This is the second installment of our series The Error of Dispensationalists: Did Israel Reject Jesus?
Part 1 can be read here.
In his series of lectures, Did Israel Reject Jesus?, Sheldon Emry exposes the fundamental flaw in dispensational Christian theology that falsely encourages the belief that because “The Jews” rejected their promised messiah — Jesus Christ — that God changed His mind, broke His eternal covenant with the Israelites, and transferred His promises of salvation to all other races and peoples merely on the sole condition that they “believe in Jesus.”
Audio:
Sheldon Emry continues:
We started with John 1:11 because this verse is used by so many to teach that the Israel people rejected Christ:
He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
But it’s immediately qualified by the next two verses:
12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
We have seen that most of the Judeans in John so far could claim Abraham as their father, but only part of them reacted in the manner that Israel was to react by coming to him, listening to him, and believing him, but another part of these people who claimed Abraham as their father rejected him, but not only rejected him but they hated him and attempted to kill him.
And Jesus said to these people,
John 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
We have seen that the only people who could meet that qualification of being from Abraham but not God’s sheep would have to be the Canannite people descendant through Esau called the Edomites in Genesis 36.
And yet they were living in Jerusalem and Judea at the time of Christ and naturally would be called by the same geographical name ‘Judeans’. And the King James translators translated this word Judean as “Jew” when they translated the Greek scriptures 350 years ago.
So some of these people called “Jews” were obviously not Israelites, and some of them were. And the only way we can tell the difference is their reaction to Jesus.
Some of them, because they hated Him, must have been what the scripture would call Edomite or Canaanite Jews. And the word “Edomite” as we saw before means “red” so they would be Red Jews, just as they are today. There are political and economic theories today that Jews follow what we would call communism, and communism is red, and they still use the same that fits Edom way back in Genesis 36.
[Note also that the head of world Jewry today, The Rothschilds, whose eretz name means “red shield”: Ed.]
I want to lay to rest once and for all this double lie — that’s what this is, a double lie that comes from the Jewish-dominated church — and when I say “Jewish-dominated church” I’m referring to Henry Ford who wrote a book 50 years ago [The International Jew, ed.], which after his investigation, he said every Protestant seminary in America was controlled by the Jews. So we have, in effect, a Jewish-dominated church in America today called the “Christian Church” and they preach a double lie:
First part is that the Jews are Israelites, and then followed by the second part that therefore Israel rejected Jesus 1,900 years ago. This is simply not so — the people who were rejecting Jesus 1,900 years ago were Canaanites, not Israelites.
Today we have we have many Jews in positions of power in America today, and they are kept there and allowed there primarily because the American people think they are Israelites, and they are not. And if that truth were known, they would be removed.
Now the high priest in John 11:47 is a Canaanite:
Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. 48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
Caiaphas apparently was an Edomite, but he was the high priest in Israel just as today we have many Jews in Christian pulpits. But Caiaphas was given a prophecy that follows in the next verses:
49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, 50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not, 51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; 52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.
Now he did not say this on his own accord. Apparently from the context here, God put these words in his mouth because he was the high priest and he said a prophecy.
Now what “nation” is Caiaphas referring to? Obviously not his nation but for that other nation. What nation did Jesus die for but the Israelite people?
John 1:31 John the Baptist said,
And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.
John 1:47 Nathaniel knew Jesus came to Israel:
Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
John 6:58 Who is Jesus telling that he was the bread of life:
This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
He’s referring to their father, so they must be the descendants of the fathers of Israel or the Israel people.
John 10:7. We have seen in the Bible that the only people called “sheep” are the Israelite people:
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
Matthew 2:6. All the prophecies are to the Israel people:
And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.
Luke 1:67:
And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people.
If Christ came to do all of this, then it is obvious the high priest here in John 11 [Caiaphas] must have been speaking, when he said “that people”, of the Israelite people. When he said, “One man should die for the people that the whole nation perish not.”
Christ came to die for Israel that Israel might not die. Now this fits in with all the prophecies that we read about Jesus giving everlasting life to his Israel people.
In verse 52, the high priest said,
52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.
Now what was that prophecy? That prophecy followed the one that He would die that they might not die — that He would gather together in one people the children of God that were scattered abroad. That must mean that He was going to gather together the Israelites in Judea with the Israelites in the dispersion.
And we know that dispersion was into the coast of the Mediterranean, into Europe, into the “Isles of the Sea,” up into Britain and as far as Scandinavia, already at the time of Christ. That is why, in the New Testament, we read so often about the Israel people who were not in Judea. This was ten tribe Israel gone into the dispersion.
And that reference to gathering them together into one by the high priest is the same as Jesus’ own prophecy John 10:16:
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
In other words, there was a fold of Israelite people in Judea — there was another fold of Israelite sheep somewhere else. That was Jesus’ mission — to regather the scattered Israel people back to the Israel people still in Judea and make them one fold with one shepherd.
What did that mean? He would make the Israel people one people with one God. Jesus Christ would be the shepherd over all of Israel, both scattered and in Judea.
If we teach today — as most of the churches teach — that the Canaanite Jews are those Israel people, then we make that mission of Jesus a farce and a failure — and we say nothing ever happened — from all that Jesus did, the Jews are still rejecting him.
The first chapter of Ephesians is a letter by Paul about the predestination. He’s talking about the Israel people being predestinated to come to God almighty. But as you read it, you must remember the Northern House of Israel, ten tribed Israel was divorced, was taken away, scattered through the nations, and were gone, and they had to be brought back, and they had to be brought back because they were predestinated to be brought back.
Ephesians 1:4
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.
Now some people say, “We chose Jesus.” Paul writes to these people and said He chose us before the foundation of the world, “…Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself.” How would these predestined people become the children of God? Through Jesus Christ. That’s what Jesus said, “I have another fold of sheep whom I must bring and make one.”
Ephesians 1:10
That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: 11In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.
So he tells these people at Ephesus that they were chosen before the foundation of the world and they were predestined to become one through Jesus Christ. What was he saying? “You Israel people, in Ephesis, are now joined back in the household of Israel and become one household, the children of God through Jesus Christ.”
Jesus told the Jewish Pharisees, on the other hand, they were predestinated not to come to Jesus Christ. He said, “You cannot hear my word.”
Now it doesn’t make sense again that Jesus cold have been talking to Israel when he said, “You cannot hear my word” because the whole scripture says that they would hear it.
Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.
The scripture tells us that where there is no law there is no trespass. So this verse identifies the people at Ephesus as Israelites. The only way they could be “dead” and “trespassing in sin” is if they had the law and disobeyed it. Where God has not given the law, He does not count their trespass sin, and only Israel has the law.
Ephesians 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world.
