“How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again!”
—Autobiography of Mark Twain, Volume 2
Pastor Ben Williams — who worked in Sheldon Emry’s ministry — delivered this sermon on how to approach fundamentalist Judeo-Christians with the kingdom identity message and break the mental and spiritual spell that they are under, a process which he calls “Steps back to reality.”
Ben Williams:
When trying to inform Christians of our message — the message of the covenants and Israel — we find that quite often they will get angry at us. They will dislike us — or at least dislike what we are saying. And sometimes they even become indignant and want to argue with every little thing we come up with.
This leads us to ask the same question that Paul asked in Galatians 4: 16:
Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
God help us to approach other Christians and other people with the right spirit – a spirit of wanting to help them. If we approach it honestly, we should get an honest reaction. So as long as we have that part correct, then let’s pray that God will open their eyes.
But quite often, we just get arguments back instead of an open mind, but when truth makes them mad at us, then it reveals a problem that we have here in America — and around the world. It reveals the basic problem of Christianity itself has been subverted into something that no longer will accept truth for truth’s sake. They would rather defend their church doctrines than to pursue truth.
And so that’s a real problem — a spiritual problem.
Now, it’s not a spiritual problem to have error in your thinking — because we all have error in our thinking. But the spiritual problem would be that you want to protect that error against truth.
There are at least three main objections — and I would like to take us through these three steps in what I call “Steps back to reality.” When someone becomes really religious, and becomes a so-called “Judeo-Christian” — and it’s really religious out there — they really are working outside of reality. They are out here in Never Never Land, so we have to take them through steps back to reality, back to basics.
The objections that must be overcome — among others — are at least these three:
-Number One: The Old Testament has been done away with — and with the Old Testament goes the Law.
-Number Two: The Jews are Israel.
-Number Three: What difference does it make?
It’s important when we are talking to fundamentalists who are generally willing and ready to accept only a very small amount of truth, to keep our arguments very simple and logical.
In terms of the first argument that the Old Testament has been done away with — or that the Law has been done away with — here are some scriptures that speak for themselves:
Matthew 5, Christ says
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Now, when you point this out to them, they will often say, “Well, he came and fulfilled them, which means he finished them and did away with them.” So we need to know what the word “fulfill” means. Turn to Colossians 1 where the same Greek word — plerosai (G4137) — is used where Paul is speaking:
25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God
We know Paul can’t end the word of God or put it to an end. So the word “fulfill” here simply means “to do” and “to complete to the best of your ability.” Also in Colossians 4:
16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea. 17 And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfil it.
See that you fulfill the word of the Lord — that certainly does not mean you finish it or put it to an end. When Jesus Christ said he came fulfill the Law — he meant he came to do the Law. Philippians 2:
1 If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, 2 Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
So you see that “to fulfill” has a very simple meaning — and not what they have said concerning the Law, which meant to do away with it. 1 Timothy:
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; 9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.
We know that the law is good if a man uses it lawfully — it doesn’t sound like the Law was done away with if we can still use it lawfully. And it points out that the Law is for purposes of dealing with sin — with those who would teach bad doctrine, or commit crimes. Those are with whom the Law would deal.
1 John 3
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our…
Law. Does it say that? No, it says, “…he was manifest to take away our sins. And in him is no sin.”
Jesus was manifest to take away the sins, not the Law — because if he took away the Law, there could be no sin — because sin is defined by the Law. Therefore, if we have no Law, we have no need to worry about sins — we have no need of Jesus — we have no need of his grace — we have no need of salvation — there’s no Law, there’s no sin, everything is fine, that’s it. But that’s not the way it is, is it?
We have sin — therefore we do need Jesus who gave us grace which is the remedy for the sin. He didn’t do away with the Law — because the Law is what tells us what sin is. In Romans 4:
15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Same thing again. Romans 5:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Now, we put these together, and it’s very clear that if there is no Law with which to describe and point out sin, the sin is not imputed — we have no need for grace or salvation. If we have sin, we must have Law. 1 John 5 — is a good verse for those who say that the law of Christ is just that “we love one another”:
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
If you want to know how to love on another, turn to this Book of Love — of Law — that’s how you love one another. If we try to love one another the way we think we should do it, we’re going to kill each other. We have to have the rule book to teach us how to love one another. 2 John:
5 And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.
Apparently, they loved one another with the Old Law, too.
6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.
That answers that question — whether or not the Law has been done away with.
The second objection that I listed — that the Jews are Israel — is an argument that’s thrown out against us who say that we are Israel. It’s easier to prove that the Jews are not Israel than it is to prove that we are. But here are some simple scriptures that show that the Jews cannot be Israel of today. 2 John:
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
There are those who would say the Jews have the God of the Old Testament — they just simply don’t accept the God of the New Testament. This scripture plainly says that you can’t have one without the other:
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
This, of course, could be directed to Jerry Falwell and some other people who are bidding godspeed to the people over in Israel who are doing all kinds of damage in the Middle East under the premise that they are Israel and worshiping the God of the Old Testament. God help us from these false prophets.
