Here we will conclude with the third part of Sheldon Emry’s essay New Testament Israel. In the two previous installments in this series, Emry firmly established that Jesus Christ, the promised messiah of Israel, came only for Israelites both in Judea and dispersed among the nations — fulfilling the promises that God the Father made to His Israelite people.
Here in Part 3, Emry continues to demonstrate that both the gospels and the epistles are directed to the same Israelite people — contrary to what is universally taught by denominational, “judeo-Christian” ministers today.
Sheldon Emry continues:
New Testament Israel (Part 3)
Let’s go on in the New Testament to see how it tells us rather plainly that it was the descendants of Abraham — the Israelites — who would become Christians in this age.
In John 8:39, Jesus said to the Jewish Pharisees,
“If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.”
All church-goers should know what Abraham’s works were — Faith. Abraham believed God and that it was counted unto him for righteousness is both the Old Testament and a New Testament doctrine. Abraham’s children would be children of the faith. In John 10, Jesus said,
“I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.” (John 10:14)
And then,
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish. neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” (John 10:27)
Only Israel is called “God’s sheep” in the Old Testament — and since Jesus came to do the will of the Father, it would follow that the sheep here must be Israel. This makes sense with what follows,
“My Father, which gave them me. is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.” (John 10:29)
So these sheep were in the Father’s hand — they were then given into Jesus’ hand — and no man can take them away from either Jesus or the Father. Now, the people we know as Jews are NOT in Jesus’ hand — they are not Christians — they have not followed this Good Shepherd, and yet Jesus said the sheep the Father had were given to Him and they would follow Him.
That must mean the Jews were not the sheep — and that the present Christian people are those sheep. Those peoples that God had as His sheep prior to Christ and gave to Christ — otherwise this too has failed — and Jesus was wrong.
The book of Acts is a study in itself of this question as to which people became Christians. We know the disciples were Israelites — and it is certain that most — if not all — of Jesus’ followers referred to in the Gospels were Israelites. And in the beginning of the book of Acts, on the day of Pentecost, we hear Peter address that crowd in this manner, calling them:
“Ye men of Israel…” (Acts 2:22)
And then we read:
“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41)
Before they were baptized — and after Peter called them Israelites — he told them,
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you. and to your Children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” (Acts 2:38-39)
In effect, he said to these Israelites: ‘Become Christians — for the promise is unto you and to your children.’ This indicates the promise was racial — it was to that generation of Israelites, and to the generations of Israelites that followed — [their posterity]. Then we read of three thousand of these Israelites becoming Christians — and in later passages in the book of Acts we read of thousands more becoming Christians.
In Acts 3:12 Peter again calls his listeners, “Ye men of Israel” and then says to them,
“Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers….Jesus, was sent to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his Iniquities.” (Acts 3:25, 26)
They believed, they repented, and they became Christians. As we read on in the book of Acts, more Israelites are converted — five thousand are numbered. And other groups are not numbered, so the total would be much more.
That was nineteen hundred years ago. Just the present day descendants of these few thousand Christian Israelites here — not counting the Christian Israelites in Rome, Galatia, Corinth, Ephesus, and so on — would number in the millions today.
Are we to believe that these descendants all left the Christian faith and joined the religion of Judaism — and that today none of the progeny of these Israelites are still Christian? That is nonsense. It is obviously much more probable that they ARE Christians — and that they just do not know — [prophesied in Psalms 83:4] — that they are descended from these ancient Israelite Christians since they have gone under the name Christians — prophesied in Isaiah 65:15 — for so many centuries in Europe and America.
In Acts 6:7 we find that conversions of the Israelites to the Christian faith was so great that
“…a great number of the priests were obedient to the faith, And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.”
How many of us miss these passages and believe the ministers when they tell us, ‘Oh the Israelite priests and the Israelite people in Jerusalem and in Judea just didn’t accept Jesus and they turned away — and they are still not Christians today.’ That is NOT true. Israelites were converted in great numbers in those first years, according to the book of Acts — and even men of the priesthood.