Who was that? Israel. Cast off, divorced Israel. Strangers from the promise but now in Christ Jesus:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
They had become “gentiles in the flesh” but He said you are now brought back by Christ:
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.
The two sheep folds have now the partition broken down to make one fold:
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
Both of who? Jews and Gentiles? The modern church today, in effect, teaches that Jesus Christ broke down the middle wall partitioned between the Jews and Gentiles. In fact, in the Living Bible translation that corruption of God’s word has been changed to say specifically that — that the Jews and Gentiles are now one people.
History proves that is false. They are not. The Jews have a religion which is antiChrist. The Christian people of Israel have one God even though we do not follow the Bible too well, we still, as a race — history and current events prove it —and the Bible prophecy proves it — that the only God worshiped by the Israel people — if they worship a god at all — is Jesus Christ.
The ‘Gentiles in the flesh” — divorced, cast off, ten tribed Israel — were reunited with the House of Israel through the body and the blood of Christ. And to make this a uniting of the Canaanite Jews with some so-called non-Israelite “Gentiles” is nonsense. It makes this word confusion.
John 12:10. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; 11Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus.
Here we still have the division continuing — those Judeans called “Jews” by the translators who are Israelites are believing. Those Judeans called “Jews” but actually Edomites are not believing — in fact, they want to kill Lazarus.
12. On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 13Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord…19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.”
The Israelites rejecting Jesus? No, apparently so many of them were following Him and proclaiming him the King of Israel that the Pharisees — or the Edomite Jews — said the whole world is going after Him.
Now some do not believe, even among these:
37But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: 38That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? 39Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
These people did come to Jesus — these Israelites — but as far as believing in the manner that we call conversion today, they could not because the Holy Spirit had not yet been given. We will see they followed, they came like sheep, but there was some rejection, of course, of the lack of the Spirit.
42Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: 43For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.
In Christendom today that, perhaps, is the main problem — perhaps a lot of men in the pulpit who are physically descendant of Jacob-Israel believe upon Jesus Christ but because of fear of the Edomite Jews, they do not say or speak out what they should.
Some people are confused as to how Jesus could choose twelve men and then one would turn out to be a traitor, one would turn away from him.
John 6: 70
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? 71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.
Modern theology which teaches that the Jews are Israel implies that Jesus didn’t know that the Israelite people were going to reject him, but what follows suggests that Jesus believed that the Israelites were going to follow him, but Jesus did know of his twelves disciples that the one would betray him. He was God incarnate, he knew that, and he said this one was a devil.
Now we already read about the Pharisees being called by Jesus Christ “the children of the devil” so it’s almost a certainty that Judas was not an Israelite but was among the Edomites.
When Judas had left, Jesus said to the remaining disciples:
31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him. 32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him. 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you. 34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. 35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
Jesus had the good sense to know that Judas was going to betray him, but according to common theology today, He didn’t know that these other disciples were all going to turn around and go back and follow Judaism and deny him. That’s literally what is taught by the churches today. And Jesus is telling his disciples that He expects them to follow him and become Christians, not reject him.
John 14 directed toward his disciples, his sheep, not the one who would betray him:
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
John 14:15:
If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Jesus Christ intended the Holy Spirit was to come and dwell in these Israelite followers of Christ.
26But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Does that sound like something the God of Creation would say to a people that He would have known would reject Him and turn around and go worship the religion of AntiChrist?
You know what that kind of teaching does? It makes Jesus a fool. It makes it appear that everything He said here was stupid and foolish, and never came to pass.
Ninety percent at least of the so-called Protestant churches in America today actually teach that these people to whom Jesus came and preached and said, “You believe in me, You know the Father, I am going to send the Spirit,” they teach that these people all turned around and within one or two generations and went back and followed Judaism, which denied that Jesus was even the Son of the living God…
Let’s read on in John 14:
29And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
Jesus told the disciples of His coming death and resurrection and going to heaven. Now, they did not understand, and we read this in other gospels. They did not understand what He meant, but here’s the purpose for which He told them. He says “I told you when it comes to pass ye might believe. I told you, Israelites, of my death and resurrection and ascension to heaven so that after it happened, ye might become Christians.”
Now if we turn around and say, “None of these people believed after the resurrection” of course, we nullify all of Jesus’ intentions here in the Gospel of John.
John chapter 15, He continues to talk to His Israelite disciples:
15Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. 16Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
Jesus ordained His disciples, these Israelites, to be Christian disciples, but we are told they refused and became the followers of Judaism. Now that would make Jesus appear to be a God without power, a God without prophecy, a God without knowledge because He said, “I HAVE done this.”
But the ministers come along and say, “It didn’t work.” And yet Jesus Christ says all power was given unto Him in heaven and in earth.
20Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.
This is a specific prophecy. In effect, Jesus said, “These Edomite-Canaanite Jews who have persecuted me, they will persecute you.” In other words, they will be AntiChrist and anti-Christian.
He said further, “If they — in other words, those who do believe — if they believe me, they will keep yours also.” What does that mean? It means that the Israelites who did believe upon Jesus would then — following Jesus’ death and resurrection — believe the disciples and become Christians….what Jesus said they would do.
The God who knows the End from the Beginning, according to modern theology, was all wrong. No, they became Christ followers, not AntiChrist.
Who did Jesus tell that they did not know Him? The Esau Edomites:
21But all these things will they do unto you for my name’s sake, because they know not Him that sent me.
And here is why Jesus did come and preach to the Edomite Jews. He came because they had to hear His word, they had to hear His voice, because if He didn’t, then they would be able to say, “We never heard Jesus. We don’t know what he was talking about. We didn’t know who he was.” This way, they have no cloak, no excuse.
23He that hateth me hateth my Father also.
Yet today we are told, “Oh, the Jews believe in the God of the Old Testament.” Jesus Christ said no. Those who hate me hate the Father also. Modern theology taught by most churches today, if you will examine it, is literally 180 degrees from the truth. It is the opposite of God’s truth. It says the same people who hated Me then are going to be the ones who hate the Christians in the age to come. And, of course, that is Jewry.
24If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. 25But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.
Jesus was quoting the Psalms 35:
19Let not them that are mine enemies wrongfully rejoice over me: neither let them wink with the eye that hate me without a cause.
Who hated Jesus without a cause? He says, “Mine enemies.” Nowhere in God’s Bible will you find that Israel was said to hate God without a cause. This is repeated, double witness, Psalm 69:
4They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty: then I restored that which I took not away.
In both cases, David identifies the people who hated Christ as the enemies of God. Now Israel, as we’ve seen, are called “the children of God,” “the sheep of God,” and all other names that relate them to God, but they are NEVER called the “enemies of God.”