The Jews — in terms of what they teach — are anti-Christian — they are against Christ — they do not keep the words of the Old Testament. They keep more closely the words of The Talmud, which has nothing to do with the Old Testament except to pervert it.
Some people say, “We are a new covenant church, a New Testament church. We don’t teach the Old Testament. So we aren’t concerned about Israel so much. We’re Christians.” They should read Hebrews 8, which was obviously written to Israelites:
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with…
Christians? Well, what does it say?
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Oh, the new covenant has to do with the house of Israel and the house of Judah — well, that’s news to some “New Testament” Christians.
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people
Let’s put two and two together here. If the new covenant people are those whose heart has received the Law and whose God is the God of the Bible, then what does that say about the Jews who say they don’t accept the New Testament God?
It tells me — A — they don’t accept Christ — B — they can’t accept the father — C — they are not the house of Israel or the house of Judah. That’s logical. Matthew 10:
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
The gospel was to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel — not to the so-called “gentiles” who are supposed to be the non-Israelites, according to fundamentalist teachings. As you know, the fundamentalists will say, “Well, the Israelites rejected it, so they went to the non-Israelites with it.” That’s not what the Bible says — the Bible says that some of the Israelites rejected it, but that didn’t mean the rest of them couldn’t hear it.
All those scattered through the nations of Europe and the rest of the world, didn’t mean that they couldn’t hear it. And it had to go to them as well. They went on to take it to Jerusalem, and then to the rest of Judea and Samaria, and then to the uttermost parts of the world — to the rest of the Israelites scattered through the rest of the world.
1 John, more proof the Jews are not Israel:
1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
They can’t love the God of the Old Testament without loving the God of the New Testament — and his people whom he begat.
2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
It’s not too hard to prove the first point — that the Jews are not Israel. At this point, you should show them the film “Heirs Of The Promise” which demonstrates how we — not the Jews — are fulfilling God’s promises to Abraham.
Now let’s go to the third step — you’ve convinced them that we’re Israel, and they say, “Okay, you’ve convinced me, but what difference does it make?” First of all, the question itself reveals some basic problems — the fact that they would even ask that question to begin with. If you have to ask that question, it means you have a problem — or you’re asking it without sincerity. You’re really only trying to escape the situation or put up a road block.
But it’s not a very good argument. A person who would ask that may think this information is essential or important in terms of getting salvation. If that is the case, then it suggests that these people are still trying to figure out what must be done to get salvation. If they say, “Well, it’s not important for me to know this. All I have to do to be saved is believe in Jesus, have faith, or whatever.”
You have to realize that there’s nothing you can do to be saved. There’s nothing you can do to get salvation. You have to accept it as a gift and then go from there. The error here is these people are still striving after salvation through works. And you may say “Faith is in works.” Yes it is, if you think faith is going to get you salvation. Salvation comes through whatever intent or mind you may have. If Jesus The Sovereign saves you, it has nothing to do with your abilities. You are totally unable to save yourself in terms of the salvation of Christ.
The knowledge of Israel’s identity and the covenants is not for the purposes of saving yourself. It’s for the purpose of serving, learning how to serve the One who has saved you. It’s for the purpose of educating yourself so that you can serve. If this doctrine is the truth — it will set you free. John 8:
32. And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
Free from ignorance and free from error — free to serve your savior in a good fashion. If we are to be officials, servants, and administrators in this kingdom of Christ, we have to know the truth. Accuracy is important.
The word “sin” is derived from a root word that means to miss the mark. That’s what sin literally means. If you sin, then you miss a mark. Judges 20:
15 And the children of Benjamin were numbered at that time out of the cities twenty and six thousand men that drew sword, beside the inhabitants of Gibeah, which were numbered seven hundred chosen men. 16 Among all this people there were seven hundred chosen men lefthanded; every one could sling stones at an hair breadth, and not miss.
And if you read it in Hebrew, it reads “….and not sin.” So when we miss the mark, it is a sin. Is accuracy important? Is accuracy in knowing who the Israel people are important? Does it make a difference? Well, apparently, if you get the wrong people, then you are living a sin, or trying to understand history through a sin. You’ve missed the mark. You’ve got the wrong people. It’s going to foul up your whole theology.
Accuracy of Bible interpretation is important because we can’t walk as closely to God as we need to walk with him if we have a major error in our theology — and this would be a major one. 2 Timothy 3
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness
Notice, it doesn’t say it’s profitable for getting salvation. What is truth profitable for? It’s to give us the hope, the faith. It makes us righteous. It makes us more correct..
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
The fact that we are Israel must make a big difference because almost all scripture is written concerning Israel — in one way or another. It’s written from the Israel perspective — it’s got the Israel language that it’s written in — Hebrew — it’s written in such a way that often only an Israelite who understands its heritage can understand it. If it isn’t important, we can just throw away about three-fourths of our Bible, and then try to live on what’s left.
