Recently, we’ve received a number of comments from some of our readers who still hold to the doctrine that “All Israel shall be saved.” They seem genuinely confused — and often at a loss — when confronted with evidence from Scripture that completely contradicts their views which attempts to maintain that all white people are Israelites — and that all of them will be unconditionally saved — while everyone else is part of an evil “serpent seedline” destined for the Lake of Fire.
So to better help them understand why other Christians outside their small echo chamber are not persuaded by their arguments to support this view, we’d like to take a closer look at John’s “baptism of repentance” (Mark 1:4) in the context of the “All Israel shall be saved” doctrine — and show how the two views simply cannot be reconciled with each other without doing violence to the plain words and meaning of Scripture.
First, let us set the scene for John’s message. Luke 3:7 says,
So he was saying to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him, “You offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?”
Matthew 3:7 says,
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?”
“All Israel” advocates interpret these verses to mean that John was actually calling “Edomite” Pharisees literal seed of the Genesis 3 serpent. Now nothing in the entirety of the Scripture actually states this doctrine — and the same is true here in these passages. If Luke and Matthew wanted to warn us that John was talking to crypto “serpent seed” Edomites, then they must have intentionally been either very obtuse about it — or just plain incompetent because it’s nowhere in the plain words of Scripture.
Luke states that John told “the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him” that they were “offspring of vipers.” Matthew states that John told “the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism” that they were “offspring of vipers.” Moreover, Luke 3:12 and Luke 3:14 tell us there were tax collectors and soldiers among the crowds as well.
If John spoke thus to “the crowds” — and if the crowds included tax collectors, soldiers, Pharisees and Sadducees — we therefore can safely conclude that John essentially told everyone present that they were “offspring of vipers” — including the Pharisees and the Sadducees. We suppose Matthew decided it would be beneficial to single out the Pharisees and Sadducees in his version of John’s message — and we can find special meaning in Matthew’s decision for doing so. On the other hand, Luke decided to show us the message applied to everyone.
In other words, where Luke told us the message applied to everyone, Matthew was sure to let us know that the Pharisees and Sadducees also suffered John’s under scrutiny. Matthew went so far as to reiterate this point in Matthew 12:34 and Matthew 23:33 where he relates the Lord Jesus also leveling the same accusation at them.
However, just because the Lord appeared to single out the Pharisees and Sadducees as the “offspring of vipers,” it does not mean that John did not call all the crowds by the same name. As we have mentioned, the Pharisees and Sadducees were included in that designation.
Therefore, if John called all the crowds “offspring of vipers,” then we could hardly even remotely conclude that John was talking just to Edomite Pharisees who were literal seed of the Genesis 3 serpent. That is, even if we were to allow the fact that the Scripture never explicitly states it — thus acknowledging we must come to the conclusion by inference — it still doesn’t work at all.
Furthermore, the New Testament never tells us that any of the Pharisees were non-Adamic — that is, they were untainted by any non-Adamic lineage such as — hypothetically speaking — the Genesis 3 serpent. On the other hand, we can see various Pharisees who definitely were Adamic — such as Paul (Philippians 3:5), Nicodemus (John 3:1) and Gamaliel (Acts 5:34, Acts 22:3). And Paul the Pharisee most certainly would have been counted among the “vipers” who persecuted Christians.
Thus we find evidence that there definitely were Adamic Pharisees, whereas we find literally no evidence there were any non-Adamic Pharisees. As we have also discussed before, the high priesthood — like John the Baptist’s father Zacharias (Luke 1:5) — was also filled with Adamic men.
As we have already covered, merely calling Pharisees “offspring of vipers” cannot be admitted as evidence, because then all of the crowds whom John spoke to would also have to be serpent seed according to the gospel of Luke — regardless of whether or not the Pharisees and Sadducees were singled out in the gospel of Matthew.
Now let us consider this “All Israel” view from a different angle. If the crowds were “offspring of vipers” — and thus non-Adamic serpent seed — then why would John bother to preach a baptism of repentance to them at all in the first place? In other words, the “offspring of vipers” had no hope of hearing or adhering to John’s message — so preaching it to them was an entirely pointless endeavor.