Did Israel Reject Jesus? (Part 3)
Isaiah 65:15 clearly prophecies that the Israelite people, God’s “servants”, will be known by another name in the future. Not by many other names, but another singular name. And that name is Christians. No other people fulfill that prophecy.
This is really simple: If Israel did not reject Jesus, then there would be no reason or purpose for God to “transfer” the covenant and blessings to non-Israelite people.
Emry clearly demonstrates that the overwhelming majority of Israelites in the NT did NOT reject Christ, and therefore God had no reason to change his covenant with them and include other non-Israelites. Case closed.
I have a Question for all the Universalists who comment here (Russ, Andrew, Norwale et., al. )—
Why do you care what we believe? There are MANY universalist groups, organizations, websites etc., etc., out there. Why come here and plead your case?
Are you worried for our Salvation?
Just curious. Thanks.
These judeo-universalists have one trait in common: they admit nothing we’ve proven to be true, not one single point or question that we’ve answered. They dare not concede one small point because if they do, their whole false edifice will come crashing down. Instead of admitting to any of these truths, they just skip to another verse, throw it on the wall and hope it sticks. They are all cut from the same cloth. And their intellectual dishonesty is on display here for any objective eyes to see.
westwins: Russ, Andrew and Norwale come here because they are racists and antisemites, but the problem is that all of the judeo-christian websites that share their universalist salvation doctrine would ban them for their “hateful” comments about Blacks and Jews. In their minds, it’s fine for to criticize Blacks and Jews just as long as they believe that they are made in God’s image and that they can be saved. So they come here, clinging to their bogus universalism because their own churches reject their racist views, but here their racism and antisemitism isn’t censored but their obstinate universalism is. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place, in no man’s land.
The last comment I posted recently on this article was not published by this website. It was deliberately censored.
In no way has this website or the commenters on this website established that “Gentiles” in the New Testament refers to Israelites, nor do I accept it.
Yes, Andrew, we did not post your previous comment because you accused us of intentionally spreading disinformation about the Bible–and even suggested that we were doing so in the service of Jewish interests. If you believe that, I suggest you find some other website that is receptive to your paranoid and unfounded accusations.
You are clearly not open to learn anything new that contradicts your deeply ingrained judeo indoctrination. Your unscriptural universalist, pluralistic doctrines serve Jewish interests, and help undermine Christianity along with the White Christian nations around the world. They have no place here.
We care for the true Israel. Why do you struggle with us truth is a journey, enjoy the ride.
See here:
The Talmud comments : ” You are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts. ” Baba Mecia 114,6.
The doctrine of racial purity and divine selectivity is vile when Jews practice it. No?
We need to make sure the truth is heard and checked as fit for purpose.
Lets be comfortable examining the truth and separating the wheat from the chaff. Truth fears no examination, remember.
These articles mix truth and error. It is true that the lost Israelites mostly went to Europe, but they mixed first with Sythians and Cimmarians, and then as nomads mixed into the population of Europe. We are not pure Israelites, we are from Japheth, but absorbed into our ranks Israelite blood. So our race swallowed up Israel and therefore is heir to Israel. Therefore it is BOTH true that we were NOT part of the commonwealth of Israel, and yet we ALSO in a figure represent the return of the lost tribes of Israel.
Not a part of Israel:
>” That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.” Ephesians 2:12-13
Mixed seed into the Indo-European:
>” He shall pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall be in many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted.” Numbers 24:7
Recovered children:
>” The children which thou shalt have, after thou hast lost the other, shall say again in thine ears, The place is too strait for me: give place to me that I may dwell. Then shalt thou say in thine heart, Who hath begotten me these, seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate, a captive, and removing to and fro? and who hath brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; these, where had they been? Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.” Isaiah 49:20-22
The Sheldon-Emry version of this elevates an alleged Israelite blood-line above common sense and historical reality. He twists every verse to privately interpret the saved person as an “Israelite” and every unsaved as “Canaanite” or “non-Israelite” no matter what the actual text says. He even blasphemously changes the Authorized Version to fit his ideas. Very irresponsible methodology.
The “strangers from the covenants of the promise” is not actually what the Greek says in Ephesians 2:12-13. It would be better translated “those estranged from the covenants of the promise”. Unfortunately, all too often the KJV translators weren’t aware of the importance of these nuances.
The Israelites who were estranged from God and the covenants were the 10 Northern Tribes of the dispersion whom God divorced. You can’t be estranged unless you were part of the covenant in the first place.
See the Greek-English interlinear translation of Ephesians 2 here, clearly showing that it should read “estranged from” or “alienated from” NOT stranger from:
https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/eph2.pdf
>”It would be better translated…”
Sorry but I’m not convinced that God appointed you to translate the Bible correctly into English so that we should believe you rather than the Authorized Version. I consider an “interlinear” to be correct only where it matches the Authorized Version, otherwise it is in error. For example, Berry’s Greek-English interlinear (1897) reads “strangers” (p.503) so it is correct in this passage.
God did NOT “authorize” the King James translators. Anyone that believes that is completely deluded. King James authorized the translation not because God told him to, but rather because he wanted a Bible translation that would clearly justify the “divine right of kings”. This is an understood historical fact. Why? Because after Queen Elizabeth I died and James VI of Scotland took the throne, many in England did not believe that he had the right to do so and that he was an illegitimate ruler. So he ordered the new translation to justify himself, not God’s word.
And you should read the original 1611 introduction to the KJV written by the translators themselves–I seriously doubt you’ve bothered to read it based on your comments, because if you’d read it, you’d know that the translators admitted that the translation was NOT perfect, that it was the work of men, and that ALL translations are prone to human error. Not only that, the KJV translators admitted that the earliest Greek codices and Latin translations take precedence over their English translation. So much for your infallible “authorized” version.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible/1611-King-James-Bible-Introduction.php
John 3: At the link you gave the Translators wrote,
>”to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against”
So therefore the KJV is the one principal Bible, and any exceptions against its words are unjust.
That’s preposterous. Just like you do with the Bible, you took this quote out of context, and you probably found it not by reading the actual Introduction to the KJV but on some website that promotes KJV only, like this one:
http://jesus-is-lord.com/Authorized_Version.htm
That quote is out of context–what the rest of the paragraph says is that was their intention, not their achievement, as it would be for any translator. As the translator’s admit, they cannot improve on the original Greek, their source.
There were numerous English translations of the Bible prior to the KJV, yet the KJV is the only one God approved of or authorized? No one can believe that with a straight face:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Modern_English_Bible_translations
Numbers 24:7: Israel’s “seed” or posterity “shall be in many waters” cannot possibly mean that it will be a legitimate part of many different races of people. According to Deuteronomy 23:2, the Israelites were strictly forbidden to race mix, marry outside their race, “A bastard shall not enter the congregation of the Lord,” here a “bastard” is the child of a mixed marriage.