You should read all of the book of Acts with this in mind — in several places it is recorded that entire cities came to hear the stories of Jesus, and most — if not all — of them were converted and became Christians.
By the time of the destruction of the city of Jerusalem in 70AD, most of the people of Judea and Samaria were divided into two religions — Christianity and what was known as Phariseeism, [which became codified as Judaism circa 200AD].
Some of us are convinced by history and by Bible prophecy that all of the Israelites became Christian — and that it was only racial non-Israelites who retained the religion of Phariseeism. Persecution of the Israelite Christians by the non-Israelite followers of Phariseeism was then responsible for driving out of the Israelites from Judea and Samaria in the years between 35 AD and 70 AD.
As the Christians left Palestine, they took the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ with them. We read of this as early as chapter 8 of Acts:
“Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.” (Acts 8:4)
They scattered over the eastern end of the Mediterranean, into Greece, into Rome and other areas — that is why Paul and the other apostles could travel and find Christian communities wherever they went and those communities were Israelites — not necessarily ‘gentile’ as we call so many Christians today.
When we realize that the word ‘gentile’ means ‘nation’ or ‘nations’, then we can see that when Paul said he was going to the gentiles, he meant he was going to the nations of Israel. This is explained in some detail in the tract “A Study into the meaning of the word ‘Gentile’ as Used in The Bible.”
Paul went to the nations of Israel, who had been dispersed by the Assyrians in the centuries before Christ — and at the same time, the converted Israelites from Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria were being driven out, so they also helped spread the gospel of Jesus Christ rapidly into the Mediterranean area of Europe.
We can verify that these Christian groups were Israelites by reading the epistles in the New Testament to see to whom they are addressed. The best known one of these, of course, is James, which begins:
“James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered
abroad, greeting.” (James 1:1)
In Romans 1:6 Paul calls them “the called of Jesus Christ” — and in verse 7 he calls them “Saints” — and in Romans 7:1 he identifies them as Israelites when he writes,
“Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the Iaw)”
Now, who of all the people of the earth would know the Law?
“He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.” (Psalm 147:19, 20)
Only Israelites — no others had the law. This and other passages verify that the Roman Christians were Israelites. (see also Romans 9)
[CFT Note: Certainly not all Romans were racial Israelites, but many were — as Paul himself is an example.]
Now turn to 1 Corinthians 10 — in the first chapters, Paul addresses the Corinthians as “believers” — then we read,
“Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea”
He is referring to the Red Sea and the cloud of Glory with which God overshadowed Israel as they came out of Egypt. So he is writing to believers at Corinth — that is in Greece — and he says THEIR fathers passed through the Red Sea — so that must mean that the believers at Corinth had to be Israelites.
Turn to Galatians. This is a little more confusing partly because of the use of the word “gentiles” — from the Greek ‘ethnos’ [Strong’s #1484] — where it actually means ‘nations’ — [not “non-Jews”] — but we still have in that letter evidence that the Galatian Christians were racial Israelites.
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” (Galatians 4:5)
Who was under the law? Only Israel, of course. And who, therefore, was “redeemed” [from lutrósis, Strong’s #3085]? Israelites. To receive what? The adoption or “placing” [from huiothesia, Strong’s #5206] of sons as Israelites — so the Galatian Christians were indeed Israelites by race.
[Read “Did Paul Write The Book Of Galatians To Israelites Or To Everyone?“]
The next letter Ephesians is full of symbolic phrases which identify its subjects as Israelites. In chapter 1 they are called “predestinated” — “chosen” — the “purchased possession” and so on. Then speaking of Christ, Paul says to them,
“And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1)
The presence of the law identifies them as Israelites — for in 1 John 3:4 we read that “…sin is transgression of the law.” And Romans 4:15 tells us, “…for where no law is. there is no transgression.” In order to be “transgressors” these Ephesians had to have had the Law at one time in the first place.
