Israel... or not?

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M We are the seed of God, the stock of our Lord.

God is our Father, not Abraham. Our faith is not through the example of Abraham, it is the result of the Ministry of the Holy Ghost.


God bless.

I suggest you read the bible pal....

Outstanding suggestion.

Where would you like to start?

How about here...


Matthew 23:9

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]9 [/SUP]And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.


...?

Now it's your turn, my friend...show me where I have to call Abraham my father?

Paul said clearly to a Gentile Church that by faith we are ALL OF THE SEED AND STOCK OF ABRAHAM BY FAITH and under the New Covenant both Jews and Gentiles have been brought together under ONE BANNER UNDER THE FAITH OF ABRAHAM......

Post the Scripture, we can discuss it.


Here...


Acts 13:26

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]26 [/SUP]Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.


Paul does not make a definitive declaration as you suggest, and includes the great whosoever.

So don't just tell people to read the Bible...post what it is you feel relevant to support your case that Abraham is your father, and that I am in error to state that God is our Father.


1 John 3:2

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]2 [/SUP]Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

And if we trust God our Father, He will help us in understanding the error of the physical Jew, in which they trusted in heritage rather than the truth of the Word of God that had been revealed to them.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M As I said, if you think to make Abraham your father, feel free, you have that liberty.

Just keep in mind that God can raise up children unto Abraham from stones.


God bless

Your missing the point and the truth....

So show me how.

I have told you several times that if you want Abraham to be your father...have at it.

You are not going to change the fact that salvation in Christ has One Father, not many.


John 1

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]11 [/SUP]He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

[SUP]12 [/SUP]But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

[SUP]13 [/SUP]Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


Now who are "His Own?"

Israel.

Scripture does not eradicate Israel from the equation.

And Gentiles had a father who did not just lead by example, but led them...to Christ, that they might be children of God. Paul's use of Abraham as an example of faith does not mean that all, or even many, or even the first person...comes to the Knowledge of the Truth through Abraham.

That is the Ministry of the Comforter...not Abraham.

argue what God inspired Paul to write all day long..matters not to me....

Some consider it arguing, others "lawyering," me, I like to call it disputing.


Acts 19:9

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]9 [/SUP]But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.

I suggest you climb to the top of the tree that is blinding you to the truth of the reference I made and see the forest pal!...

So give me a Scriptural Basis for your truth.

That is all I ask.

If I am wrong, I will be the first one to apologize and admit the error.

But I have all the confidence in the world that I am not in error in declaring, not suggesting, that God is the Father of the Born Again Believer...not Abraham.

Abraham is himself a child, lol.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Israel is one nation.

True.

Abraham was promised to be the father of many nations.

Also true.

We know Israel was the first nation of God and linked to Abraham directly by blood,

Incorrect:


Genesis 17:20

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]20 [/SUP]And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.


You are creating false facts which you think supports your position. It does not.

and not to forget, spirit.

And you incorrectly impose something into the text which is not there:


Galatians 4:22-23

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]22 [/SUP]For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

[SUP]23 [/SUP]But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.


In view is the physical births of the sons, the one being born out of human effort (after the flesh), the other born by promise (after the Spirit):



Galatians 4:29

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]29 [/SUP]But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.


Paul is not saying that Isaac was born in relationship with God, as we are when we are born again, what he is saying is that Ishmael was born through human effort and that Isaac was born according as God had promised.

The imagery given is meant to describe the difference between then and now (meaning those days versus Paul's day), which he also does here:


Galatians 3

King James Version (KJV)
1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

[SUP]2 [/SUP]This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

[SUP]3 [/SUP]Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?


Both Ismael and Isaac were born through natural birth, were natural men, and the reference to being born after the Spirit deals with God's will, not that Isaac somehow circumvented the fallen nature.

If that were the case, then we can delete a number of texts which point out that all have fallen short of the Glory of God.

Therefore those other nations are not Israel,

Has anyone other than those who have embraced mythology surrounding Physical Israel said they were? lol

and they, we, are adopted by spirit as descendants of Abraham.

You understand adoption pertains to Israel as well, right?


Romans 9:4

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]4 [/SUP]Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;


And that the adoption makes us sons of God, right?


Galatians 4:5

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]5 [/SUP]To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.


(and I would point out that those under Law had to be redeemed still)


And that adoption is related to Christ, right?


Ephesians 1:5

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]5 [/SUP]Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,



God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

How do you think it will settle with our Lord, Jesus, on the great Day of Judgment, if individuals say to Him, "I am not Israel, I am a US citizen?" or "I belong to the European Union?" "I am an Egyptian national?" and so on.

Anyone who is not headed to the New Jerusalem, capital of the Israel of God had better get a visa from their government before checking out of this age. Myself, I belong to my King, the King of the Jews and the Israel of Yahweh...... I pray I see you all there as fellows in that Israel of God, amen.