How can this glaring contradiction be explained away? They have no choice but to make the claim that John the Baptist was a dissembler who was merely challenging the serpent seed to do good — even though they had no hope of doing good. In other words, they would have us suspend common sense that John preached a baptism of repentance to them because they literally had a hope of repenting. They would have us believe that John would play this cat-and-mouse game with them without explaining to anyone that he was actually doing it.
They would also cite Genesis 4:6, where God encourages Cain — Adam and Eve’s son — to overcome his sin and do good. They might also cite Acts 26:29 where Paul states his desire for Herod Agrippa — an actual Edomite — to become a Christian. In each case, they would have us believe that God — like John the Baptist — encourages Cain in vain and when Paul stated he wished for Agrippa to become a Christian, he didn’t really mean it — he was lying and just wanted to show everyone that Edomites incapable of being Christians.
As usual, if the writers of the Scripture actually did believe in this unredeemable seedline, they do a very poor job of just saying what they mean rather than opting to play mental and word games to hide their true meaning.
Yet Luke tells us that “the crowds were questioning him, saying, ‘Then what are we to do?'” (Luke 3:10) The very same crowds whom John called “offspring of vipers” responded positively toward John’s message with the intention of adhering to it.
Ultimately we are forced to completely drop the idea that the meaning behind “offspring of vipers” extends beyond the metaphorical level. The purpose of the phrase was a reflection on their character — not some kind of covert secret passphrase only the enlightened would understand as referring to their supposed corrupted bloodline.
CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM
Luke 3:8-9 says,
8 Therefore produce fruits that are consistent with repentance, and do not start saying to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children for Abraham. 9 But indeed the axe is already being laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.”
Matthew 3:8-10 says,
8 Therefore produce fruit consistent with repentance; 9 and do not assume that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’; for I tell you that God is able, from these stones, to raise up children for Abraham. 10 And the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore, every tree that does not bear good fruit is being cut down and thrown into the fire.
We assume at face value that the crowds — including the Pharisees and Sadducees — were children of Abraham. After all, the Lord Jesus even says to the Pharisees, “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants” (John 8:37).
Those adhering to the “All Israel” doctrine would then argue that Edom was also a descendant of Abraham, therefore these people could be Edomites. They might further point out that the Pharisees claimed, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been enslaved to anyone” (John 8:33) — but since the real Israelites had definitely been enslaved in Egypt — therefore, these Pharisees must be Edomites because Edomites were never enslaved to anyone.
Yet Isaac prophesied of Esau in Genesis 27:40,
And by your sword you shall live, and you shall serve your brother; but it shall come about when you become restless, that you will break his yoke from your neck.
Then 1 Kings 11:15-16 says,
15 For it came about, when David was in Edom and Joab the commander of the army had gone up to bury those killed in battle, and had struck and killed every male in Edom 16 (for Joab and all Israel stayed there for six months, until he had eliminated every male in Edom)
Ultimately 2 Kings 8:20 says,
In [Jehoram king of Judah’s] days Edom broke away from the rule of Judah, and appointed a king over themselves.
We can clearly see from the plain meaning of these verses that Edom indeed was brutally put down by Israel and lived under their control for some time — to the extent that they did not even have a king over themselves and almost all of their men were eliminated. Genesis 27:40 qualifies this fulfillment of prophecy as Esau serving his brother. Later on, as the prophecy stated, Edom broke free from this bondage of his brother.
Therefore, when the Pharisees said they had never been enslaved (John 8:33), they could not be referring to the history of Edom because they were — just like Israel — in bondage. And if the Pharisees were truly Edomites, the Lord Jesus would have naturally disputed their claim that Edom had never been in bondage — notably to Israel.
Therefore, what could the Pharisees have actually meant when they said they “have never been enslaved to anyone?” Recall that they were responding to the Lord Jesus’ words when He said, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly My disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31–32) The Lord told them He would set them — the Pharisees — themselves free. The statement would make no sense if the Lord were referring to their ancestors’ enslavement — whether Israelite or Edomite enslavement — from which they were already free.
There was obviously no reason to set them free from any literal enslavement.
