribes of Israel? (Rev 21).
How do you reconcile your “all men” doctrine with Matthew 22-13-14, “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are invited, but few are chosen”?
Because that is God’s plan and he was letting us in on the plan. It is not my Doctrine, it is what the Bible says. In Revelation it says all knees will bow and maybe Matthew is speaking to people who haven’t bowed yet but eventually they will and when they do they will be saved. The false Gospel that is preached today is not good news for Billions of people. The Script doesn’t say people would all be saved at the same time the same way. Alot won’t be saved until the ressurection of the dead when they see Christ they will bow the knee. Why would God burn His progeny in everlasting fire when He specifically told the Israelites not to burn their children to molech. God said it never came into His mind. You put the face of Satan on God and make God into a hypocrite
So if everybody will be saved at one time or another, why do we need Christ? No matter what we do in this life, eventually because we will “bow” to Christ, we will be saved at that moment. Is that really “good news”? If everybody is saved regardless of how they have lived their lives, including blasheming the Holy Spirit and denying Christ, what the point of conforming our lives to Christ now when we all end up in the same place in the end. That seems preposterous and futile. Sounds like your idea of the Kingdom is not much different from the world as it is now except that “every knee has bowed.”
God already flooded the world, he already contemplated destroying humanity altogether. The reason why he would cast his creations into everlasting fire, which is the second death, is because they would not be suited for his Kingdom and corrupt it all over again. Why else would there be a judgement of individuals?
It’s pretty clear what the requirements are for avoiding the Second Death, that is the vast majority of humanity out of the picture. If we look at the history of the world, we can see which people have been Christian the longest and fought to maintain it, that must increase the likelihood of people amongst that group who will be judged positively. There would be no Christianity today without European investment into it and if we only have the Jesuits to thank for the attempt to convert the rest of the world. Are the Biblical teachings even meant to be understood by other peoples outside of Israelites? Could come to thousands and thousands of interpretations & conclusions but only the Israelites have the laws of God written in their hearts, and yet who knows who they are?
How do you rationalise the how one nation was chosen and was the ‘only family God had known’? Or how Christ said “I have only come for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel”?
If there is salvation for other peoples, then it is in addition to what is promised to Abraham & Isaac’s posterity, and is still dependant on actions & beliefs, just as the Israelites are also judged.
“All men” is contradictory.
All Whites are not saved. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (denying Christ) so those who refuse to accept Him as their Lord and Saviour cannot be saved (Mathew 12:31). I believe all Whites have the gift of salvation afforded to them but if they remain unrepentant, they probably are not kingdom bound. I say “probably” because it’s actually impossible to know what God’s final judgment will be.
Well said, James. The more you know, the more you realize what you don’t know, and the more you realize how little you really know… and with the Bible, the more you realize that you can never know it all, as that would be blasphemy: only God knows all.
I would like to clarify something.
Peter denied Christ three times, and he even knew him face to face. But he was forgiven.
So saying that the blasphemy of the holy spirit is ‘denying Christ’ isn’t exactly the case.
Peter was later powered in the spirit – purged and cleansed. There is a difference between believing in Christ and being doused in the holy spirit.
Upon becoming believers in Him we still carry baggage from our upbringings. Christ isn’t going to destroy us for our missteps as long as we are yet reborn in the spirit. It’s a process of death and rebirth.
A man may say many foolish things along the way. Who was David railing at in psalms 22? Perhaps at God. Perhaps Christ echoes that frailty of man on the cross when even He questions God’s will for him saying “why!?”
I think a true denial is giving up the path for the world once you have that spirit. Denying His road for lust, greed etc. Becoming a diabolos to gain power or something.
But honestly I am not entirely certain. It is good to develop a repentant spirit and a slow acting spirit.
Embracing the idea of martyrdom is good. Notice Peter had no problem accepting his own. Far cry from the old Peter.
Martyrdom, to drink Christ’s cup, is the ultimate honor. But we can’t go and look for our martyrdom and try to make it happen. Instead of trying to make it happen, it’s something we must have faith in. Have faith Christ will provide the opportunity for us to give our lives. I think when the time is right, we will know.
Looking at the world now, I sure don’t know how it would happen. Although it will be like the martyrs of old. They weren’t fighting or trying to kill anyone, necessitating them being put down. They were peaceful, but they were hated without cause.
This aspiration also helps to put all things in life into perspective. Worldly things become boring. Have faith we will give our lives, just like Christ gave his. None can take it from us, because we have work to do. When our work is done, we’ll be ready to move on, and our deeds will follow us…
Grass,
The greater fear is the second death. It’s not lost on me how easily a man can fail God. The idea of losing His spirit in my life is far more terrifying than losing my earthly existence. I think that is why the Essenes accepted their martyrdom with smiles, because they had dwelt with His spirit whereas the other sects of Judea had not.