The fact that we are Israel must be important — it must make a difference because of God’s covenants. Luke 1:
68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: 71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; 72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; 73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham
This shows that God’s covenants have to do with a racial lineage. What is this oath to Abraham? Genesis 28:
10 And Jacob went out from Beersheba, and went toward Haran. 11 And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took of the stones of that place, and put them for his pillows, and lay down in that place to sleep. 12 And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it. 13 And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; 14 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.
It must be important — God keeps his covenants, so it’s important to know who Israel is. In the Book of Revelation 21, we read that the gates of New Jerusalem are named after the twelve tribes. The symbolism is that you get into Jerusalem in some way or another through Israel:
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, 11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal; 12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel
Tell me it’s not important that we know who Israel is. Tell me it doesn’t make any difference if we are Israel. I think I want a part of New Jerusalem, and I’d like to know what that means. I’d like to know why these gates have the names of the twelve tribes of Israel on them. I think it’s important. I don’t claim to know every reason, but I do claim to know it’s important.
The fact that we are Israel must be important because the books of Hebrews, James and Peter were written to Israelites. James 1 starts this way:
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greetings.
The Book of Peter begins in a similar way:
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia
Now, “strangers” here refers to those Israelites who were scattered throughout the world. [The Greek reads, “eklektois parepedemois diasporas” or “the chosen expatriates of the dispersion”]. These books were addressed expressly to Israel — it must be important — it must make a difference.
Before the argument begins, fundamentalists will say it’s important to know who Israel is because they are over there in that little country that was begun in 1948. So they are quite willing to accept the fact that it’s worthwhile to who Israel is to understand the Bible — until you tell them it’s not who you think it is. And then they’ll say it’s not so important after all.
If it’s not important to understand the majority of the Bible teaching concerning the affairs on this earth and the history that involved Israel, then God help us. It’s the difference between truth and error, between bondage and freedom. If truth sets you free, then error must bind you down. It makes a difference in understanding the Bible or not.
It makes a difference in having a strong and lasting faith in this word. If we don’t understand it, how can we truly have faith in it? And to be comforted by it?
It’s often difficult to get misinformed, fundamentalist Christians out of their ruts — and of course, we can’t do that. We can talk until we’re blue in the face and not talk them out of the rut they are in, but Jesus does — and he continues to do so — opening doors for us. 2 Timothy 2:
1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
We must first understand and then teach others as God leads them to us. 1 Peter 3:
15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: 16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.
There is a goal for all of us to reach for. If we have that truth — if we have that sword, and it is sharp — the word of God, the truth — and if we used it correctly, then those who would come against us will actually be belittling themselves.
We must interpret the Bible through a White Adamic/Israelite lens and not of a Judaized Judeo jack van wimpy or pro-intergrationist Billy Ghram lens. Case and point ,They took John 3;16 to promote internationalism, However, if you interpret the Bible like a nationalistic white man, When it says ”For God so loved the world’ We must ask ourselves…. What world? It’s simple, The white Adamic Israelite world such as the Greeks Judeans Scythians Barbarians for they are all one in Christ Jesus and It’s consistent with Christ teachings that ‘He came only unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Bottomline the Bible is a White Adamic Israelite book.
This idea that only white people are descended from Adam and that other races of human beings are animals is the most offensive idea I have ever heard any people claiming to be Christians profess. It’s a satanic doctrine straight from the pit of hell. This is exactly the kind of thing that the vile Talmud teaches, except that it teaches that only Jews are human and that all other races are cattle.
Nobody who promotes this idea has the slightest hope of convincing Christians in any significant number to adopt it.
You are condemning most of your ancestors, Andrew, because only until recently did White people consider non-Whites to be part of Adamkind. And there is enormous proof within the Bible itself that the Genesis 10 nations that descended from Noah were White.
But you are contradicting yourself, Andrew. We all know that it’s Jews who push the Babylonian multi-culturalism that you are espousing–a preposterous multi-racial Garden of Eden. It’s the Jews who push the concept that “God created us all.” That’s how they wormed their way into White Christian nations. Don’t you get that?
And where do you think that the Talmud got the idea that God only created Jews and that only Jews are human? They got it from the Bible–they read Genesis and Leviticus in Hebrew and concluded correctly that God created only one race, one family in the Garden of Eden. But they misapplied that knowledge of Adam to themselves instead of the real Adamic people, the White race. Jews got their racial “supremacism” out of sheer envy of the White race. That is why God put enmity between the seedline of the woman and the serpent (Genesis 3:15).
If God was the one that put “enmity” between those two seedlines, two bloodlines, two “races”, and created racial enmity to keep Adamkind and other “people” separate, does that offend you? When God separated people and races into separate nations did that offend you? When God loved the race of Jacob-Israel and hated the race of Esau-Edom, did that offend you?
When God said he knew or recognized or loved only one race or family in the entire world (Amos 3:2)–Israel–does that offend you? When God said he would make a new covenant only with the same race of people as the old covenant (Jeremiah 31:31), did that offend you?