Therefore, when the Pharisees said they “have never been enslaved to anyone,” they could have been referring only to some kind of enslavement in their own lifetimes from which the Lord Jesus could free them. They did not perceive themselves to be literally enslaved, so they found the Lord’s words confusing. If they took His words to mean the enslavement of the Israelites, then the conversation wouldn’t make any sense. Israel had been taken out of slavery more than a thousand years ago by that point.
Thus there is no proof that crypto-Edomites masquerading as true Israelites comprised the audiences of Luke 3, Matthew 3 or John 8.
When the Lord Jesus announced His pleasure over Zaccheus the tax collector, He said, “Today salvation has come to this house, because he, too, is a son of Abraham.” (Luke 19:9) If Zaccheus was an Israelite — which he most certainly was — then there would be no reason to call him a “son of Abraham,” because all Israelites are children of Abraham according to the flesh. Therefore referring to him as a “son of Abraham” must have a meaning over and above his fleshly ancestry.
On the one hand, the Lord acknowledges the Pharisees were children of Abraham (John 8:37), then on the other hand He acknowledges that Zacchaeus was a child of Abraham. Yet the Lord says to the Pharisees, “If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham.” (John 8:39)
Why then would the literal children of Abraham (John 8:37) need to prove they are Abraham’s children according to their deeds (John 8:39)? We must conclude that being a child of Abraham means something far greater than merely being a child of Abraham according to the flesh — that is, merely a physical descendant. If it were that simple, then the Abrahamic covenants would have been realized in Ishmael and Esau as well.
Clearly, being a “child of Abraham” also has a Spiritual meaning — that we must “do the deeds of Abraham.” (John 8:39) As we have previously written at length, this means living a life of righteous deeds by a personal faith in the Lord Jesus. When the Lord Jesus said those words to Zacchaeus, Luke 19:8 tells us he had given half his possessions to the poor and restored four times what he had extorted from anyone. In other words, Zacchaeus actually performed righteous deeds as evidence that he was a true son of Abraham, not merely the physical seed.
Conversely, despite the Lord acknowledging that His audience were descendants of Abraham (John 8:37), He tells them, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father.” (John 8:44) The “All Israel” proponents always claim this verse prima facie proof of validity of their doctrine. They claim that the serpent is the devil — therefore, the Lord is calling them literal genetic offspring of the devil — or serpent.
Yet when making this bold claim, they ignore the obvious qualifying criteria which the Lord Jesus provides us in the very same breath — “you want to do the desires of your father.” As we have previously explained, living like Abraham makes us his spiritual children through faith in Christ (Galatians 3:14, Galatians 3:16) — and conversely, therefore, if we live as Satan wants us to live, then we become his spiritual children.
Yes, the very author of the gospel of John confirms this interpretation in no uncertain terms in 1 John 3:8-10,
8 the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one who has been born of God practices sin, because His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin continually, because he has been born of God. 10 By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother and sister.
We don’t need to conjecture or read between the lines of the Lord Jesus’ meaning here in John 8:44 — unless we merely disagree with John the apostle’s own very explicit criteria for discerning the children of the devil from the children of God. John tells us exactly the same thing which we’ve shown explicitly from the Scriptural itself — one is either a child of God or a child of Satan through one’s deeds, not through merely being an Israelite — or an Adamite — according to the flesh.
Many “All Israel” adherents go as far as to scoff at any kind of spiritual interpretation of the Scripture — yet here it is as written by John in very plain terms. When John wanted to convey what he believed, we presume he endeavored to write exactly what he meant — as opposed to making the false assumption that the New Testament authors are intentionally writing in an obtuse manner rather than coming out and saying what they really meant.
Some “All Israel” adherents go so far as to claim that any spiritual understanding of the Bible must necessarily be a covert attempt to introduce “race-mixing” or “universalism.” They have merely presumed the truth of their own premise — by claiming that by doing so, they are defending “racial purity,” yet they do not allow anyone else to believe in “racial purity” unless they believe it in exactly the same way they do.