And that is not the same as saying Abraham is our father.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by valiant

Originally Posted by wolfwint Jesus plan with us christians (jews ore gentile in christ till our meeting with the Lord in the air 2.Thess. will take place, the rapture) is different to his folk the descendes of Jacob, which are then still on earth, while we christians are with the Lord.

What a sad view of God you have..

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M
Why is our hope of the Rapture, a Biblical Doctrine taught by Paul...sad?

As usual you twist what is said.

You deny you said his hope of the Rapture was sad?

Do you have no conscience?.

A clear one...but thanks for asking.

The Rapture on the final day of history is glorious.

You cannot support that if you include all relevant Prophecy.

You can start by showing where this...


Revelation 20

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

[SUP]5 [/SUP]But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.


Has both dead and living saints resurrected as well as the dead who are not among the Elect.

You couldn't do it the other thread, you won't be able to do it in this thread, and you will never, in any thread...be able to support your doctrine.

What is miserably sad is the mess you want to see left behind.

Not sure I would actually like to witness God judging the wicked that have rejected Him, who are given strong delusion because they refuse to obey the Gospel, but, I would like to witness the resurrection and Rapture of the Two Witnesses at the mid-point of the Tribulation, the sealing of the 144,000 of Israel, the preservation of part of Israel in the Wilderness, and the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs.

And of course...the Antichrist and the False Prophet being cast into the Lake of Fire at the End of the Tribulation, as well as the imprisonment of Satan at the end of the Tribulation.

I will witness that Millennial Kingdom, though my abode will be, according to Christ...New Jerusalem.

There will be no 'after' on earth once the rapture has taken place.

Sure there will be, there will be, according to Scripture, 1000 years and 75 days at the very least.

While we cannot be dogmatic about the timing of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, we can say with quite a bit of confidence that it will occur before the Tribulation begins, as it makes little sense to impose it after the Tribulation as that would leave no physical believers to repopulate the earth, from which come those who rebel against God and join forces with Satan after he is loosed for a little while (which I think will be about a 75 day period according to Daniel 12):

Revelation 20:7-9

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]7 [/SUP]And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

[SUP]8 [/SUP]And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

[SUP]9 [/SUP]And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

In terms of Redemption, no question. But that does not mean God saved us to leave us in this fallen Creation.

Ne He has saved us, is saving us and will save us so that we might spend eternity with Him in a glorious, heavenly, spiritual new heaven and earth. Once Jesus has come He will have done with this earth.

Not according to Scripture, both Old and New Testaments.

Your rejection of the thousand years in Revelation 20 and the denial of the separation between the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs and the "rest of the dead" may sit fine with you, but most people that read will have to question your doctrine.
Only indoctrination to a System of Theology could lead one to deny what is written.

Culmination of Salvation is the Eternal State in which we will all be redeemed ultimately from fallen flesh, which occurs at death, but, physical death is not the end either.

The culmination of salvation is dwelling in the new heaven and the new earth in a new spiritual body and worshiping God eternally. Flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom of God.

I just said that.

Physical death is the end of the earthy part of our bodies, thank God.

Then you actually deny the resurrection of the dead:


1 Corinthians 15:44

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]44 [/SUP]It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Hence Paul's teaching that the entire Church, both dead and living...will be glorified at the Rapture.

At the same time as the unrighteous dead are raised from the dead to judgment (John 5.28-29), Then will commence eternal life in the everlasting kingdom, and eternal judgment (Matt 25.46).

Not according to Scripture:


Revelation 20

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]4 [/SUP]And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

[SUP]5 [/SUP]But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Not sad, but a glorious event some of us await in great anticipation.

you are simply pathetic.

Let's clarify, in another post you called me simple, now simply pathetic. Do you mean simply pathetic, or simple and pathetic, or both?

Do you really call the Jews being left behind to face misery (according to you) as glorious?

No, I call it the righteous Judgment of God.

What do you call it?

Originally Posted by valiant It is the way of salvation for ALL who will believe from Adam onwards.

Not according to Scripture: The Gospel of Jesus Christ was unknown to all men until Pentecost.
Adam had no clue as to the specifics which we have had revealed to us.

I have a sneaking feeling that God knew that His Son was to be slain from the foundation of the world, and that Adam was justified on those grounds

God knew, but men did not:


Romans 16:24-26

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]24 [/SUP]The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

[SUP]25 [/SUP]Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

[SUP]26 [/SUP]But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


Here is another for you to contemplate:


1 Corinthians 2:6-10

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]6 [/SUP]Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

[SUP]7 [/SUP]But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

[SUP]8 [/SUP]Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

[SUP]9 [/SUP]But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

[SUP]10 [/SUP]But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.