When God incarnate repeated that preference for that same race of people whom he came for (Matthew 15:24), did that offend you? When that same God incarnate commanded his apostles to go take his gospel only to those same people, did that offend you so much that you changed the meaning of the gospels to include everyone?
It’s the Bible that offends you, Andrew, now that you know what it really says, and you want to kill the messenger. You were raised believing in a Judaized world where your ministers lied to you and hid these truths from you, and now you defend those ministers who lied to you–in fact, you are offended that we don’t share your Jewish, universalist interpretation of the Bible.
Instead of being offended, perhaps you should go back to the drawing board and seriously look at the Bible again with new eyes and ask yourself why so many intelligent, well-read people believe that exact opposite of what you were told. But we know it’s a lot easier to dig your heels in and cast aspersions on and demonize those who tell you the truth. You have some real work ahead of you–and you need to humble yourself and admit to the possibility that you’ve been misled or even lied to by your ministers. Are you willing to humble yourself? We understand if you are not.
If you are, I suggest you start with these two verses in Leviticus, and ask yourself why certain “people” are described as “beasts” — the same word you will find in the Genesis creation account. These verses are precisely where Talmudic Jews stole their ideas of race from in the Bible:
Leviticus 18:23 “Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.”
Leviticus 20:15. “And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. “
— “Nobody who promotes this idea has the slightest hope of convincing Christians in any significant number to adopt it.” —
“For the gate is narrow and the way is constricted that leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Matt 7:14)
I suppose if the simplicity of this verse were easy to grasp, then the very verse itself would not be true. What a strange irony.
Hey Andrew….
Where did they come from then??? If Adam and Eve were homogenously White, how do we then get 4 distinct people groups — White, Black, Red, Yellow? How it is even remotely possible that blacks and whites are from the same family tree???
Would you like to explain this? Are you an Evolutionist?
westwins, God can do anything, including defy the laws of genetic inheritance, to conform his will to universalist doctrines so that nobody is “offended” by anything he does, dontcha know?
🙂
It is amazing to me that someone with a straight face could actually admit to believing is such a ridiculous theory.
Sadly, I think I did as a young man in my twenties. But if someone would have had the courage to challenge me point blank to “explain” it; I hope that question would have caused me to really think about what I was saying.
It is easy for people like Andrew to so confidently boast of such a belief because he is backed by millions of other “christians”.
But I would enjoy hearing Andrew himself explain it to us here on this forum. Maybe he will actually use logic and reason.
If he is correct however, the good news is all of those Africans that were sent to Northern Climates like Minnesota, will eventually turn White…………….so we have that to look forward to.
Although it doesn’t appear that Europeans who settled Australia are turning Abo anytime soon. 😉
There are some African tribes who believe that the gods created only them, not any other tribes or races. This belief in no way offends me. I’m glad those Africans believe what they do, even if it excludes me. Nor would I be offended if an African country proclaimed that no White people would be allowed in their nation. That would suit me fine. Yet why is it that when White people have similar beliefs that it somehow becomes “offensive”?
Chesterton…
Great points!
Why is it Ok for a jew to declare they are a unique and a special people….but when a White person says the same thing, he is a supremacist, racist, bigot, hater, serial killer.
On a side note……………..I listened to a congressional debate in Washington State and you should have heard the two White candidates GROVEL over the plight of the Red Indian. Embarrassing. They were literally declaring that the Red Indian is more noble than ourselves.
When will this insanity end??!!!
Why are you, namely John 3, Johan, westwins and Chesterton, posting on this website anonymously if you hold these beliefs so strongly? It’s difficult to take you seriously when you don’t use your full legal names.
I believe that modern-day Jews are descended from Esau and that they’re Satanists pretending to be God’s chosen people. This website convinced me of that. I believe that white people are descended from the twelve tribes of Israel.
I don’t want people who are not white immigrating to my country of Australia and making it their home. However, I do believe that white Australians have an obligation to live harmoniously with the Aborigines, who were living in Australia before white people settled here. I also believe that white Australians have an obligation to people fleeing other countries as a result of unjust wars that Australia has supported and involved itself in, such as the Vietnam war, the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war and the Syria war.
As for your belief that non-white races are not descended from Adam, the Bible contradicts it and discredits it.
“And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;”
Acts 17:26, The New Testament, King James Version of the Bible
Andrew, do you honestly think that by taking one verse from Acts out of context “discredits” the idea that Adam and his direct descendants were all of one race? What “nations” are being referred to in Acts 17:26? The Zulu and Chinese? That is preposterous, and you know it. It’s referring to the Genesis 10 nations, and by extension, the Israelite nations scattered abroad, which are indeed all “one blood”.
If all nations are of “one blood”, then why did God choose the bloodline of Jacob-Israel over the bloodline of Esau-Edom? You can’t answer that. Why did God hate Esau the race mixer? Why did God choose the Jacob-Israel bloodline over Ishmail’s bloodline? You can’t answer that. God chooses, Andrew. And if he forbid race mixing (Lev 18:23, Deut 23:2), he wanted to keep the bloodlines separate. And that means the bloodlines cannot be all the same, as you contend.