John wrote his epistle to pure descendants of Adam and Eve — the “generations of Adam (Genesis 5:1) — of whom he said, “you have no need for anyone to teach you” (1 John 2:27). Therefore, he did not even need to include endless implications and innuendos about “race” to his audience — they would have presumed the gospel was intended only for them.
Like John, we speak with this tacit understanding to our own brethren — because we are all aware of — and agree with — the Bible law against miscegenation — much the same way we understand that homosexuality or adultery are also wrong. No one in John’s audience is going to question it, so why belabor the point in every conversation — or in every other line from Scripture? Yet “All Israel” adherents expect a hidden racial implication in every verse from John — even when he’s speaking with the ones he calls his “children” (1 John 2:1).
No, John skipped the milk of the word and went straight to the meat with them. Yes, the understanding of purity of ancestry is merely the milk of the word. Hebrews 5:12-14 says,
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the actual words of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to distinguish between good and evil.
We have proposed the elementary principles of the actual words of God means that we should take the words of God as far as possible at face value. This plain interpretation teaches us to be acquainted with righteousness and to strive to distinguish between good and evil in the broadest possible way.
Yet “All Israel” adherents seem content to accept this one basic teaching of the Scripture — purity of ancestry — as the single most important truth of the entire Scripture — as opposed to it being merely one teaching out of many that is essential to righteousness. Hebrews 6:1-2 continues,
1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and about the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.
Merely being born white is a dead work compared to a “foundation of repentance from dead words and of faith toward God.” See how maturity requires a repentance of dead works — a repentance from things which cannot in and of themselves produce righteousness. Maturity means a personal faith toward God, the cleansing baptism of repentance, laying on of hands in prayer and ultimately our final judgment — “to be found spotless and blameless by Him, at peace” (2 Peter 3:14).
Yet “All Israel” adherent would claim that “maturity” means teaching that merely being born white automatically brings about righteousness — and salvation.
Yes, we already agree on purity of ancestry — now let us press on to spiritual maturity and seek to be acquainted with the word of righteousness and train our senses in distinguishing between good and evil.
Then let us consider Luke 3:8 once again,
Therefore produce fruits that are consistent with repentance, and do not start saying to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children for Abraham.
As we have shown, the New Testament makes it very clear that merely being a descendant of Abraham according to the flesh means very little in and of itself. John puts its all Adamic flesh in perspective for us when he goes so far as to emphasize that “from these stones God is able to raise up children for Abraham.”
Genesis 2:7 and 3:19 tells us that Adam was literally created from the ground itself — therefore, John is telling us that we need to aspire to something greater than a mere physical, Adamic creation. Moreover, we can be sure that when John speaks of raising up children for Abraham in this way, he could be referring only to actual Adamites — because that’s how Adam himself was created — from the dust, ground or stones.
John tells literal descendants of Abraham according to the flesh that their vaunted ancestry is meaningless when it does not produce “fruits that are consistent with repentance.” Unless they produce this fruit, their ancestry according to the flesh means nothing.
If they cannot break out of a fleshly understanding and move into a spiritual understanding, then they do not belong to Christ (Romans 8:9) — despite satisfying the fleshly requirement (Romans 9:8). That is what John the Baptist, John the Apostle, Matthew and Paul all clearly teach — as we have briefly shown in this article — and these are the “elementary principles of the actual words of God.” (Hebrews 5:12)
That’s what it means to preach “a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.” (Mark 1:4) A repentance from all sin — not merely just one sin. Why? Because merely being born white doesn’t guarantee anyone salvation — just like merely having never committed the sin of homosexuality doesn’t guarantee any Adamite salvation.
CUTTING OFF BRANCHES
Then John says in Luke 3:9,
But indeed the axe is already being laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
And in Matthew 3:10
And the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore, every tree that does not bear good fruit is being cut down and thrown into the fire.
Note the criteria which John gives us to determine which trees will be cut down. He tells us that the trees which do not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. “All Israel” adherents attempt to claim that they and their fellow Israelites produce only good fruit, while “serpent seed” produce only bad fruit — therefore, John here could be referring only to serpent seed that will be thrown into the fire.