This issue is picked up in Hebrews 12:8 “But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.” God chastises only His Israelite children under the Law, and if God does not chastise you, you must be a bastard, an illegitimate offspring of an unholy marriage.
Right and when God’s holy city comes here, it is ONLY the 12 tribes of Israel around it, much like they were camped around the Tabernacle in the dessert, that will be ministers unto him.
ganymede: But Israel did race mix:
>” Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people…” Hosea 7:8.
Hence the need for the new birth, that’s how the in-gathering happens.
>” But were mingled among the heathen, and learned their works. … Save us, O LORD our God, and gather us from among the heathen…” Psalm 106:35,47.
The gentile nations swallowed up old Israel to Assyria, but eventually the new Israel, the Israel of God – viz. the Church – swallows up those nations, and Christ reigns supreme by the Church.
>”… Israel be heir unto them that were his heirs, saith the LORD.” Jeremiah 49:2.
No one said Israel didn’t race mix, Norwale. Deuteronomy states that they were forbidden by law to race mix, but clearly many of them did, such as Esau and Ezra. And the offspring from those mixed marriages would not be considered Israelites. Esau’s descendants are Edomites and Canaanites–cut off from Israel. How hard is that to understand?
“Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” (Romans 9:13). That is why Esau is called “profane” in Hebrews 12:16, a race mixer who forsook his inheritance by doing so. Jude also alludes to it, “going after strange flesh” (Jude 1:7), equating it with “fornication”.
Really? A ‘mixed multitude’ came out of Egypt led by Moses. Moses 2nd wife was of Cush. Joshua was Edomite. Rahab was a Canaanite from Jericho. Ruth was a Moabite … Moses did not receive the Torah in KJV Elizabethan English. KJV translators clearly had an agenda. I suggest reading scripture in its original language, keeping culture and historical context in mind – even then idioms get lost to antiquity. Don’t rely too heavily on Dr. Strong as he made mistakes.
Norwale wrote, “It is true that the lost Israelites mostly went to Europe, but they mixed first with Sythians and Cimmarians…”
The Scythians and Cimmerians were both Israelite peoples, The Cimmerians were known as the Celts by the Greeks — and they were known as the Gauls by the Romans. The Welsh are Cimmerians, still today known as the Khumry in the Welsh language–Cimmerian inscriptions can be understood by Welsh people when read aloud.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150313230612/http://dailywales.net/2015/01/29/are-the-welsh-the-lost-ten-tribes-of-israel/
The Scythians, many of whom were part of the Parthian Empire, were the Sacae (named after Issac), who became the Saxon tribes. The Japhethites were in Europe much earlier–and they were the ones that were absorbed into the much larger and more powerful Israelite westward migrations.
SouthWales: Scripture paints the Samaritians as the counter-example to the Sychians/Cimmarians,
>” And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel: and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof.” 2 Kings 17:24
>” Howbeit every nation made gods of their own, and put them in the houses of the high places which the Samaritans had made, every nation in their cities wherein they dwelt. And the men of Babylon made Succoth–benoth, and the men of Cuth made Nergal, and the men of Hamath made Ashima, And the Avites made Nibhaz and Tartak, and the Sepharvites burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech, the gods of Sepharvaim. So they feared the LORD, and made unto themselves of the lowest of them priests of the high places, which sacrificed for them in the houses of the high places. They feared the LORD, and served their own gods, after the manner of the nations whom they carried away from thence.” 2 Kings 17:29-33
So the policy of Assyria was to shift populations around and mingle them together. Therefore the captured 10 tribes of Israel would likewise have been force-mingled with all the other conquered peoples of Assyria, forming new mingled identities, some of which became known as Cimmarians and Sythians.
>” Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned.” Hosea 7:8
If you are claiming that the northern ten tribes of Israel were “mixed” out of existence, out of history, then you are making Christ and the prophets liars, because he stated he came to regather them, and the prophets said they would eventually be regathered. Did some of them get mixed and disappear? Yes. But God reassured them that he would punish them but not make a full end of them. (Jeremiah 31:10)
No, this means that God does not care about race mixing. Also, that verse from Deuteronomy is taken out of context so much that it is sickening. In the original Vulgate, this is what is stated; “non ingredietur mamzer hoc est de scorto natus in ecclesiam Domini usque ad decimam generationem”, or to translate, “A mamzer, that is to say, one born of a prostitute, shall not enter into the church of the Lord, until the tenth generation.” (https://vulgate.org/ot/deuteronomy_23.htm) I do not not know how to gain access to the original Greek, but there is no Biblical ban on race mixing.
There is plenty of proof in Scripture that refutes the idea that Deut. 23:2 is about children of prostitutes. And the Vulgate is hardly authoritative on this verse. Read how Scripture proves it cannot be about children of prostitutes:
https://christiansfortruth.com/a-closer-look-at-deuteronomy-23-prophetic-fulfillment-of-the-assembly-of-the-lord/
I don’t agree at all with some commenters that only the descendants of Jacob (ie. Israelites) will be saved. “Gentiles” in the book of Romans refers to non-Israelites. Verses like Romans 11:11 testify to Gentiles being saved:
“I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.”
I agree that white people today are descendants of Jacob – Israelites. Thanks to the work of this website, it is abundantly obvious that modern-day Jews are Edomites (ie. descendants of Esau) pretending to be Israelites.
I leave you with Romans 11:25-27:
“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. 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: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.”
The revelation of this website that modern-day Jews are Edomites pretending to be Israelites is instrumental in awakening all Israelites to salvation in Jesus Christ.
But, Andrew, isn’t the whole point of this essay is to demonstrate that the “Gentiles” referred to in the New Testament are Israelites who are descendant from Jacob? Translated from “nations” or “ethnos”, the so-called “Gentiles” are the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel (Matthew 14:24) who lost their understanding of who they are–and Christ came to regather them? And Paul in Romans over and over explains to these “Gentiles” that they are, in fact, Israelites. That’s the whole point of Paul’s ministry–to bring the Gospel to those Israelites of the dispersion, the lost Northern Tribes, the “uncircumcized”.
I could make the point that Matthew 28:19-20 contains the following words of Jesus Christ: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”
You could make the point that the Greek word for “nations” in Matthew 28:19-20 above is the same as the Greek word for “Gentiles” in the book of Romans, with only one exception in Romans 3:9.