It’s great that you’ve accepted that the Jews are not Judah, but if they are not Judah, who is? What people fulfill the prophecies of Judah? The nations, the kings?
Where do you think you got your name “MacKinnon”? It’s a Milesian name. Your ancestors were direct descendants of the Israelites who founded Troy, and they are descendants of Judah’s son, Zarah, whose descendants migrated up into the Isles. You share a common blood ancestor with Christ. The “scarlet thread” figures prominently in your folklore for a reason. You, Andrew, are a Judahite. Why do you reject your heritage? You reject it by claiming that your bloodline isn’t special, that you share the “same blood” as Abos, Vietnamese, and Zulus.
Daniel’s 5th Kingdom:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Oabwbal7ZY
Andrew MacKinnon has left some inflammatory, insulting, and pharisaical comments, casting aspersions on commenters who disagree with him, suggesting that he believes them to be “satanic’ and “on the road to hell”.
As such, we regret that we must ban Andrew from further commenting here any longer. We hope that he can find a more appropriate venue that will accept his condemnation for his Israelite brethren who sincerely try to help him see the error of his doctrines. We do not wish to further “offend” him and discourage him from caring for — and seeking salvation for — the Aboriginees, Asians, and Blacks whom his wicked Australian ancestors have “wronged”.
In no way do we wish to further lead him astray with our “satanic” beliefs–and we certainly do not want to imperil his potential “salvation” by his continued association with many here who apparently are “hell-bound” for not sharing his judeo-Christian belief in the universal brotherhood of all races.
Hear, hear!
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our…
Law. Does it say that? No, it says, “…he was manifest to take away our sins. And in him is no sin.”
Jesus was manifest to take away the sins, not the Law
this is what you wrote: Please see the greek from Colossians 2:13-14
it says hand writing in decrees. Greek word is dogmasin – we get dogma in the English from this word I would presume.
It is used also in Ephesians 2:15
Its say Law/ commandments /decrees
It clearly says the law was annulled. It is the same annulment for Law and annulment and dogmas.
I ask politely how is it only sin removed if clearly it was the Law. This seems to be the very opposite of your proposition. Do you see this as I do from the Greek?
Does anybody have any idea WHY judeo-Christians and dispensationalists came up with the notion that Christ did away with the Law? Does the Law have to be done away with in order for dispensationalism to “work”? There’s obviously a difference between the Law and the empty rituals of the law, which Christ clearly did away with–instead of literal circumcision, he circumcized our hearts with his truth. Why would dispensationalists ignore such an obvious distinction between the law and the rituals of the law? How does it serve their doctrine?
I think because it allowed them to claim Eternal Security — aka Once Saved Always Saved.
Also known as — a license to Sin.
The heresy of “Penal Atonement” was also a result.
The first lie of the Garden was — “thou shalt not surely die”.
So the same lie is the same for today. Ever notice how the Judeo-christian is proud to declare that they are STILL sinners??? They say we are “righteous” only in Fiction. Not reality.
The Adversary loves Sin. Why? Because our Father does not hear sinners —
“Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.” John 9:31
The Adversary knows he can’t win. But the more of us he can take with him……this is the goal.
I suppose discarding the Law would allow the Catholic priests to take its place and become the sole arbiters of sin, which is what they became….
Yes…………great point!
Doubt there is any chance of “going back to reality”. Normalcy was the term after WW1 that Christians wanted. However, the League of BS was formed and now it’s called the UN. Wars were rather minimal and never called “world” wars until these jewish institutions were created.
America is the last bastion of freedom because it is the most heavily armed and majority white, Christian country left. The jews are taking guns and flooding Christian nations with illegals who have been historically, and at least two generationally programmed to hate white, Christians. America is the last chance for whites and Christianity for the North American continent which the jews wish to turn into an NWO “region.”
The CV and the DEW fires are part of agenda 21 which calls for depopulation. CV does both suggestions the Club of Rome concluded. Lower birth rate and/or higher death rate. It’s happening.
The recent fires in Orange County, CA and up north in CA are DEW weapon fires.
5g is also agenda 21. Those microwaves can pass through the holes on your microwave oven. Think about that. They go to your phone which you hold to your head. John McCain got brain tumor/cancer from using these MIC FCC regulated at the time microwave frequencies on a military sat/com (sattelite cell phone), then restricted for military use only. Now it will be used on civilians. If you have the CV “vaccine” you are at more risk healthwise. Too much to go into but it’s lethal. Please trust me as a Christian. Times are too tough to lie. Why would I take the time?
God bless. Jesus is Lord. Jesus lives and protects his faithfull. Pray for the best. Prepare for the worst.
For those judeo “Christians” who continue to “preach” the same ole..same ole.” That, “The jews are either God’s chosen people”, or “Jesus was a jew”… or BOTH, neither of which is true. To you and to all yours, understand ONE fundamental conclusion.