Rather, ahem...simple, is it not?

Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

Infusion of the Holy Spirit?"

yes

Sorry...no.

You present the imagery of something being poured into the believer, that is not an apt description of the union of the believer and God.

Who is not a substance, but God Himself.

The Holy Spirit is not a substance, or a force, He is God, and it is not infusion, it is immersion.

lol you simply try to find difficulties which you can twist for your own unchristian purposes.

Well what do you expect from the simple?



And now I am a simple unbeliever? I am not a Christian?

My, but you must be quite a powerful person to render judgment on other in regards to whether they are saved or not.

I was not aware that the way to present one's self as a Christian was to present mythologies and opinions, insult people, and deny Scripture which is stated simple enough that someone as simple as me can understand it.

Nor was I aware that addressing mythologies, insults, and opinions while presenting a Scriptural basis for that address was an unchristian thing to do.

It is equally not immersion.

Well, yes, it is, that is why it is called the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.

We have no human word to describe what it is.

We do, several, in fact:


Acts 1:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]4 [/SUP]And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

[SUP]5 [/SUP]For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.


We can also call it being born of God, Born from above, Born Again, or even conversion.

And to be honest, calling it "infusion," though I think it presents a misleading picture, would be okay too.

But what I see lacking from your response is an affirmation that God is not a substance.

Being made one with Christ is infusion. We are made part of His body.

We don't make that the only aspect of being Baptized with the Holy Ghost, but we also consider the eternal indwelling of God.

We are still in this world, indwelt of God, and in God.
Right?


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

We are placed in God and God in us.

I wonder whether you are?

That is quite evident.

Apparently you feel men must accept your truth or they are not saved.

But that's okay, my friend, I am used to those who have to resort to insult because they cannot address the focus of the topic.

Question away, it makes no difference to me, lol.

Speak for yourself:


Romans 8:23

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]23 [/SUP]And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body


Oh glorious day!

I recognise that your thought is not deep enough to understand it but that is all part of the resurrection and the working of the Spirit.

Great. Now explain why we see three resurrections in Revelation, none of which are the first in sequence, as was explained to you in the other thread, which points you could not answer but resorted to insult there as well.

Are you really comfortable repeating the same error in multiple threads?

Where do you get that the King will fail?

Any king who rules a kingdom where there is a wholesale uprising resulting in violent warfare and is unable to prevent it (in spite of his supposed rod of iron) and has to wait in Jerusalem for God's intervention is a total failure.

Then you would also have to include the very Kingdom which we have been translated into, because it is without controversy that Satan is still the god of this world, that we are in unredeemed flesh, and that Scripture clearly presents a Timeline of Events which shows a future end to our current conditions.

Good job...you have just denied the Sovereignty of God and HIs Kingdom in the hearts of those who truly are of the Israel of God.

I have my doubts that you will actually understand the significance and implication of your doctrine, but I hope that some at least will recognize it.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

How is that which is taught by Christ going back to the beggarly elements?

But it is not taught by Christ.

You are correct sir...it is taught by you.
Now answer the question.

Is that how you view this Age, seeing Redemption has not reached it's culmination yet?

Of course it hasn't we await the day of redemption (Eph 4.30).

So you understand that the implication of your view is that if Christ establishes a Millennial Kingdom and then ends that Kingdom to yield a new heavens and earth...He has failed.

What ineffable twaddle.

On the contrary, that is specific to your teaching:

Don't be silly. Choosing a tribe is an IRRELEVANCE that only people like you would even think about.

As I said...that is your teaching, and it is as erroneous as most of what you have sought to assert in this thread.

You have not successfully defended the first point of your doctrine.

Actually it is simply taking Scripture at it's Word.

There will be a Rapture, there will be a Millennial Kingdom, and there will be a passing away of this current existence which will yield to the new heavens and earth.

NONSENSE.

It's just Scripture. Simple enough for the naïve to understand.

The eternal kingdom is the consequence of the rapture and resurrection

Not at all, there is a thousand year period which follows the Rapture, both of the Church (prior to the Tribulation) and the Two Witnesses (which occurs at the mid-point of the Tribulation) and the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs.

Then will the rest of the dead be raised to stand before the Throne of God, from He from whom this current universe flees.

Then will the Eternal State begin, and culmination of the Redemptive Plan of God will have occurred.


God bless.

 

[DP]

The thread seems to be quite on topic, in my view.

The OP states...


....

...which suggests that he can be a "Jew" which I don't have a problem with if he states it in a context of being a Jew inwardly through faith. That doesn't mean that we do not have the Nation of Israel to deal with as well, and in regards to that, the question is asked "Which Tribe are you a member of?"

God bless.