The KJV translators omitted the Greek definite article “ta” or”the” from the phrase “teach all nations” in Matthew 28:19. It should read “teach all of THE nations”, referring to specific nations where Israelites dwelled. Why only Israelites? Because “nations” here are the fulfillment of Abraham’s prophecy that many nations would come from his loins, and only the nations from Jacob received the blessings and could be redeemed by Christ. And these are “the nations” referred to here in Matthew.
See the Matthew 28:19 here in the original Greek to confirm the presence of the definite article:
https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/mat28.pdf
Remember, the Greco-Roman world would have understood “the nations” to share a common birth or blood relationship–the latin nationem, meaning race or tribe.
By omitting the definite article, the KJV translators opened the text to a universalist interpretation which you are putting forth.
Thanks Chesterton and John 3. I have a feeling that the answer will reveal itself in the fullness of time.
Yes, all will be revealed, but the Bible also says “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)
This subject, Andrew, requires many years of study–and yes, be skeptical, but also be ready to acknowledge when a new truth has been revealed to you, and when it does, be ready to let go of your old wine skins, your old doctrines that have been proven to be false.
It also says “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Judeo-Christian denominational universalists rely on Christians to not do either of these things: serious study or to prove all things with at least two witnesses.
The “World’ of the Ecumene is co-terminous with Europe, up to and including Russia. If you stop and look at the first 1000 years of Christian history, the ONLY nations who accepted all seven of the Ecumenical Councils, were White, and preached/lived Christianity, are those nations of the Roman Empire, or Christendom. It was only after the Schism, when Rome sought to both a)change her Trinitarian theology (via the filioque) and presume ‘universal jurisdiction’ over all the world, that the problems started- if you hold to standard orthodox Christology, etc.
No matter how you look at it, the Israel of God [ Gal. 6:16] the Church, and the White Race of Europe are one and the same. NO OTHER RACE can make that claim. Reading many of the articles over at Christogenea, while I disagree with Finck on his ecclesiology, this one fact remains. Christendom = Europe= the People of God. And, as we are seeing with greater and greater expositions of hellish evil, the non-Whites and the Universalist traitor Whites are all satanic in their hatred for White Christendom/European Civilization/Culture. It’s as if God is drawing us back to the realization of our Predestined “White” election, whether we want it or not. Thank you, Jesus. You ARE my ‘blood brother,’ after all.
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2020/09/06/practical-applications/
” And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” Acts 10:28
Peter’s reference here is to Cornelius, the Roman centurion in Acts 10. Peter was stubborn like most Israelite Judeans who kept the Law and had trouble accepting the charge of the disciples that the Gospel should also be taken to non-Judean Israelites and Adamites, that is, “the nations” or so-called “gentiles”. Traditionally, they would have looked on these people as “unclean” for not keeping the Law, not because they were a different race.
We know specifically from Paul that terms like “all men” does not refer to every human on the face of the earth, but rather only to Adamkind, and specifically those descended through Jacob-Israel, or as Paul said, “my kinsmen according to the flesh.” (Romans 9:3) A “kinsman” is someone closely related to you by blood, such as the Israelite Judeans and the “lost” 10 northern tribes of Israel, i.e., “the nations” or “the gentiles”.
The two groups seen by John were the 144,000 Israelites and a great multitude from every nation, including some Israelites who were not thus protected and who were martyred in the Great Tribulation.
Revelation 7:9-17
9 After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could number, of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands, 10 and crying out with a loud voice, saying, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!”
It says nations plural not Lost Sheep. Nations are nations why modify the plain meaning of the text and insert lost sheep instead of the nations.
The gospel is a great filter it separates the meek and poor in Spirit from the political occult theocracies controlled to make them gods on earth owning everything. All nations including wayward Israel and house of Judah played government through religious priest-craft. Jesus did not accept any of them. If it was false and untrue and man made he rejected those people and chose the ones able to rejoice and obey. God can raise up stones to be sons of God – get used to it.
Russ, you’ve been shown over and over again that “nations” and the “lost sheep of the House of Israel”, the dispersed 10 northern Tribes, along with the more ancient Genesis 10 Adamic nations–are virtually synonymous, that includes here in Revelation.
You have intentionally chosen to ignore the overwhelming proof of the true identity of “the nations” and continue to insist on your universalist doctrine despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary.
If you continue to ignore all efforts to correct you and answers to your points, your future comments on this issue will not be posted as it shows you are not sincerely engaged in good faith or open to see how you are in error.
Andrew………..
Would you like to explain to us how we get 4 Primary Races from ONE homogeneous couple???
If Noah and his wife were homogeneously the same race (which we all can agree)……….let’s say they were White. …..
How do we get black, yellow and the red man from a homogeneously White couple???
westwins, there were four men and four women who went into the ark before the worldwide flood and who came out of the ark after it subsided. They were Noah and his three sons and their four wives. So all the races on earth came from these eight people.
In Matthew 15:21-28, a “woman of Canaan” asks Jesus to drive a devil out of her daughter. Presumably she isn’t an Israelite because Jesus refers to her figuratively as a “dog” while he refers to the Israelites figuratively as “children”. He even tells her in verse 24 that, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel”. So the probability that she is an Israelite living in Canaan seems to be non-existent.
This woman proves her faith in Jesus to him, causing him to heal her daughter by driving the devil out.
It appears to me to be quite implausible that Jesus would take this action for the benefit of this ostensibly non-Israelite woman, even commending her for her faith, if he knew that the salvation he was going to effect by dying on the cross would not extend to her at all but would rather exclude her altogether.
It is not clear if this woman was a racial Canaanite. After all, in Luke she is called a “Syro-Phoenician”. This discrepancy would suggest that these identifiers are geographical, rather than racial.
Recall that Simon is called a “Canaanite” (Matt 10:4) but some original manuscripts call him a Canaanean–someone from Canaan, not necessarily a racial Canaanite. And Phoenicians were originally Israelites, not Canaanites as many mistakenly believe.
Furthermore, the KJV translators made an error here–the Greek word is “kunarion” which means “small dog” or “pet dog”. If it were meant to convey an insult, the Greek would have been “kuan” instead. This mistranslation has caused a great misunderstanding of this episode and its meaning.
So Christ doesn’t insult the woman here–He tells her it’s not right for the Gospel (the Bread of Life) to be given to non-Judahites (Israelite Judeans) at this point–comparing it to throwing table scraps to their pets, but she acknowledges His divinity so He heals her daughter. It’s not unlike his encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well.
Mark 7:25-30, not Luke, for those who are interested.
When Jesus said in Matthew 15:24, “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, he was possibly talking to the disciples, indicating that this woman was, in fact, one of these lost sheep.
By “children” and “dogs”, I thought Jesus was comparing Israelites to non-Israelites. On any reading, “children” and “dogs” are different species.