1- KJV 1 John 22 (Quoting Jesus Christ): Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ?
2-KJV John 14:6 : Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
3-KJV Jihn 4(cat): And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
CONCLUSION
The jews DENY JESUS CHRIST. — They are liars
The jews DENY JESUS CHRIST. — They are lost
The jews DENY JESUS CHRIST. — They are AntiChrist
And those who defend the jews and by extension:
YOU’RE ALL GUILTY AS CHARGED
In my experience, it’s easier to convince liberal atheists that White people are Israelites than it is to convince fundamentialist, dispensationalist judeo-Christians…..they are in a cult, literally, and the brainwashing is almost irreversible for most of them. The most common response from them is, “I’ll pray for you.”
Bring on the Noachide Laws and away with the Christian idolators! I can only laugh when I think about the surprised look frozen on John Hagee’s bodyless head.
“…my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever… from the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable… A partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the nations has come in”.
We have faith ultimately in performing that service to our Lord. It is not faith in the flesh, or faith in ourselves, or faith in any other thing as scoffers and slanders claim, but the faith that we will be led into His service.
We cannot please Him without faith, so then how much more then a faith that leads to a more severe calling to His side? Not a faith that leads to haughtiness and pride, but a faith that leads to love, hope, meekness, service, Spirit and truth.
What does “having faith in the flesh” mean to you?
The Greek word “skranos” (lit. flesh) is used in two senses in the Bible.
One, skin/ethnicity.
Two, material pleasure.
This happens to be the latter usage.
I was paraphrasing those who scoff at the true Israel of Scripture, who are white, Adamic men. They make as if not being a half-breed is a kind of “work”; their conscience being seared by Satan’s concept of “race”.
I suppose if I had to answer it for myself anyway, I would say it’s a fine line. We know that we must be pure Adamic men, and descendants of Israel. That is irrefutable. But if that faith produces fruits of the flesh as opposed to fruits of the Spirit (Galatians 5), then our faith is in our flesh and not in the Spirit.
That makes sense, but why do people claim that to value racial identity is “having faith in the flesh”? People who will be saved had their names written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, right? If a non-Adamic person believes their name is written in that book, they must have “faith in their flesh”, that is, faith that what the preachers say is true — that their race does not matter to God, and that God put their name in that book for another reason–but what could that reason be? Surely not good works? Then what? what reason would God put anyone’s name in that book other than belonging to HIS family?
I think “race” is sometimes overstated though, because in the Scripture, there are men and there are animals. Men have the opportunity of salvation and animals don’t. There are no different races of men in Scripture.
Therefore we don’t have to ascribe a special preference of “race” to God, because “race” doesn’t exist. It is a anthropological classification made by one of Satan’s religions, Scientism. Humans don’t exist. There are Adamites, who in these times are pure whites, and then there are animals.
Is it any wonder there are gorillas and orangutans smarter than blacks? Especially those in Australia. Who is fighting for “human rights” for Coco the gorilla?
They have arbitrarily made for themselves a cut-off point, in which they place faith in the flesh, as you say, that they are “humans” and not animals.
To clarify the point I made: We have faith that we are Israelites, which is a calling greater than Adamites. It is faith in the promises God made to our ancestors, and that He is a God who keeps His word. We believe we are physically descendants of Jacob, but then if we don’t live up to that calling, which is holiness, we are worthless and ready to be cut off.
Okay, but then the universalists turn around and claim that “race” doesn’t exist for another, different reason — that God created only one race, and the Adamic race encompassing all sentient beings who have the ability to walk upright and create a facsimile of language using their larynx and windpipes.
Yet if we are all of one race, why would God forbid race mixing in the Bible? If we are all created in His image, why even bother setting us all up in separate nations even prior to Babylon? If God is “no respecter” of persons, then why did He chose one race or family of people apart from all others? It seems that God does have “confidence in the flesh” in some sense, no?
I think the universalists are right to assert that, but in effect they witness against themselves, because Paul said, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.” They affirm there is no “race”, but then cast aside what is plain to see in practice.
God doesn’t actually forbid race mixing in the Bible, because there is no such thing as race. He does forbid mixing with animals, which is obvious. Deuteronomy 23 refers to those who are mixed not being allowed in the congregation, who are the mixed blood of confusion which results from Leviticus 18:23.
The rest of Deuteronomy 23 is referring to other nations, not the mixing of different “races”. They are allowed to mix with Mitsrayim/Egypt, because they were all men and descendants of Noah. If Deuteronomy 23:2 referred to the union of an Israelite and non-Israelite, then a Misrayimite would never be allowed into the assembly, making the third generation clause useless. Isaiah 56 affirms this, as it echoes Deuteronomy 23… So long as they are not mamzers/mixed-bloods (also Leviticus 19:19, which is a “shadow law”, not a moral law).