Again, only Israel had the law. In Chapter 2 we are told that the Ephesians were “reconciled” [Strong’s #2644] to the household of God by the blood of Christ. Paul would not apply the term “reconciled” to anyone who had not once been a part of the group — and then had been alienated — and now bought back again or “reconciled.” Remember that at other times we’ve seen how Israel became God’s wife at Mount Sinai — then because of her adultery and worshiping other gods, she was divorced and cast off.
Now, Jesus — through his shed blood — has effected a reconciliation between God and His divorced wife Israel. Thus, only Israel can be “reconciled.” We do not use the term “reconcile” to describe a first time marriage between two parties. The term is used only to describe a re-uniting only after a separation.
Throughout the New Testament, therefore, whenever the term “reconciled” or “reconciliation” is used, it can refer only to divorced and cast off Israel being brought back through the Christian faith. In addition, there is no prophecy that Christ in this age would convert a people or a nation of non-Israelites. But instead that He would convert the Israelites — and that is what was happening as the book of Acts and these letters testify.
[Read “The False Doctrines Of Universal Reconciliation And Restoration“]
The letters to the Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy and so on do not have clear cut passages which can be pointed to and say, “See, these are Israelites.” But they follow the same pattern as the others in using the names for Israel such as “saints” — “brethren” — “sons of God” — “the elect” — “peculiar people” — and so on. The letter to the Hebrews — by its title and contents — is clearly addressed only to Israelites.
As cited previously, then follows James:
“James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.” (James 1:1)
James not only identifies them as Israelites, but also as “scattered” or dispersed tribes. That James’ letter was written years before the dispersion of the so-called “Jews” in 70AD [after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem] is also proof that the “scattering” or dispersion of Israel had taken place prior to the dispersion of just the apostate Jews.
These examples should be enough for now to demonstrate that the New Testament is written to and about Israelites. You can see from what little we have covered here that the New Testament is a record of the conversion to Christianity of most of the Israelites who heard the Gospel (John 1:12) — then of their diligence in carrying that gospel on to other Israelites who were then converted (Matthew 28:19).
Within a few decades of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ most of the Israelites in the eastern end of the Mediterranean had become Christians and were no longer called “Israelites” ( or “Jews” or Judeans). That process continued [as Christianity spread throughout Europe.]
[Read “The Great Commission — Did Jesus Christ Intend The Gospel To Reach Everyone On Earth?“]
However, most ministers today will nevertheless try and tell us that all of the world’s Israelites are followers of a religion called “Judaism” — and that they number only a few millions of people. In order for that doctrine to be true that would mean that in the centuries since the book of Acts and the New Testament were written, all of these Christian Israelites would have had to abandon Christianity — and denounce Jesus Christ — turn back to the religion of Phariseeism — and resist almost to a man re-conversion back to Christianity.
In that case, their quick and seemingly almost spontaneous acceptance of the gospel of Jesus Christ in the first century hardly makes any sense — either from a rational or from a prophetic standpoint.
No, the only thing that makes sense is that these Israelites did become Christian — and they now number in the tens and hundreds of millions in Europe, North America, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand — [wherever white Europeans have dispersed]. And while millions have not been diligent in their obedience to the Christian gospel, still they have largely not turned to “religions” such as Judaism which are in direct opposition to Jesus Christ.
i have had battles on facebook with someone who is about to be an ex facebook friend as i can no longer stand her spreading the black hebrew israelite lies , she as much as called me a nazi and even called me a zionist , here is what i said.