If you're Jewish, how is it that you don't know your own history per God's Word?

There's ample Old Testament evidence to show that not all the tribes of old Israel went by the name Jew. That title came from the name of Judah, which is only ONE tribe of Israel.

The tribe of Benjamin also took that title because they joined with the tribe of Judah at Jerusalem/Judea under Solomon's son Rehoboam after God split old Israel into two separate kingdoms. Judah at Jerusalem under Rehoboam then became the "kingdom of Judah" per God's Word, and the northern kingdom at Samaria became the "kingdom of Israel" per God's Word.

Most of the tribe of Levi left the northern kingdom also once king Jeroboam in the northern kingdom of Israel setup priests of the common people after the split. Even small groups out of the northern tribes left to side with Judah and also took that title. But the rest of the remaining northern tribes did not.

And then after God removed all the "house of Israel" (ten tribes), the only tribes left in the land were Judah, Benjamin, Levi, and small remnants of the northern tribes that had joined with them, and then strangers, mostly in the southern lands of Judea.

Jer 3:8
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
KJV

God gave the "house of Israel" or "kingdom of Israel", the ten tribes in the northern lands, a bill of divorce because of their falling away from Him. So He removed them all out of the land by the hands of the kings of Assyria (2 Kings 17). The only tribes left in the holy land were that of the southern kingdom of the "house of Judah" or "kingdom of Judah". The kingdom of Israel was scattered first.

In the Book of Hosea this distinction between the two separate groups is made also. God said He would give the house of Israel (ten tribes) the full weight of Baal false worship that she had gone into and He would cover up their paths so they wouldn't find their way back to the lands of promise. That resulted in the "house of Israel" losing their heritage as part of Israel. It never meant they stopped... being Israel.

Hos 11:12
12 Ephraim compasseth Me about with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit: but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints.
KJV

The tribe of Ephraim became the head over the ten tribed kingdom of Israel in the north with their capital city at Samaria. Jeroboam of Ephraim is whom God chose to setup as king over them (1 Kings 11). Thus God made a clear distinction who He was talking about there in the Book of Hosea. Yet Judah at Jerusalem/Judea was still faithful to God in that time.

Then around 100 years later after God had removed all the northern tribes of Israel out of the land and scattered them, the house of Judah at Jerusalem/Judea also began to play the spiritual harlot, and God brought the king of Babylon upon them and took them captive to Babylon for 70 years (the time of Daniel). That was a separate captivity of only... the tribes of the southern kingdom of Judah. The ten tribes were already gone.

Then after the 70 years, only a small remnant of the house of Judah returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and temple. Ezra 2 shows the list of children of Israel that returned, and NONE of the ten tribes are listed (because they had already been scattered long before this). The larger portion of the house of Judah (Judah, Benjamin, Levi, and some small remnants of the ten tribes) remained... in Babylon after the 70 years, and were further scattered through the countries like the house of Israel were. Per the Jewish historian Josephus who lived around 100 A.D., he said the title of Jew became the main title for the remnant of the house of Judah that returned from the 70 years Babylon captivity. He said all living in the lands of Judea, including the strangers there, took that title of Jew. And per later history we also know many of Edom (seed of Esau) after its fall migrated in among Judah at Judea and also became Jews.

Thus the Jews know who they are and where they came from, and many of them can trace their heritage, and then some of them cannot because of being foreigners. But the house of Israel (ten tribes majority) are lost, having lost knowledge of their heritage of Israel, like God showed they would in Hosea, and to this day, the majority of the house of Israel are like lost sheep in the world.

But God Himself has not lost the ten tribes of Israel, as He has much to say about them in future Bible prophecies involving their gathering back with the house of Judah in final, Ezekiel 37 being one of the strongest examples of that when God tells Ezekiel to take two separate sticks and write the names of each house on them, and then join the two sticks together in his hand, and let the people see him do it, and then explain to them the meaning when God will do that joining. To this day that joining is still yet to occur.

So how is it, if you're Jewish, that you don't know this history?

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M So if no hostility, why are you shouting? lol

Here is proper emphasis: you are mad because you have made a rather silly statement, at least that is how I view it. And the one thing we can say about the "fathers" that the Jews looked to as a means of validation that they were in relationship with God, which was denied by the Lord Jesus Christ, is that they were trusting in the wrong Father.

That's kind of a simple lesson Christ taught throughout His ministry.

If you would like to discuss that, my friend, I will be more than happy to show you that the "fathers" of the Jews were in fact devoid of the Life of Christ.


God bless.

First of all I was not shouting PAL.....

If you say so.

SECOND...my statement is biblical even though you are blind to it and are obviously rejecting truth that contradicts your view...