— “If we are all created in His image, why even bother setting us all up in separate nations even prior to Babylon?” —
I’m not sure I follow the question, so I’ll try give a general answer. Genesis 10:32 says, “These are the families of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, by their nations; and OUT OF THESE THE NATIONS WERE SEPARATED on the earth after the flood.” With respect, the question is moot I believe, because the nations come from Noah and Noah was a pure Adamite. Why were they split? Paul said, “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!” I don’t believe a question which needs an answer as it relates to “race”. But… I would venture a guess, which is to read Deuteronomy 32:8-9, but specifically the Septuagint, not the Masoretic. I’ll leave a hint at my view only, as it’s a lengthy topic.
Why did God choose one family apart from all others? It was so that the promises to Abraham could be fulfilled. Promises which Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness. It says in Genesis 18:19, “For I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring upon Abraham what He has spoken about him.”
Unfortunately Israel stumbled time and time again, but for His own name’s sake, God fulfilled and is fulfilling the covenants with Israel. Paul says, “That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants” (Romans 9:7), because it was promised to Sarah (Gen 18:10) and it was promised to Jacob (Gen 25:23). For this reason Paul says, “For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel” (Romans 9:6). Paul is referring to physical Israel by the flesh (Romans 9:3), so that not all Israel are called to the covenant, just as not all Abraham’s descendants were called to the covenant. This in combination with Israel’s failure and God’s faithfulness to them because of His promises proves that the flesh is useless to bring about what was promised.
By this we see that God has no confidence in the flesh, but only in His promises. Therefore, we must have faith in those promises, not our flesh. But… We have to be Israelites in the flesh in order to qualify for those promises. It is seemingly a paradox, but Paul says in Philippians 3:4, 7 & 9, “…although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more… But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ… and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith.”
This is why I say, let us produce the fruit of righteousness by the faith in our ancestry and the promises to it, that being children of the flesh indeed, we can become children of the promise, “to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the service and the promises”.
Johan wrote, “Paul says, “For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel” (Romans 9:6). Paul is referring to physical Israel by the flesh (Romans 9:3), so that not all Israel are called to the covenant, just as not all Abraham’s descendants were called to the covenant.”
I guess I was never entirely clear what Paul meant by this verse, but now your explanation really puts it in focus. So an Israelite who by birth is born of the promise, but fails in faith and works is not “called to the covenant”, i.e., will not be at the wedding feast of the Lamb? Salvation is their birthright, but any rewards in the kingdom are not–or even entry into the kingdom?
[Thanks to the editor for putting up with my wordy replies. When I try to be concise it comes across as obscure.]
I believe that to be saved to eternal life requires faith for all, and that faith must be evidenced in our lives, as Christ said to those who came in His name, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” This applies to Israelites and to Nations. Galatians 3:16 says, “Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, “And to your seed,” that is, Christ.” Then in Romans 4:16, “For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all”. Then it is only by faith in Christ, that it may be in accordance with grace.
The calling I refer to is the calling of Israel. Unfortunately it is watered down as simply being salvation, but as Peter writes to Israelites, “But you are a chosen race [kindred], a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light”.
Paul says in Romans 11:25-27, “For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the nations has come in; and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.” “This is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”” Isaiah 59 from which this is taken elaborates beautifully.
The fullness of the nations is coming to an end, and the time of Israel’s fulfillment is coming, and so it is time for Israel to fulfill its original calling to God. In their service, the remnant of Israel will seek atonement for the world (Rev 8:5) and they will sing a new song that no other may learn (Rev 14:3).
If we don’t have faith for worldly gain (for Christ knows the heart), but we have faith to be of service to Him, and seek Him with all our hearts, to fulfill that which Israel was called to do, which brings about goodness and righteousness and His pleasure in our lives, then isn’t that a faith worthy of having? We believe — and even have faith — that we are a kingdom of priests, but as James said, “faith without works is dead”, and “faith is perfected by works”. Then let those who believe that they are Israelites act like the priests they believe they are.
1 Peter 2:9 ““But you are a chosen race [kindred], a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.”
Was this directed to the Judahites in Jerusalem or to all Israelites, including the dispersion?
There are those who claim that all you need to be “saved” is to be born Israelites or White, and yet the gospels seem to suggest otherwise. After all, if you’re automatically saved by birthright, then Christ isn’t necessary, no?
Peter address his first letter, “To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia”, so I assume he is writing it to Israelites scattered abroad.
Those who claim all we need to be saved is to be an Israelite find some room for Christ in their theology so they can pay lip-service, but they remove any and all faith in Him, ignoring where it is said, “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.” (John 3:14-15)
J Polk…
Such are “Hirelings”. They see “danger” and don’t warn the flock.
OSAS is heresy among the Judeo-c.hristians and this idea that All Israel (all white people) will be saved no matter their ‘fruit’ is exactly what Jude was referring to. It is the first lie in the Garden — “you shall not surely die”.
It changes the Grace of our Lord into Licentiousness.
“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.”
My reading of this isn’t that every Israelite shall be saved unconditionally. In the context of Romans 11, it seems to be emphasizing that not just the Judahites and Israelite Judeans can be saved, but also all Israelites in the dispersion too. After all, that’s what Paul’s ministry was about–convincing the lost sheep of Israel that a) they were Israelites, and b) because they were Israelites, they could be saved through Christ. Is that reading correct?