Yet it’s undeniable that there are myriad examples of Israelites producing bad fruit throughout the Scripture. Furthermore, if we as individuals live a life of sin, then we also produce bad fruit. By that standard, if we sin, isn’t that demonstrable proof that we ourselves are the so-called “serpent seed?”
Unfortunately, we have not seen a logical explanation to resolve this obvious internal inconsistency. If they want to insist that all Israelites according to the flesh bear only good fruit, then wouldn’t we expect every Adamic person to live a righteous life according to the Scripture?
John the Baptist gives us a severe warning in the clearest terms — if we do not bear fruit worthy of repentance, then we will be cut down and thrown into the fire. The Lord Jesus says in John 15:5-6,
5 I am the vine, you are the branches; the one who remains in Me, and I in him bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not remain in Me, he is thrown away like a branch and dries up; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.
If we remain in the Lord Jesus according to a personal faith in Him, then we certainly will bear fruit for Him. Conversely, if we do not remain in Him, then we will not bear any fruit. If we do not bear any fruit, then we are thrown away into the fire to be burned.
How does this teaching work according to the “All Israel” doctrine? If remaining in the Lord Jesus means bearing fruit, then why do “All Israel” adherents claim they can remain in the Lord without having to bear the fruit? What is the “good fruit” (Matthew 7:17) exactly according to this self-negating doctrine? It can’t be good works because by far the majority of Israelites according to the flesh do not live according to the Lord Jesus’ ways.
The Lord teaches us the meaning of the parable of the sower in Matthew 13:19-23,
19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one sown with seed beside the road. 20 The one sown with seed on the rocky places, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; 21 yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution occurs because of the word, immediately he falls away. 22 And the one sown with seed among the thorns, this is the one who hears the word, and the anxiety of the world and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. 23 But the one sown with seed on the good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces, some a hundred, some sixty, and some thirty times as much.”
We see exactly the same pattern in The Parable of the Sower as with John the Baptist’s words as well as the Lord’s words in John 15.
If one does not understand the word, they will never bear fruit. If one understands, but gives way to affliction or persecution because of the word, then that understanding counts for nothing. Unless we hear the word and understand it, then we cannot and will not bear any fruit.
Yet it is not simply enough to hear and understand because the one seed “is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no firm root in himself.” We cannot merely hear, understand and agree — we must actually bear the fruit.
There is absolutely nothing “racial” about this teaching — because this teaching applies to only one people — “the generations of Adam.” Without question, The Parable of the Sower is about understanding, belief and their influence on our ability to bear fruit. Whether we bear fruit or not doesn’t depend on the skin into which we were born — it depends on hearing the word, understanding it and applying it. The same applies to John the Baptist’s words.
Paul tells us in Romans 11:17-24,
17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 See then the kindness and severity of God: to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; for otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?
Paul explains that natural branches — Israelites according to the flesh — were broken off. Under some circumstances, they may be grafted in again. If this were a “racial” teaching, then one would be broken off even though they were not of pure Adamic lineage. Yet if one were not of pure Adamic lineage, how would they be grafted in again — or part of the tree in the first place?
Likewise, if a wild olive was grafted in — meaning it fit the requirement according to the flesh — then why would it run the risk of being cut off again according to verse 22? Interpreting this metaphor in a “racial” way simply doesn’t make any sense.
Paul says that branches were “broken off for their unbelief.” Then he says, “if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in.” Paul has very clearly and explicitly stated the criteria under which a branch is allowed to remain in the root. Being a part of the root — that is the Lord Jesus — comes entirely down to our belief and what it produces in us.
Paul speaks of bringing about the “obedience of faith among all the nations” (Romans 1:5) — and commends the Romans because their “faith is being proclaimed throughout the world.” (Romans 1:8) He says the “righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith” and “the righteous one will live by faith.” (Romans 1:17)
He speaks of the “righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ” (Romans 3:22). God is “just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.” (Romans 3:26) We live “by a law of faith” (Romans 3:27), and we are “justified by faith” (Romans 3:28) and we are “circumcised by faith” (Romans 3:30)
Romans 4 follows with a teaching on our need for a personal faith based on the life of Abraham — whose own faith serves as an example for us. Paul says in Romans 9:30-32,
30 What shall we say then? That nations, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, but the righteousness that is by faith; 31 however, 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. They stumbled over the stumbling stone
With the above in mind, to reach Romans 11 where Paul talks about branches broken off because of unbelief, a racial metaphor should just be the furthest thing from our minds. Branches may be broken off and grafted in again, because merely being an olive branch — or even a child of Abraham according to the flesh — does nothing to guarantee our own conformance to the Lord Jesus’ ways.