Your statement could be considered Biblical, just as the statement "We are all fallen beings" is a Biblical statement, lol, your only problem is understanding that the "seed of Abraham" is a figurative statement which describes people of faith.

Now, care to address the Scripture I have presented?

THIRD...I am not mad about anything

That is good, glad to hear it.

and FOURTH....you cannot admit the truth because it contradicts your view.....

I have presented Scripture and why I do not consider myself the seed of Abraham, lol.

So feel free to ride this one-trick pony if you like, I will continue to reject it.


Romans 8:14

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]14 [/SUP]For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.


And you do understand that the Seed of Abraham is singular, right?

The sons of Abraham had that confused as well.

Know ye therfore that they which are of faith, THE SAME ARE THE CHILDREN OF ABRAHAM.........THERE IS NEITHER JEW NOR GREEK, THERE IS NEITHER BOND NOR FREE, THERE IS NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE, FOR YE ARE ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS. AND IF YE BE CHRIST'S THEN YE ARE ABRAHAM'S SEED AND HEIRS ACCORDING TO PROMISE.....

So Gentiles become descendants of Abraham?

You do understand that this is figurative, right?

Our son-ship to God is not.

Again, do you pray, "Our Father Abraham, hallowed be they name..."?

Like I said....argue against the above and keep looking like a fool....PAL!

Be glad to:



Galatians 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]16 [/SUP]Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Now let's look at your proof-text:


Galatians 3:29

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]29 [/SUP]And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.


Whose children are we again?


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Sure sounds like someone is looking for a confrontation........sorry, you lose.......good night.

You might want to review the discussion and determine who entered the discussion with an attitude, lol.

But, good night.


God bless.

 

[DP]

There are very valid Biblical reasons why the subject of how the ten lost tribes of Israel would wind up keeps coming up. It is because God gave some very specific Bible prophecies involving them after He split old Israel into two separate kingdoms.

But even early on in His Word, God hinted about this split with what the ten tribes of Israel were to become:

Gen 35:11
11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins;
KJV

Gen 48:18-20
18 And Joseph said unto his father, "Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head."
19 And his father refused, and said, "I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations."
20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh.
KJV



Anybody knows that the nation of Israel in the holy land has always been but one nation. The only change in the land per history was when God split old Israel into two separate kingdoms. When God removed the ten tribes of the northern kingdom first, that left only the "kingdom of Judah" in the land, so it became like one nation again.

Yet God told His servant Jacob that his seed would become not only "a nation", but also "a company of nations". That has never... involved Judah at Jerusalem/Judea. It has never been that "company of nations".

Then later when Jacob was on his death-bed, he transferred this prophecy of becoming "a company of nations" to Joseph's son Ephraim, saying that Ephraim would become "a multitude of nations". And he said that his brother Manasseh would also "become a people, and he also shall be great".

In 1 Chronicles 5, we are shown where God's Birthright blessing first given through Abraham, would wind up which is the heart of this prophecy that Ephraim would become "a multitude of nations"...

1 Chron 5:1-2
5:1 Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright.
2 For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph's
KJV


Judah would remain as chief ruler, but the Birthright was Joseph's, and that Birthright was transferred to Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh.

So it should be no wonder that God chose Jeroboam of the tribe of Ephraim to be king over the ten tribed kingdom of Israel when He split old Israel into two separate kingdoms. That the tribe of Ephraim would become head over the rest of the ten northern tribes was not by chance, for God has previously ordained it through Jacob.

One of the most powerful Truths involving this is the Promise by Faith which God first gave to Abraham. Abraham believed, and it was accounted to him as righteousness (Gal.3). And thus all... those of Faith that have believed as Abraham are now called the "children of Abraham". That Promise by Faith represents The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus The Gospel... is PART of God's Birthright blessing transferred to... yes, to Joseph's two sons Ephraim and Manasseh.

So just what nations after the Passion of Christ received The Gospel of Jesus Christ and became Christian nations per history? It was the nations in Asia Minor and Europe. That... is where the majority of the ten tribes with Ephraim as head had to be scattered to in order to fulfill that "multitude of nations" prophecy about Ephraim.

Some Jews may not like it, but this was God's Plan all along as shown by those prophecies to Jacob and Ephraim and Manasseh. Jewish brethren in Christ Jesus shouldn't be jealous of God doing this either, because they got to keep knowledge and their heritage of being part of Israel. But in NO WAY... does that give them the right to simply disregard this prophecy about the ten tribes of Israel, for God has definitely NOT... lost His people of the ten tribes of Israel, regardless of their not being able to show a lineage back to old Israel.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Originally Posted by P1LGR1M It doesn't, it addresses your denial that foreigners were imported during occupation of the Northern Kingdom

Why do you always LIE about what your opponents say?.

I have never lied about what any antagonist I have ever spoken to has said.