Donna Dove spreads lies saying the israelites were black when their is wealth of knowledge to dispute her lies and falsehood , this person who challenged her backed up with knowledge referring to christians for truth website because those that run the website have greater understanding of scripture , donna dove is not a christian has no understanding of scripture but she uses the nazi card i find that highly suspicious dont you think , the comment made to challenge donna dove was removed she accused the person of being a zionist , donna dove claims to value the truth but ignores what does not suit her narrative
i have had it with that donna dove
https://scontent.fbhx2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/313407107_124790307062319_5940880903130707917_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=KyczctB6pGMAX_5d-gD&_nc_ht=scontent.fbhx2-1.fna&oh=00_AfCsdtwr8p18BRAtib_w9EEY8rFOkHkKPoymUxPEk1uK9A&oe=6370D3BE
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=124790310395652&set=a.111022191772464
i cant upload pic but included a link
There are pictures of blacks working with the actual Nazis. I wonder if you could change your approach with her and use that photographic evidence, as well as the evidence that Hitler and the Nazi regime supported Christianity, to get her to realize that the Nazis weren’t the bad guys?
I’m not sure that you can get blacks who believe in any version of their “We Wuz Kangz” myth, but maybe they can be redirected through that belief into to supporting something useful?
nazi is a made up name by jews ti insult white nationalists , if you look up the name of hitlers political party nowhere does it say nazi , when you show here articles of the true israelites she ignores them then doubles down on more of her black hebrew israelite lies i doubt if she will listen regards to the truth about hitler there is another i follow that uses the nazi card , back to dona dove she never bothered reading the christians for truth articles i posted in comments in fact she deleted them each and every time i present the truth she doubles down on more black hebrew israelite nonsense so if she is not going to listen to me its not worth me commentating on her posts nor being her fb friend since unfriending her i am blocked from commenting on her posts , even if i showed articles that hitler was lied about and he was against organised jewry kicked out rothschild bankers would i get thrugh to her as she certainly does not read the articles regarding the truth about the israelites , she posts articles exposing jews and chabad but ignorant on other things
No Dallas Cowboys at the Alamo,
No {{{{PROSELYTES}}}} to {{{{TALMUDIC JUDAISM}}}} in the Old Testament.
The Old Testament is about the Children of Israel who never heard of Talmudic Judaism.
in this TIME ….look at who the “workers of iniquity” are….ready for harvesting !
Matthew 13:39-43 !!!!
I’m a white, far-right paleoconservative male of European heritage and culture, a white nationalist, and a Jew hater. Also, my spirituality lacks the necessary dogma that’s required to be associated with any of mankind’s petty religions. As for Christianity, it is not an Aryan religion; like Judaism and Islam, it is Semitic in origin. Jesus was a typical anti-Gentile Jewish supremacist (see below), and Christianity is nothing more than self-inflicted Jewish supremacy.
Mt 15:21 Leaving there, Jesus now withdrew into the parts of Tyre and Sidon.
Mt 15:22 And, look! A Phoenician woman [a Gentile] from those regions came out and cried aloud, saying: “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David. My daughter is severely demonized.”
Mt 15:23 But he did not say a word in answer to her. [Jesus completely ignores her, because she is a Gentile] So his disciples came up and began to request him: “Send her away; because she keeps crying out after us.”
Mt 15:24 In answer he said: “I was not sent forth to any but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” [I was sent here just for the Jews, and not to deal with Gentiles]
Mt 15:25 When the woman came she began doing obeisance to him, saying: “Lord, help me!”
Mt 15:26 In answer he said: “It is not right to take the bread of the children [Jews] and throw it to little dogs [Gentiles].” [Here Jesus is saying that the Jews are the children of God, and the Gentiles are nothing more than little dogs]
Mt 15:27 She said: “Yes, Lord; but really the little dogs [the Gentiles] do eat of the crumbs falling from the table of their masters [the Jews].” [Here the woman shames her race by implying that the Jews are her masters]
Mt 15:28 Then Jesus said in reply to her: “O woman, great is your faith; let it happen to you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that hour on. [Jesus only decides to help her after she acknowledges to him that the Jews are the masters over the Gentlies]
John 4:22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know because salvation originates with the Jews.
Mt 10:5 These twelve [apostles] Jesus sent forth, giving them these orders: “Do not go off into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter into a Samaritan city;
Mt 10:6 but, instead, go continually to the lost sheep of the house of Israel [the Jews].