That said I am a man as weak as men are. I pray if it ever comes to such a fate that God pulls me through it.
Kevin, if you have any writings to suggest on the Essenes, please let me know.
Yes, we are all weak as men. Dead in the body, but alive in the Spirit. Alive indeed, if we show the Spirit in us. Through prayer and humility, we have strength in Christ.
2 Cor 3,
4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
Grass,
From ‘Wars of the Judaeans’ by Josephus; book II, ch. 8.10:
“…and indeed our war with the Romans gave abundant evidence what great souls they had in their trials, wherein, although they were tortured and distorted, burnt and torn to pieces, and sent through all kinds of instruments of torment, that they might be forced either to blaspheme their legislator (God or Moses) or to eat what was forbidden them, yet could they not be made to do either of them, no, not once to flatter their tormentors, nor to shed a tear; but they smiled in their very pains, and laughed those to scorn who inflicted the torments upon them, and resigned up their souls with great alacrity, as expecting to receive them again.”
Thanks, I haven’t read much of Wars yet. I read chapter 8 and it was quite interesting. I wonder if they were involved in the Maccabees account of torture under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, or what Hebrews 11:35 refers to. Paul advocated celibacy as well, but he was a Pharisee, not an Essene. I wonder if any of his writings referred to them albeit indirectly.
More importantly, I wonder if they became Christians…
Repentance is not just about saying sorry though. It involves learning or meditating on why the action is sinful, the consequences of the action, and also then preventing yourself from doing it again.
John 8:37 37 I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
Vs 13 shows that He speaks with Pharisees. They were Abraham children and that not to believe they would die in their sins. Sons of Abraham are not unique in any way nor absolved from sin by reason of the descent.
I too shall read this article again. Thank You.
Why did they focus so on being descended from Abraham?
As opposed to being descended from Jacob?
Gal 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed.
Paul argues that the seed is singular thus Christ.
It all began with Abraham. The pharisees seem well versed in this fact. Yet still, we could use Jacob in a similar vein. The passage in John relates to their defence against fornication and illegitimacy. Jesus agreed by saying I know that you are Abraham’s seed (descendants of the flesh).
Hoping that helps.
Edomites are also descended from Abraham.
If someone is descended from Esau as well as Jacob, that means they are also descended from Canaan as well. Considering that people are inherently the products of their ancestors desires, choices & habits, that makes for a perverted or corrupted inheritance. Such a thing is caused by the sins of ancestors who mixed away what God gave them as a blessing.
Pro 5:1 My son, listen to my wisdom; Incline your ear to my understanding,
Pro 5:2 So as to watch over discretion, And your lips guard knowledge.
Pro 5:3 For the lips of a strange woman drip honey, And her mouth is smoother than oil;
Pro 5:4 But in the end she is bitter as wormwood, Sharp as a two-edged sword.
Pro 5:5 Her feet go down to death, Her steps lay hold of She’ol.
Pro 5:6 She does not consider the path of life; Her ways are unstable – you do not know it.
Pro 5:7 So now, listen to me, you children, And do not turn away from the words of my mouth.
Pro 5:8 Keep your way far from her, And do not come near the door of her house,
Pro 5:9 Lest you give your splendour to others, And your years to one who is cruel;
Pro 5:10 Lest strangers be filled with your strength, And your labours go to the house of a foreigner.
Pro 5:11 Then you shall howl in your latter end, When your flesh and your body are consumed,
Pro 5:12 And shall say, “How I have hated discipline, And my heart has despised reproof!
Pro 5:13 “And I have not heeded the voice of my teachers, And I have not inclined my ear to those who instructed me!
Pro 5:14 “In a little while I was in all evil, In the midst of an assembly and a congregation.”
Pro 5:15 Drink water from your own cistern, And running water from your own well.
Pro 5:16 Should your springs be scattered abroad, Rivers of water in the streets?
Pro 5:17 Let them be only your own, And not for strangers with you.
can someone give me the cliff notes on this
With such a short attention span, how do you read the Bible?
I’ve been hoping for CFT to write about this exact question for some time now. I am still absorbing it now and will re-read it again. I am anticipating some great feedback in this comment section which always serves as a great supplement to the article itself. Tremendous piece of work
Bravo! A much needed article.
I hope this will go into the “Core Doctrines” category.
This article and “who are the jews” should be priority or even mandatory reading for those who wish to comment here.
Hey Midwest CNN Guy ……………… what are your thoughts on this article?