You bear false witness.

There have been times when I have misunderstood an antagonist, and addressed a response from a faulty understanding, but that is not the same as the charge you levy.

Anyone reading these exchanges can see that your doctrine waffles, and this is because your foundation is weak.

Any time beliefs are the result of what we want to believe, rather than what Scripture teaches, we are going to stumble all over ourselves when someone challenges those views.

Everyone is agreed that you do.

Perhaps those whose doctrines I have disagreed with.

I have no problem acknowledging that those who disagree with my own views have been rather outspoken as to what they think about me personally, yet have been less forthcoming with a Scriptural presentation of why I am in error.

They have called me a false prophet, a cult follower, a liar, a wrester of words, and let's not forget...

...unsaved.

That last one your own judgment.

So tell me, where is one of these wise souls who would restore a brother, or seek to lead someone they charge with being lost...to the Lord?

Haven't seen anyone interested in that yet.

Perhaps it may be that for them, debating Scripture and views is just something that takes place in their cozy little country club here? There is no real grasp of a responsibility to encourage, exhort, correct, rebuke, reprove?

But hey, it's okay, I am used to it.

But when you can actually address the points and Scripture presented as the Basis of my beliefs, then perhaps your denial of my salvation might mean something to someone other than yourself.

You clearly have no conscience or are completely unable to understand what people say

I doubt anyone would see this as credible.

Did I not say that these mythologies usually have a racist mindset behind them, and that is why many embrace this kind of foolishness?

Did you not confirm that by saying "We can't trust Jews?"

Go ahead, say I wrested your words. Say I am lying.

I'll tell you again...there is no place in the heart of the Christian for racism, and there is no place in Sound Doctrine for the nonsense we are seeing taught in these mythologies.

I never denied any such thing, I emphasised that they were Gentiles, remained Gentiles and had nothing to do with the Samaritans of Jesus' day

You did deny it:

Originally Posted by valiant
In regards to Samaritans, we know who they descend from, the intermingling of Jews with the people that were brought into Israel after they were fell under their enemies.

This is simply untrue.

As has been pointed out repeatedly Scripture draws a distinction between those of Israel, Samaritans, and Gentiles.

If you would simply address each point instead of making this personal we wouldn't have to keep going over the same ground.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

and that Samaritans were a distinct people inter-related to the House of Israel...but not of the House of Israel.

that is their claim.

No, that is the clear statement of Scripture, and stated by Christ Himself:


Matthew 10:5-7

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP]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:

[SUP]6 [/SUP]But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

[SUP]7 [/SUP]And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

In the second quote they sought to align themselves with Israel and they were rejected.

that is in fact not what is said.

It is, lol. But because you neglect to include the Scripture already presented, here it is again:

Actually it is not:


2 Kings 17:24

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]24 [/SUP]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.


Gentiles were imported.

When they come to assist in the rebuilding, they are refused:


Ezra 4

King James Version (KJV)

1 Now when the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the children of the captivity builded the temple unto the Lord God of Israel;

[SUP]2 [/SUP]Then they came to Zerubbabel, and to the chief of the fathers, and said unto them, Let us build with you: for we seek your God, as ye do; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assur, which brought us up hither.

[SUP]3 [/SUP]But Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and the rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel, said unto them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as king Cyrus the king of Persia hath commanded us.

LOL how does that prove who the Samaritans of Jesus day were?

Again, this was not given to "prove who the Samaritans of Christ's day were," it is simply given to illustrate that the captors of Israel (the Northern Kingdom) imported foreigners into the land, and it is generally held that there was intermarrying, and we look to the Lord's distinction between Gentiles, Samaritans, and those of the House of Israel (which in His day was a reference to Israel as a whole, not just the Northern Kingdom) to determine that Samaritans were not Gentiles, nor were they of the House of Israel (Jews).

you simply jump to conclusions.

So you say, lol.

those who were rejected were so because of their idolatrous connections.

I would agree with that, and presented this before:


2 Chronicles 11:14-15

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]14 [/SUP]For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem: for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off from executing the priest's office unto the Lord:

[SUP]15 [/SUP]And he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.


And I would suggest to you that the Southern Kingdom would fall into Judgment for idolatry as well.

Many of them would have been Jews left in the land.

I said that, lol.

We do not have details of their antecedents.

I would agree that information is limited, but we cannot deny that Christ distinguishes them from Gentiles and Jews.

In Christ's day He distinguishes them from the House of Israel as well as the Gentiles.

Yes because Jesus was speaking of the house of Israel as descended from the returnees.

Thanks for finally agreeing. It only took, what, fifty denials and four or five pages??

Israel, Gentiles, and Samaritans, three distinct peoples.

you are soooo naïve.

And simple. Don't forget that.

there were many Israelites and Jews who were not seen as part of the house of Israel.