The “Jewish Problem” will never be solved until the “Christian Problem” is solved first.
Robert, a little knowledge, as they say, is a dangerous thing. Your comment shows that you don’t understand the real meaning of “Jew” or “Gentile” in the Bible, a common error even among Christians.
We have thoroughly addressed the “white nationalist” rejection of Christianity, and we strongly suggest you read the following essay, along with the comments, as many of your points are addressed in it. Please keep an open mind:
https://christiansfortruth.com/a-christian-response-to-yahweh-did-not-create-us-by-a-white-nationalist/
John 4:22 is negated by John 4:23-24. For (((reasons))), those verses often seem to be omitted.
How does “white nationalism” dogma handle the Spartans being Semites?
Well, most Christians don’t understand John 4:22, “salvation is of the Jews”. They think it means that in order for Christ to return, and for Christians to be saved, the “Jews” must be saved first, which is false. This verse means that Christ, our salvation, arose out of Judah. That’s all it means.
And John 4:23 confirms this idea, “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.”
God the Father will be worshiped through His son, not through empty rituals, but through the spirit. Not complicated at all, unless you make it so.
Salvation is of the Judeans* or Judahites.* The word Jew, meaning what it does today, didn’t exist until 1775 A.D.
Regarding the word “Jew,” Jewish-born historian Benjamin H. Freedman explained it thus:
“When the word ‘Jew’ was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century (1775) its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was ‘Judean’. During the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international ‘pressure group’ created a so-called “secondary meaning” for the word ‘Jew’ among the English-speaking peoples of the world. This so-called ‘secondary meaning’ for the word ‘Jew’ bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word ‘Jew’. It is a misrepresentation.”
As it stands, the adherents of Pharisaism or Rabbinists not only hijacked the word Judaism, but they also misappropriated the word Jew. However – over time and as it pertains to Christianity – the word Jew was completely hollowed out of its “Judean” or “Judahite” meaning because those who hijacked it were not of the tribe of Judah. In fact, in many Christian circles today, that word causes quite the confusion.
“The present generally accepted ‘secondary meaning’ of the word ‘Jew’ is fundamentally responsible for the confusion in the minds of Christians regarding elementary tenets of the Christian faith,” continued historian Benjamin Freedman.
“It is likewise responsible today to a very great extent for the dilution of the devotion of countless Christians for their Christian faith. The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the word ‘Jew’ today, to the preponderant majority of intelligent and informed Christians, is contradictory and in complete conflict with incontestable historic fact. Christians who cannot be fooled any longer are suspect of the Christian clergy who continue to repeat, and repeat, and repeat ad nauseam their pet theme song ‘Jesus was a Jew’. It actually now approaches a psychosis.
“Countless Christians know today that they were ‘brain washed’ by the Christian clergy on the subject ‘Jesus was a Jew‘… (They) are also becoming more and more alerted day by day why the so-called or self-styled ‘Jews’ throughout the world for three centuries have spent uncounted sums of money to manufacture the fiction that the ‘Judeans’ in the time of Jesus were ‘Jews’ rather than ‘Judeans’, and that ‘Jesus was a Jew’.”
When many Christians today interact with a Jew they just met, their immediate reaction is to say, “Oh, Jesus was a Jew too.” What they’re unwittingly saying is, “Oh, Jesus was a Pharisee too.”
Oh, the blasphemy!
A word is what it is according to the meaning of its time. The word “Jew” today is so entrenched in describing one who follows Pharisaism (or Judaism) that it’s been completely emptied of its original meaning. Hence it no longer describes a Judahite or Judean, the actual word in the non-translated bible. That is why it needs to be struck from the translated bible, because all it does is create confusion in the Christian mind; and that very confusion is exactly what the demonic forces want in order to unseat Christians as the new Chosen People – chosen to love and to do good – and to calumniate Christ as a Pharisee.