Chesterton, my understanding of the history of the tribes of Israel is poor, despite having read the Bible a few times. What is it about the Israelites in Judea that so distinguished them from the Israelites who were dispersed among the Gentile nations?
Feel free to tell me to research it myself if there’s too much to tell.
I haven’t forgotten Revelation 21:12 and “the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel”.
Thanks, Chesterton.
I replied in a conciliatory and constructive manner but I think it got lost.
Yes, sorry, Mark not Luke. My error. In Mark, it’s emphasized that the woman was a Greek who lived in Syro-Phoenicia (Canaan). Many of the Greeks were Israelites, such as the Colossians, Thessalonians, and Danaans.
But the “lost sheep” would not be referring to just the Israelite Judeans because they never lost their identity as Israelites, and they kept their faith and the scriptures. The “lost sheep” traditionally refer to the Ten Northern Tribes of the Assyrian captivity, many of whom over the previous seven centuries lost their identity as Israelites and no longer practiced the faith. That’s what made them “lost”.
A very small remnant of Israelites in Judea received the Gospels first, to fulfill prophecy. They in turn became “fishers of men”, i.e., went in search of their fellow Israelites who had lost their identity, and give them the “good news” of the Gospel–that they were found and their promised Messiah had appeared. And, yes, there probably were even lost Judahites from the tribe of Judah who had also lost their identity.
The Parthians were indeed Israelites and “lost sheep”, and the greatest challenger to the Romans, descendants from the Assyrian captivity. Many Parthians were also known as Scythians (Cimmerians) who migrated up through the Caucuses into Europe and became the Goths who eventually raided and conquered Rome, their ancient enemy, in 400 AD.
Thanks a lot, Chesterton. That’s really helpful.
I should add that many times in the NT when Greeks are mentioned, it is often translated from a word meaning “Helenists”, which, in many cases means someone helenized in Judea rather than an ethnic Greek. So this “Canannite” woman here could be a Helenized Israelite from Canaan, or a Japethite, though, again, there’s no way of knowing for sure.
“They were Noah and his three sons and their four wives. So all the races on earth came from these eight people.”
Andrew, NO! Anathema Sit to such a lie. “Jewish Apocryphal legend represents Noah at his birth as having a body white like snow, hair white as wool, and eyes like sunbeams.”- http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11571-noah
[BLOND hair in full sun appears as white, and the sunbeams come from a sky of BLUE.]
Continuing with this idea: “Lamech, [ Noah’s dad] frightened at this sight, went to consult Methuselah, telling him that his grandchild resembled an angel more than a child. Lamech further informed his father that he foresaw some accident would befall the earth during the lifetime of his son; he therefore asked Methuselah to consult Enoch, who was then among the angels, and who consequently would know what was to happen. Methuselah, accordingly, went to the ends of the earth to confer with Enoch, who announced to him that a flood would destroy the world, that only the new-born son and his future sons, three in number, would survive. Enoch also told him to name the child “Noah,” inasmuch as he would console the earth for its destruction (Enoch, cvi.-cvii.).” ‘
Noah ALONE was ‘pure in his generations’ (genetics) so there is NO WAY, he would/could be the grandfather of miscegenation/fornication/race-mixing.
Here is another (long) post on your idea about ‘all races come from Noah.’
“Another fallacy of the argument that racial differences are a tragic byproduct of the Fall of Adam and Eve, and that without the Fall mankind would have remained one large undifferentiated mass of people without racial, ethnic, or tribal distinctions is this: the same people who make this argument generally support the world-wide flood theory. In other words, despite what happened in Eden, if God scratched out the original design and started fresh circa 2,345 to 2,344 B.C. with just eight humans, wouldn’t this have then started us out as one harmonious race a second time?
But, setting aside the geological impossibilities of a global flood, a careful study of Scripture will show that the Flood was not world-wide, but simply destroyed much of the Adamic race in Eden. History shows there were at least five major civilizations that had a continuous, uninterrupted written history before, during and after the flood (Egypt, Minoan, Mesopotamian, Indus Valley, and China). With the exception of China, none of these histories make any mention of the Flood. Chinese history does record vast floods coming from the east for some time in 2,344 B.C., which agrees with Bible chronology concerning the Flood. Furthermore, if one looks at a map of the Tarim Basin today, one will see that this vast area about 300 miles in width and 600 miles in length is surrounded by high mountains, with the exception of the eastern side where the ramparts broke in a bygone time. (Note: ‘Ararat’ simply means ‘highest mountains’. The Mount Ararat of southern Turkey which many claim is the resting place of the Ark, was not named Mount Ararat until recent times; in Bible times it was called Mount Massis).
Still, as Scripture says, all men are of one blood (i.e. – can interbreed). But, as shown by DNA studies, we could also interbreed with the Neanderthals; many of European extraction have a very small amount of Neanderthal DNA. Does this mean interbreeding is good? Certainly not! What is good and precious in each race is lost through miscegenation. We are no different from, say, horses in this respect. If you cross a Thoroughbred with a Clydesdale, you will end up with something that cannot run like a Thoroughbred nor pull like a Clydesdale. So, the lesson to be learned is this: if we want to celebrate diversity, we must be committed to protecting it.”
Pastor Bertrand Comparet recorded many sermons on why Adam was the first ‘white’ man and the flood was local. See the 73 video collection on YouTube hosted by David James.”
http://faithandheritage.com/2018/07/racial-distinctions-in-an-unfallen-world/#comment-9456
When it all comes down to basics: politics, nation, race, it is always, ALL about family, and nothing else. Kinism, in other words. Even in your Church; especially in your Church.
The Bible is the record of ONE people, and ONE race, alone. Adam means ‘fair, ruddy, able to [visibly] blush. That is the DEFINITION of the Hebrew word.
Fr. John+, the earth is not a globe; it is flat like a coin with Antarctica around the circumference. Under the globe earth model, the angle of inclination of the axis of rotation of the earth is 23.4 degrees. The complement of this angle is 66.6 degrees. Under the globe earth model, the earth is travelling around the sun at 18.5 miles per second, which is equal to 66,600 miles per hour. The globe earth model is a satanic deception.
The Bible says in Genesis 7:19, “And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.” This indicates to me the flood was worldwide.
Fr. John, I hope you understand that the website you posted a link to faithandheritage.com is universalist and promotes racial ideas that completely contradict your own that you promote here. They are Kinists, that is, racial dispensationalists. They are confused in their doctrines, and believe all races come from Adam. They promote dominion theology despite suggesting otherwise. They are a rabbit hole that I would not send any sincere truth seeking White man down.
Andrew………..
Are you suggesting Noah and his sons and wives were a mixed multitude of Races?
Perhaps Shem’s wife was Yellow. Ham’s wife black. And Japeth’s wife Red.