No, we need faith — and if we don’t have it, we will be broken off due to our unbelief.
All of the passages presented here are self-evident in their meaning. We do not constantly second-guess the authors of the Bible merely because they do not agree with our own arcane interpretation which lurks between the lines, in double entendres and sexual innuendoes.
Some might object and claim, “But a wild olive is still an olive!” Yes, a wild olive is still an olive. This teaching of the sower applies only to Adamic peoples. Their grave mistake is to presume that an olive can only ever be an Israelite, as opposed to any legitimate Adamic person from the Genesis 10 nations.
They are happy to claim that only Israelites who supposedly never received the Law — itself an incorrect assumption — are the wild, uncultivated branches yet the exact same thing applies to all Adamic peoples who never received the Law. Israel was cultivated whereas the rest of the nations were not. Israel and the nations are still both olive branches — that is, Adamic people.
Let us review Luke 3:9 again,
But indeed the axe is already being laid at the root of the trees; so every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
John the Baptist is telling us very explicitly here that we must actually bear good fruit — which cannot be realized apart from a faith in the Lord Jesus — otherwise we will be cut down and thrown into the fire. We cannot take a stance on this passage which doesn’t require us to actually do good. Matthew 7:15-20 says,
15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, you will know them by their fruits.
Again, “All Israel” adherents will attempt to claim that being born white means necessarily bearing good fruit, even when they obviously are doing no such thing — such as sacrificing their children to Molech (Leviticus 20:3). This claim is just as ridiculous as the Marxist “logic” which claims that black people are as smart as white people. If only blacks had better native grains, or better animals to domesticate, or hadn’t been enslaved, then we’d all be living in Wakanda.
At no point to they actually have to demonstrate any evidence — so long as they have excuses for Israelite sin to fall back on. Likewise, just because one may produce an excuse for not bearing good fruit doesn’t change that they still aren’t bearing good fruit.
Adamic people do not bear good fruit merely by having been born Adamic. Thousands of years of history — along with the Flood — prove this fact countless times over. There’s no use burying our heads in the sand over it.
Moreover, through the Scriptures, the Lord teaches us how to identify false prophets — they are not some kind of banal racial manifesto to help us identify mamzers or crypto-Jews. We face a very real threat that some would come in sheep’s clothing — in the name of Christ (Matthew 24:5) — yet inwardly they are ravenous wolves. If being a ravenous wolf depends on how one acts, then being a ravenous wolf or not has nothing to do with “race.” Israelites have proven over and over that they are perfectly capably of behaving as ravenous wolves.
If the so-called prophet or teacher produces bad fruit in their own lives, the Lord tells us they are not good trees. Why? Because a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. If a tree bears bad fruit, why would we presume it is a good tree? If a teacher bears bad fruit — demonstrating itself to be a bad tree — why would we continue to pick its fruit assuming it is good?
At the end of the teaching in Luke, the Lord again confirms that if we do “not bear good fruit” — our faith and works — then we are “cut down and thrown into the fire.”
Even in the Lord Jesus’ explanation of The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares — a veritable sacred cow for the “All Israel Is Saved” acolytes — He teaches exactly the same thing. He says in Matthew 13:40-42,
40 So just as the weeds are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42 and they will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Note how the Lord Jesus has very explicitly qualified what He means when He calls people weeds. His words are very difficult to misunderstand or misinterpret. The weeds are the ones who are stumbling blocks and commit lawlessness. Many Adamic people are stumbling blocks toward their own brethren and commit all manner of lawlessness. Also recall that lawlessness is sin (1 John 3:4). There’s just no way this could ever be a “racial” teaching — as if only non-Adamic people could possibly be stumbling blocks.