Do tell. Could you provide Scripture so we can test the truth and relevance?

They had seceded from it.

And?

Is not the creation of the divided state of Israel a lesson in man deciding who their King is going to be?

Can we not trace it back to the carnal lusts of a people who rejected God as their King?


Continued...

 

[Magenta]

I have no problem acknowledging that those who disagree with my own views have been rather outspoken as to what they think about me personally, yet have been less forthcoming with a Scriptural presentation of why I am in error.

They have called me a false prophet, a cult follower, a liar, a wrester of words, and let's not forget...

...unsaved.

That last one your own judgment.

So tell me, where is one of these wise souls who would restore a brother, or seek to lead someone they charge with being lost...to the Lord?

Haven't seen anyone interested in that yet.

Perhaps it may be that for them, debating Scripture and views is just something that takes place in their cozy little country club here? There is no real grasp of a responsibility to encourage, exhort, correct, rebuke, reprove?

But hey, it's okay, I am used to it.

What a skewed view you have. When I tried to repeatedly point something out to you, you called a direct quote of Scripture my opinion. You gave walls of text to prop up your opinion while refusing to accept what the revealed Written Word of God very plainly stated.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Only a fool would take those words of Jesus and try to divide the world up on that basis.

If you say so. Perhaps you can explain why Christ Himself divided the world up like that?

Here is my Scripture:


Matthew 10:5-7

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP]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:

[SUP]6 [/SUP]But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

[SUP]7 [/SUP]And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.


Your turn.

You have a mind block.

I like to think of it as simply pointing out a stumbling block to mythology.

Kind of simple, I know, but suitable as a description.

Doesn't change the fact that Samaritans are a distinct people.

yes distinct from the Jews, and distinct from the Gentiles who were settled in Samaria.

Thanks for finally agreeing.

Why do you make the statement "Jews must always believe?"

Please explain. This sounds a bit contemptuous.

As that is one of your usual lies and I did not say that I will leave the explanation to you.

It's not a lie, it is not a misrepresentation, it is a simple question tinged with what I perceive it to mean.

Here it is again:

LOL how does that prove who the Samaritans of Jesus day were? They claimed to be from the tribe of Ephraim. But I suppose as they were not Jews (who must always be believed) we cannot believe them. You are so naïve.

If you do not mean "who must always be believed" as a slight, then just say so. If you do not mean we cannot trust Jews, and simply mean we can't trust Samaritans, just say so.

Are you saying you actually believe that "Jews must always be believed?"

Please explain why we cannot "believe Jews?"

Because Jews are fallen human beings and can no more be trusted to tell the truth than you can. And you are a proven liar.

This supports the impression I got when reading your statement. Here you make it clear we cannot believe Jews. And in the context of this discussion that hints at a racist attitude.

I believe quite a few Jews, beginning with Christ and going through quite a few Apostles. We can predate these and assume we can believe Moses (though in His day the term "Jew," which derives from the Kingdom of Judah during Israel's divided state, was not being used yet). We can assume we can believe the Prophets. The Psalmists.

As you say there were no Jews before the exile. So what is your point?

There were Jews before the exile, lol, I never said there were not.

And my point seems to be very clear...I am addressing your view "we cannot trust Jews."

I don't like your attitude,

I am very sorry for that, but it isn't going to change my approach to your doctrine.

Have I called you naïve, questioned your salvation, called you a liar?

Is that the attitude you would have me to adopt?

Not going to happen, but, if my address of your doctrine causes you to perceive an attitude you don't like, perhaps you might give some consideration to the points being raised.

I don't like your approach,

Few do, because I don't often get the chance to "chat" as some have made their focus. My approach is very simple: to discuss and debate Doctrine.

That's all I am here for.

I don't like the way you twist what people say,

Prove it, instead of just saying I do.

You call me a liar and I challenge you to show me where I can be legitimately be seen to intentionally twist anyone's statements. The whole purpose of commenting on your statements is to address what is perceived as being said. You have every opportunity to correct me if I misperceive something.

I don't like your accusations,

What accusations? I am just addressing your doctrine, my friend, and it is your burden to show that I have erroneously understood the doctrine you present.

so I will not be replying to you again.

Then my work with you is done.




God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

What a skewed view you have. When I tried to repeatedly point something out to you, you called a direct quote of Scripture my opinion. You gave walls of text to prop up your opinion while refusing to accept what the revealed Written Word of God very plainly stated.

Then let me make it very simple for you...show where you proved anything.

I am not going to debate with someone that has only a consistent pattern of emotional responses that demand people embrace the twaddle they teach.

If my view is skewed, quote what is skewed.