The way I see it, it is not some broad all-encompassing statement, “all Israel shall be saved”. It’s referring to a specific event at a specific time, when “the fullness of the nations has come in” (Luke 21:24) and “when I take away their sins” (Isaiah 4:3-4, Zeph 3:12-13) — A sanctifying work, creating a holy people.
It is referring to the return of Christ, who only returns once Israel’s power is broken (Dan 12:7) and they have returned to Him (Matt 23:39, Luke 18:7), He will destroy the wicked with the breath of His coming and save the remnant of Israel. Even Isaiah 59 which Paul quotes says,
“According to their deeds, so will He repay:
Wrath to His adversaries, retribution to His enemies;
To the coastlands He will deal retribution.
So they will fear the name of the Lord from the west
And His glory from the rising of the sun,
For He will come like a rushing stream
Which the wind of the Lord drives.
“A REDEEMER WILL COME TO ZION,
AND TO THOSE IN JACOB WHO RETURN FROM WRONGDOING,” declares the Lord.”
This is also Deuteronomy 31:40-41, which says,
“Indeed, I raise My hand to heaven,
And say, as I live forever,
If I have sharpened My flashing sword,
And My hand has taken hold of justice,
I will return vengeance on My adversaries,
And I will repay those who hate Me.”
In Joel 3:1-2 it says,
““For behold, in those days and at that time,
When I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem,
I will gather all the nations
And bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat.
Then I will enter into judgment with them there
On behalf of My people and My inheritance, Israel,
Whom they have scattered among the nations;
And they have divided up My land.”
So this “all Israel” is the final remnant, their sin being taken away is a sanctifying work, and them being saved is referring to the destruction of their enemies, not their salvation. I’m butchering this by keeping it so short, but it’s really everywhere in Scripture.
J Polk….
I think so.
“Israelite Identity” is still pretty new for me. I just spent 10 years fighting OSAS in the brick and mortars.
I know with out a doubt, that our Salvation or our Eternal Rest is Conditional in Nature.
I mean, how can anyone explain John 14:21 any other way???!!!
Not to mention Paul’s exhortation — Sow and Reap.
“He who sows to the flesh will of the flesh reap corruption. He who sows to the Spirit will receive Eternal Life.”
Notice — “corruption” is compared with “Eternal Life”.
Conclusion — Corruption = the opposite of Eternal Life.
Cheers!
Will all of Israel be redeemed, as opposed to “saved”? Or are redemption and salvation synonymous?
J Polk wrote — “…Will all of Israel be redeemed, as opposed to “saved”? Or are redemption and salvation synonymous?…”
Not my wheel house. I will wait and allow others to respond. But for me, it seems like splitting hairs.
A good example/comparison might be Revelation 22:15. I have heard some say that “outside” is still Eternal Rest.
When I was in the brick and mortars, the OSAS advocates would say that all of the “conditional” salvation passages ONLY refers to Rewards.
Seems like a similar argument which of course I don’t buy.
Jesus will say to some — “I never knew you”. I don’t think he is referring to non-Adamic peoples.
I believe that in this final instance they are synonymous (Matt 24:31, Jude 14). Those who return with Christ are not in the final judgement, being deemed worthy of eternal life already.
These are the remnant of Israel (144000), and the martyrs of the nations and Israel already dead, martyrs of the great tribulation, and those who remain who don’t take the mark of the animal (Rev 5:9-11, Rev 7/Isaiah 49, Rev 19:8, Rev 19:14, Rev 20:4, 1 Thes 4:14-17).
westwins, the whole verse is “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matthew 7:23), and it encompasses anyone who works iniquity, not just non-Israelites who work iniquity. There are some false teachers that claim Israelites cannot work iniquity, but the term appears almost 250 times in the Old Testament and often applies to Israel. I don’t think Matthew 7:23 is referring to or echoing Amos 3:2.
Chesterton….
Interesting.
I am new to the teachings of CI. It is my understanding that CI teaches that the non-white peoples do not have access to Eternal Life. If they don’t have access to Eternal Life, what would be the point of them being judged.
Or in other words………………..the Scriptures were never intended for non-Adamic peoples.
You say — “…and it encompasses anyone who works iniquity, not just non-Israelites who work iniquity…..”
When you say ‘non-Israelites’…………are you referring to Adamites, or non-Adamites? Or both.
I get confused as to which terminology is appropriate.
It is my understanding that Adamic man are all White peoples. Within some of those peoples are Adamic men of the Genesis 10 Nations. The rest are Israelites. Therefore, non-Adamic peoples (non-whites) are not included.
Hope that makes sense. Thanks!
Yes, westwins, I didn’t mean to exclude Adamic non-Israelites in that equation. From my reading, I just can’t imagine that there are any non-Israelite Adamics left in the world–but there certainly were non-Israelite Adamics in the past who will be saved and judged, etc….