By the time the Lord Jesus returns — when His grace of salvation is over (2 Peter 3:15) — He will gather up the lawless sinners and they will be thrown into the furnace of fire, which is eternal death. Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10,
7….when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God, and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified among His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed—because our testimony to you was believed.
Note how Paul explicitly tells us that those who “do not know God” and “those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” will “pay the penalty of eternal destruction.” This distinction has nothing to do with our status as Adamic people — and everything to do with whether or not we have lived our lives in Christ. There have been many Adamic people who do not know God and did not obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus, even by “All Israel’s” own standards.
BAPTISM OF FIRE
To bring this essay to a conclusion, let’s consider Luke 3:16,
John responded to them all, saying, “As for me, I baptize you with water; but He is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the straps of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”
Then in Matthew 3:11,
As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
Being baptized with water was a symbolic cleansing of the body from sin, just as Peter says, “baptism now saves you — not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience” (1 Peter 3:21). Baptism by water was symbolic — a copy and shadow — thus incapable in and of itself to bring about righteousness.
The baptism by the Holy Spirit was the heavenly fulfillment of baptism by water and achieves the exact same thing just as Paul says, “He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we did in righteousness, but in accordance with His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.” (Titus 3:5) The Holy Spirit washes us in that it cleanses us of all the uncleanness of sin.
The Lord says of the Holy Spirit, “And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment.” (John 16:11) Thus the Holy Spirit washes us from the uncleanness of sin by convicting us regarding our sin, our righteousness and the coming judgment.
Moreover, the Holy Spirit is the heavenly fulfillment of cleansing; therefore, if we are baptized by the Holy Spirit, then we definitely will be cleansed — unlike dead works which have no power in and of themselves.
Again then, when we receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, then we must inevitably bear good fruit. Paul tells us that “all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons and daughters of God.” (Romans 8:14) If we have not been cleansed by the Spirit, then we are not being led by the Spirit. If we are not being led by the Spirit, then we are not children of God. If we are not children of God, we will not be saved unto eternal life regardless of whether we were born into Adamic flesh or not.
If we are Adamic people, we are merely candidates for the work of the Holy Spirit. Being led by the Spirit — that is, what we actually do — is not guaranteed merely by having been born into Adamic flesh.
In Galatians 5:16-24, Paul gives us some concise pointers on how we can gauge whether we — or others — are being led by the Spirit or not,
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17 For the desire of the flesh is against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, in order to keep you from doing whatever you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law. 19 Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: sexual immorality, impurity, indecent behavior, 20 idolatry, witchcraft, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, 21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 Now those who belong to Christ Jesus crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
Paul goes as far as to say that we will not inherit the kingdom of God if we exhibit any of the deeds of the flesh. He then says that “those who belong to Christ Jesus [have] crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” If we have not crucified our passions and desires, then we simply do not belong to Christ. If we do not belong to Christ, then we do not have eternal life in Him — because only those in Christ will be made alive (1 Corinthians 15:22).
It is our sincere hope that every Adamic man or woman who reads these words will seriously consider the brief pointers Paul gives us in this passage to the Galatians. We must first and foremost apply them to ourselves, but then also seriously consider the company we keep.
We have a brief wisp of life filled with the grace of the Lord Jesus toward our sins (2 Peter 3:15). Therefore, let us “work out [our] own salvation with fear and trembling,” (Philippians 2:12) because in so doing, we demonstrate that “it is God who is at work in [us], both to desire and to work for His good pleasure.” (Philippians 2:13) Paul says 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.
Paul is probably the most clear in this passage. We must not disregard this teaching — because Matthew 3:12 and Luke 3:17 say,
His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
Then Luke 3:18 concludes by saying,
So with many other exhortations he preached the gospel to the people.
This is the gospel. The gospel is something to be obeyed, because those who do not obey the gospel will pay the penalty of eternal destruction (2 Thessalonians 1:8–9) whether they are Israelites according to the flesh or not.
If anyone has felt convicted to a repentance for the forgiveness of their sins, it may seem like a daunting mountain ahead. However, through earnest prayer in faith, the Lord Jesus will come to help us with our weaknesses. After all, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous, so that He will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)