I can't help it if you think you are going to chat your way into understanding the Word of God, nor will I refuse to present whatever amount of Scripture and points it takes to address what is so obviously in error.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

For me to say that I am Christian, I belong to Jesus, and that everything else is semantics, would that be a correct or incorrect summation, and why? No arguments here, just trying to learn.

Excellent question.

In my view it would not only be incorrect, it would be contrary to what we are taught.

As Christians, we have only Biblical Doctrine to support our claim of being Christians.

There are a number of groups that call themselves Christians, and say they belong to Christ, yet they teach a Christ that is not found in Scripture.

So how do we distinguish between their doctrine and our own?

Do the Writers of Scripture present the image that Doctrine is a secondary issue in regards to obedience to God and being in relationship to Him?



God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

If you're Jewish, how is it that you don't know your own history per God's Word?

There's ample Old Testament evidence to show that not all the tribes of old Israel went by the name Jew. That title came from the name of Judah, which is only ONE tribe of Israel.

The tribe of Benjamin also took that title because they joined with the tribe of Judah at Jerusalem/Judea under Solomon's son Rehoboam after God split old Israel into two separate kingdoms. Judah at Jerusalem under Rehoboam then became the "kingdom of Judah" per God's Word, and the northern kingdom at Samaria became the "kingdom of Israel" per God's Word.

Most of the tribe of Levi left the northern kingdom also once king Jeroboam in the northern kingdom of Israel setup priests of the common people after the split. Even small groups out of the northern tribes left to side with Judah and also took that title. But the rest of the remaining northern tribes did not.

And then after God removed all the "house of Israel" (ten tribes), the only tribes left in the land were Judah, Benjamin, Levi, and small remnants of the northern tribes that had joined with them, and then strangers, mostly in the southern lands of Judea.

Jer 3:8
8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
KJV

God gave the "house of Israel" or "kingdom of Israel", the ten tribes in the northern lands, a bill of divorce because of their falling away from Him. So He removed them all out of the land by the hands of the kings of Assyria (2 Kings 17). The only tribes left in the holy land were that of the southern kingdom of the "house of Judah" or "kingdom of Judah". The kingdom of Israel was scattered first.

In the Book of Hosea this distinction between the two separate groups is made also. God said He would give the house of Israel (ten tribes) the full weight of Baal false worship that she had gone into and He would cover up their paths so they wouldn't find their way back to the lands of promise. That resulted in the "house of Israel" losing their heritage as part of Israel. It never meant they stopped... being Israel.

Hos 11:12
12 Ephraim compasseth Me about with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit: but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints.
KJV

The tribe of Ephraim became the head over the ten tribed kingdom of Israel in the north with their capital city at Samaria. Jeroboam of Ephraim is whom God chose to setup as king over them (1 Kings 11). Thus God made a clear distinction who He was talking about there in the Book of Hosea. Yet Judah at Jerusalem/Judea was still faithful to God in that time.

Then around 100 years later after God had removed all the northern tribes of Israel out of the land and scattered them, the house of Judah at Jerusalem/Judea also began to play the spiritual harlot, and God brought the king of Babylon upon them and took them captive to Babylon for 70 years (the time of Daniel). That was a separate captivity of only... the tribes of the southern kingdom of Judah. The ten tribes were already gone.

Then after the 70 years, only a small remnant of the house of Judah returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and temple. Ezra 2 shows the list of children of Israel that returned, and NONE of the ten tribes are listed (because they had already been scattered long before this). The larger portion of the house of Judah (Judah, Benjamin, Levi, and some small remnants of the ten tribes) remained... in Babylon after the 70 years, and were further scattered through the countries like the house of Israel were. Per the Jewish historian Josephus who lived around 100 A.D., he said the title of Jew became the main title for the remnant of the house of Judah that returned from the 70 years Babylon captivity. He said all living in the lands of Judea, including the strangers there, took that title of Jew. And per later history we also know many of Edom (seed of Esau) after its fall migrated in among Judah at Judea and also became Jews.

Thus the Jews know who they are and where they came from, and many of them can trace their heritage, and then some of them cannot because of being foreigners. But the house of Israel (ten tribes majority) are lost, having lost knowledge of their heritage of Israel, like God showed they would in Hosea, and to this day, the majority of the house of Israel are like lost sheep in the world.

But God Himself has not lost the ten tribes of Israel, as He has much to say about them in future Bible prophecies involving their gathering back with the house of Judah in final, Ezekiel 37 being one of the strongest examples of that when God tells Ezekiel to take two separate sticks and write the names of each house on them, and then join the two sticks together in his hand, and let the people see him do it, and then explain to them the meaning when God will do that joining. To this day that joining is still yet to occur.

So how is it, if you're Jewish, that you don't know this history?

Could you point out where it is that I said I was Jewish?


God bless.