Is this what you postulate?
I will say this………….at least you gave an answer. Most everyone I ask, simply dodges this question.
Well, because the flood of Noahs time was not global; look closely and the Bible will tell you that. The other races were still around in their ‘appointed places’.
One must remember that the Bible is written to, for and about ONE group of people.
The flood of Noah was in the area where that one group of people were predominant – hence, ‘the whole world’ as far as the author was concerned. Don’t have the Scripture cite right at hand, but the Word does talk of the ‘corners or boundaries of the flood’.
Kinda like that scene in the movie ‘Back to School’ where the drunk kid tells the blonde English teacher about Melons party – “the whole world is there!’. Obviously, that isnt completely accurate, but HIS whole world was there. A simple and technically inaccurate illustration, but i think you get my point.
God made the races separate and different – don’t know why – and the White race is different from the others. This is provable archeologically, socially, historically and with DNA. We are distinct. The other races do not come from us, nor vice versa. Can I explain it all? No. But i know it to be true…
“….God made the races separate and different – don’t know why – and the White race is different from the others. This is provable archeologically, socially, historically and with DNA. We are distinct. The other races do not come from us, nor vice versa. Can I explain it all? No. But i know it to be true…”
Amen! This is how I see it as well.
Westwins: God made Adam for the garden of Eden (Gen 2), but he also made other men to fill all the earth (Gen 1). Noah’s wife and his son’s wives were daughters of those other races of men.
Westwin, please answer my question first. How did Noah get all the animals in the ark? It does not say. So the possibility is divine intervention is more than probable. Now hear the answer give by Andrew 3 wives most if not all must have been outside Noah’s family. You see when you obey God waters part and heaven thunders and all nations are saved. For God so loved the world ….
Too many of us think exegesis can sustain a prior prejudice. It is not what we want but what God determines that comes to fulfillment. Not the will of man or the flesh but what God gives birth to by Spirit. We must be born again is so terrifying to Jews as they think they are special based upon hereditary and pedigree.
If you still doubt go and read Isaiah 7:7
Israel crushed no longer a nation. Obadiah says there is nor mercy for Israel but only Judah.
I do not believe the Flood to be global. So…………the answer to your question is rather simple. Only those animals native to that area were needed saving.
I don’t think it is a miracle to turn a homogeneous Race into a variety of races.
“Pre-Adamites” is the best logical explanation.
Jews like to derogatorily refer to gullible goyim as “sheeple”, a tacit admission that they know White people are God’s sheep, His only children.
However, the Jews want us to follow them not Christ, yet when we blindly follow them to our own destruction, they mock us, as they should. Wake up, sheep!
Sheep have white wool. Coincidence? I think not.
K.I.S.S.
John 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
So did Jews hear his voice and follow him? NO! Not to this very day.
So did Negros hear his voice and follow him? NO!
So did Orientals hear his voice and follow him? NO!
It took the Middle East centuries to even admit he was a prophet.
If it wasn’t for Caucasians, they all would be clueless.
Who lived in the Isles of the sea?
Who fought the Holy Crusades?
Who spread Christianity to all the nations?
Who built thousands of Christian churches?
Whose graves are marked with crosses?
Who fulfilled Genesis 35:11?
Why is the Dariel Pass known pass the Pass of Israel?
Matthew 15:24 He was SENT only to the lost sheep (Tribes) of Israel.
If only Israelite sheep could hear His voice how do we explain: Luke 7:9 “I tell you, not even in Israel have I found such great faith.” He then heals because He has more faith than the men of Israel. Not even the apostles had reached that firm belief that He was God incarnate capable of all things. This Gentile soldier allows us to see the truth God is not a respecter of persons.
And when they came to Jesus, they besought him instantly, saying, That he was worthy for whom he should do this:
5 For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue.
6 Then Jesus went with them. And when he was now not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying unto him, Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof:
7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed.
8 For I also am a man set under authority, having under me soldiers, and I say unto one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
9 When Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
He felt himself unworthy. Why because he a Gentile understood the Hebrew sanctification and cleanliness.
He had Judaic character witnesses.
He was gracious enough to build a synagogue for the Israelites.
He by faith knew the power of Jesus and made a humble request.
Yet he not of Israel had the Greater faith.
Therefore: Jesus Marvels and grants him a healing.
Why don’t we marvel?
It would be redundant to say He loves our nation as we all know all love their own nations.
Carefully read the entire text it is marvelous.
Russ, you’ve previously been shown that “no respecter of persons” does not refer to race:
Judeo-Christians love to cite this verse to “prove” God does not care about the race of people, but that’s not what this verse means. The Greek word here for “respecter” (προσωπολήπτης) is also used by James 2: 1-6, “My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons…” and here he clearly shows that it means a respecter of the social status of people, specifically admonishing to not respect anyone simply because they are wealthy while ignoring the poor.
This Greek word for ‘respecter’ has nothing to do with race. Remember in Judea, there was a higher social status conferred on Roman citizens, such as Paul–Christians are being told to ignore such partialities. And Israelite Judeans who kept the Law had a higher social status than Israelites who didn’t. The Gospel abolished those social status differences.
In Luke 7:9, “Israel” here refers only to the remnant of Israelite Judeans who had kept the Law, not necessarily the physical country or land. And Cornelius, the Roman, was indeed an Israelite, one of the “lost sheep”. Christ here is referring to Isaiah 43, where in verses 5-6, we are told that lost Israel (“the nations”) will be regathered from the four corners of the earth under Christ, which let’s us know that Cornelius can be counted among those sheep to be regathered. Isaiah 43:9, “Let all the nations be gathered together” which tells us that “nations” in the Gospels is referring only to these Israelite nations that were to be regathered.
The point here is to show that an Israelite by birth can have greater faith than Judean Israelites who kept the Law because God had written the truth on the hearts of all Israelites (Jeremiah 31:31). Paul explains this same concept in Romans 4, that the uncircumcised can show greater faith and works than the circumcised.
He helped a few non-Israelites, on an individual status, when they had true faith in him.
But in general, doing so, would mean giving the Israelites’ meat to dogs.
Matthew 15:26
Not at all the gospel was for the Jews first and then the Gentiles. His earthly ministry was to the Jews he never left that geographical area during his ministry.
He even said I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. So those lost sheep were in that region. Lost is not literal but spiritual they had no shepherd. Hence lost is not a separate class always called gentiles but meaning Israelite among the nations. Ezra /Nehimiah had difficulty finding Priests after the return from Babylon not having married out to other nations. How much worse is it for racial purists after 2000 yrs and no Genealogies kept in a temple. You have got no chance of convincing with such deliberate oversights. People in Judiah and The Galilee were the lost sheep. Otherwise the apostles could not carry out the command of the limited commission. Go only unto the lost sheep not to the gentiles and Samaritans. Lost is not a diaspora but a state of union with the divine.