Once the words “Judaism” and “Jew” were commandeered, they became the immediate revisionist words that historians endeavored to apply to everything “Jewish,” especially as such impetus was spurred on by that well-financed group historian Benjamin Freedman mentioned.
As a result, the words that were previously used to describe the adherents of Pharisaism and their religion were sanitized. This in turn caused compromised writers of all stripes to follow suit, as they searched for any excuse to exploit the word “Jew” in reference to proselytes of Pharisaism.
For example, pre-18th century playwrights employed the word IEWE (Iewe is old English and means Jehudite/Judahite or Judean) in their work, but unlike the word Jew it was pronounced Yee-hoo-wee, stretching its best to imitate the original Hebrew phonetic of Ye-hu-wdiy. Its usage was never meant to describe a JEW in the sense of the religious person we know today, but that didn’t matter to those who had revisionism in mind.
As a case in point, in The Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare’s Shylock the Iewe was a fictional creative construct that borrowed its obvious tautology from the biblical Judahite money changers, whom Jesus whipped and chased out of the Temple. Its creation was not intended to mimic Rabbinists of Shakespeare’s time. Nonetheless, it’s been widely and erroneously interpreted to mean a “JEW” in the modern sense.
Yet, compromised historians and critics convoluted the whole Shylock-money-lender thing and re-engineered it to be construed as anti-“Jew” – just the way they twisted Christopher Marlowe’s The Rich Iewe of Malta into The Rich Jew of Malta. As Professor Smith pointed out: “…the representation of anti-semitism is more interesting and significant to us…”
However, Shakespeare was not anti-Jew as some allege, and nor was Shylock created to malign those who today are known as Jews, especially when he was penned at a time when “Jews” were called Rabbinists (followers of the Babylonian Talmud), and everyone knew they were not of the tribe of Judah.
Leonardo….interesting to note that when Shakespeare wrote “The Merchant Of Venice”, Jews had been banned from England for over 300 years already….
They were expelled in 1290 for usury and ritual child murder….and the Shakespeare’s audience would have known this….
Ribald The Jews couldn’t return to England until the 1650s, when they were invited to resettle by Oliver Cromwell.
Robert
You’ve bought into the big Jewish lie that they wrote the Bible, and that “gentiles” are white people. No wonder you reject the Bible.
Your superficial take on it is exactly how Jews want you to believe, and reject the faith that Jews hate so much because it stands in the way of their world domination.
And if you think even for a second that somehow the white race is going to dismiss or reject Christianity as a whole, you are far more naive than you realize.
Christianity is the longest, sustained religion in the history of the white race – 2,000 years. And you think we are just going to discard it because a few ignorant white nationalists call it an “alien” religion?
If it were “alien” to us, we would have discarded it long ago. But we didn’t, why? Because its truth resonates with us.
And regardless of whatever you may think, that faith kept the Jews in check, marginalized, for nearly 1,800 years, until “rationalists” or “humanists” of the “Enlightenment” decided, against the wishes of the Churches, to “emancipate” the Jews and allow them equal status in our nations.
Christians didn’t do that, no, agnostics and atheists did that.
You cannot vist a single good homepage without a Jew, like yourself, being there trying to destroy information with your fake Jewish gibberish. Jesus was as Jewish as he was Chinese.
1: He was not Jewish through faith, obviously, he hated Judaism and said that those who we call Jews today, were of the devil.
2: There is no Jewish ethnicity, but let’s pretend as if there is. Well, Jesus’ father is God and his given mother was not a follower of Judaism, nor was she a Jew.
So it doesn’t matter how you view it, you still lose, Jew. You will always be a Jew, we will always be your enemy and you will always keep lying, because the truth is not in you.
If the Israelites turned back to Judaism, then they would have known of the Talmud, but non-jews did not fully know much of it till the 1890 first translation? and still don’t know much.
Robert, why be against whites sticking together. You check our boxes, but I don’t think anyone can be far right it’s ongoing anyway. CFT straightens a lot out, so I guess you’re done?
http://talmudunmasked.com/index.htm