The lost sheep are not gentiles as proposed but those in Israel old land boundaries. Otherwise how does he say go not to the gentiles if they are the lost sheep. Its clear for me to see verbal gymnastics is being done to silence on this matter. Matthew 10:5 say not to go the way of the gentiles. Gentiles therefore cannot equal lost sheep. Incongruous and thus a stretch too far.
You’re completely making this interpretation up–with your own “verbal gymnastics”.
Christ says go not to the “gentiles” or “nations” or “heathens” because the Gospels were to go to the Israelite Judeans first. He refers to them as “lost sheep” here because it’s language they would understand, knowing the OT prophets. No doubt, even within Judea there were Israelites who had fallen away. These are “lost” because they have yet to hear the Gospel. His disciples would not understand who the uncircumcised “lost sheep” are–Peter struggles with this.
Only after the crucifixion is Christ reconciled with the rest of Israel, the non-Judean Israelites, the “gentiles” or “nations”.
Ten-tribed northern Israel are “lost sheep” because they had forgotten who they are, forgotten their history, and their connection to Abraham through Issac and Jacob. But they would be regathered (Jeremiah 31:10, Ezekiel 34:12). God assured them that he would not put a “full end” to them.
It is undeniable that all Israel would be regathered by their messiah, their shepherd. If the “gentiles” are not “lost Israel”, then, tell us, who are they? If Christ didn’t regather them all, then he’s a failure and a liar.
It has nothing to do with being lost in a particular physical space or land such as Judea — they were scattered abroad (James 1:1) outside Judea. They lost their identity — they’d become a byword. That is what makes them “lost”. It was foretold that this would happen to them, but also that they would be found regathered, and renamed.
Here is another translation of John 1:11-13 “He came into His own land, and the men of the country received Him not. But as many who received Him, He gave to them the authority which the children of God are to attain, to those believing in His Name: not those from of mixed origin nor from of desire of the flesh nor from of the will of man, but they who have been born from God.” [CNT]
Emry was a gifted speaker.
Read genesis 48:4 4and told me, ‘Behold, I will make you fruitful and multiply you; I will make you a multitude of peoples, and will give this land to your descendants after you as an everlasting possession.’5And now your two sons born to you in Egypt before I came to you here shall be reckoned as mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon are mine.…
What is a multitude of people is it a company of nations?
Who were Manaseh and Ephrahim if their mother was the daughter of an Egyptian Prince?
How does that compare to a mamzer or mongrel people in your thinking?
Asenath was the mother of Ephrahim and Menasseh and they were adopted by Jacob.
Are Christians all nations according to the Great commission.
Answer: To adopt someone is to make that person a legal son or daughter. Adoption is one of the metaphors used in the Bible to explain how Christians are brought into the family of God. Jesus came “that we might receive adoption to sonship” (Galatians 4:5), and He was successful: “You received God’s Spirit when he adopted you as his own children” (Romans 8:15, NLT).
Jesus himself was adopted by Jospeh. Just as Manasseh and Ephrahim were adopted by Jospeh for legal entry into the geneology of God.
What does it mean to be adopted for the BI movement and CI movement?
This is incorrect again. The word “adoption” in Galatians and in Romans is mistranslated from the Greek “uioqesian” (huiothesian) which means “son-placing” or “placing of a son”, NOT adopting of a son. Implicit in the Greek is the idea that that whom is being placed is already a “son” to begin with.
The Greeks use a complete different word for “adoption” in the sense you are alleging. Greeks would NEVER consider adopting anyone outside their own race.
The meaning here in Galatians 4:5 “that we might be getting the placement of son” which, of course, they were entitled to because the Galatians were Israelites, and therefore rightful sons of God.
https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/gal4.pdf
And the same is true with Romans 8:15 “we have received the spirit of son-placing”. Roman lost Israelites are being regathered and placed as Christ’s rightful sons by their birthright.
https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/rom8.pdf
Universalists never bother to check the Greek meaning with these two “go-to” verses for them because it refutes their doctrine of alien adoption, “grafting” and “transfer” of the covenant to people for whom it was never meant.
Fair enough, so did Jacob son place Josephs two boys Ephraim and Manasseh into his own blessings? Either way adoption or son placing its in order to be blessed. Little bit of a technicality that stretches too far and misses the point.
No one can be saved simply by claiming that they “believe in Jesus”, which is what the judeo-Christian churches all claim. If they can get an African or Asian to say, “I believe in Jesus”, they brag that they’ve “saved another soul” and the misguided donations pour in. This is utter heresy.
If such were true, it would mean that we could save ourselves by our own actions. Christ chooses us. We do not chose him. (John 15:16) Those Christians who will be saved were chosen at the foundation of the world. (Ephesians 1:4) When an Israelite accepts Christ, he/she affirms that covenant and that new identity.
We are saved, by not only believing – even the demons believe according to Scripture – but by accepting and then DOING as He instructs. This includes, yes, Acts 2:38 . Mark 16:16 confirms this, as does other Scripture.
Others may be ‘saved’ if they follow instruction and live / act accordingly as is shown in several places, but most notably in the parable of the treasure in the field, but only WE may be redeemed, as only WE ‘were sold for nothing’ and ‘bought back without money’. We, the true Israel people, the Celtic, Anglo Saxon, Germanic, Scandinavian and kindred folk, are the only ones who have that privilege, and that duty, to be a light unto the world.
Non-Israelites benefit from trying to live like Christians, but they will not be at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, as they clearly are not adorned with the correct garment (Matthew 22:11)–and what is the fate of those who do not belong at the wedding feast? (22:13)
The argument can be made – and I dont want to argue! – that the ‘garment’ is the ‘putting on of Christ’ thru baptism. I believe that the Bible is fairly clear that nonIsraelites CAN come to Jesus and save their souls [if they have one] ; its just that so few do. Its not in their nature. WE have ‘His law written upon our heart’ as does no one else. The parable of the feast itself, Peters vision of the sheet and Cornelius – tho we dont know what his racial makeup was – as well as other passages seem to indicate the possibility of nonIsraelites salvation. Also, there is the ‘supper’ and a seperate ‘wedding’, tho Christ can only be wed to His bride Israel, others may attend the service if youll allow that metaphor.
Personally, I sure wont pull pistols over the question; Im just too busy trying to make it there myself!
Christ did away with the rituals of the Law. He said that He was the baptism and the circumcision. Israelite Christians would be “circumcised of the heart” and “baptised in his word”. This does not apply to non-Israelites.