The Israel Christian Hoax? Are modern Jews the Old Testament chose people of God?

Krispy brought up that modern Israelis are the Old Testament chosen people of God and still are today. It is interesting that I just read this article yesterday that attempts to debunk that way of thinking by modern Christians. I am not saying that I disagree with Krispy or that I agree with this article (which I did not) but would greatly appreciate any feed back or discussion on the Scriptural validity of the following point of view. I look foreword to any comments or discussion on the matter. READ Carefully You will have to think … these truths once understoodWill change your Faith forever. The Israel Christian HoaxMost Christians that have attended church for any length of time are led to believe that the Jew and the nation Israel are God’s chosen people. There seems to be this unwritten code in Christianity that Christians should honor people of Jewish faith as well as the nation Israel that we see today. In nearly any church, you will hear the pulpit often say, “pray for the peace of Jerusalem." Or the infamous “I will bless those that bless you and curse those that curse you” in reference to the nation Israel. Neither statement is applicable to Christianity today. A few strange individuals developed most of the distorted Christian views about Israel, the Temple, and the Jew within the last 300 years. Most of these views stemmed from a false belief system that we are living in the last days. The false End Times eschatology regarding Israel preached by the Chicken Little’s of this generation is nothing more than biblical huxterisum.Most churches will point at Israel today as a sign that we are living in the last days. From the battle of Armageddon to the 666 mark of the beast, Christians are taught that Jesus is coming soon to “Rapture” them out of this troubled world. After the rapture, the good Christians will go to heaven for 3 1/2 years. While they are in heaven playing harps, flutes, and floating on clouds, everyone “Left Behind” will eventually be destroyed in the final battle of Armageddon. After 3 1/2 years I suppose they will put down their harps, flutes, get off of their clouds, and return with dust busters to clean up the mess.Christians are also taught that Israel will rebuild the Temple and the Antichrist (The Son of the Devil) will walk into the Temple and proclaim himself to be God. Oh brother, don’t you know that we are living in the last days? Jesus is coming soon! None of this is biblical and it can be easily proven to be in error by applying proper simple biblical hermeneutics.In this article, I will destroy all false logic and doctrine concerning Israel. Without any REAL Jews on the earth there is a big hole in the escapism of all end times teaching. From Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, Tommy Ice, Lalonde, Perry Stone and especially Tim LaHaye coupled with the foolishness of Jerry Falwell they will all have a problem with the truths from God contained within this article. I do believe however, that if Jesus were really coming soon he would throw most of these “Christian Airheads” into outer darkness because they never found out why they are here! These people have failed to realize that everything in heaven is okay and the real battle is down here. Their lives are void of a reality of Christ and they follow a false doctrine that has absolutely no life in it at all.While I would love to take this opportunity to fully expose and kick your rapture fire escape ladder out from under you, I must stay with the matter at hand. The Israel/Christian Hoax. In the end it will punch a big hole in your blow up Jesus filled with helium and escapism. I mentioned all of this foolish escapism because I realize how embedded the false doctrines of Israel, the Temple, and the Jew are in Christianity.I have put together a special life-changing package for you if you are waiting to be "Raptured" off of the planet at the end of this letter. I must warn you it will burn up your fire escape and POP your blow up Jesus. I want to prove the following truths to you about the nation Israel in the Old Testament as well as the nation Israel today.1. Old Testament Israel was Gentile in its origin.2. Old Testament Israel was and never will be again.3. There is no such thing as a Jew based on the blood type of a man.4. The nation Israel today is nothing but another Gentile nation.5. Not one person in Israel today can validate blood lineage to any of the original twelve tribes.6. God never made a covenant with Old Testament Israel based on the blood type of a man.You will have to think. If you do you will see. This is meat for the mature in Spirit. Let’s begin with a simple understanding that Old Testament Israel was Gentile in its origin. God Almighty was going to send the entire world a spiritual message through a select few individuals. From Abraham to Christ, God worked through a few selected individuals to reveal man’s dilemma and his plan for all mankinds. While there was a specific purpose for Old Testament Israel, there is not a single biblical purpose for the nation Israel today.In scripture Abraham is the one man that God chose to be the founding father of what would eventually become the nation Israel in the Old Testament. Abraham would also give us a glimpse of spiritual Israel. Every Christian realizes to some degree that the church is supposed to be "spiritual" Israel. Most Christians have heard this passage but few actually comprehended the gravity of these words. In one sentence, the apostle Paul revealed the ENTIRE spiritual purpose of natural Israel. With an even greater gravity, the same sentence executes the end of natural Israel. Since God started out with Abraham and ended with Christians Gal 3:29 -29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. (KJV)Since God started out with Abraham and ended with Christians becoming the fulfillment of every promise made to Abraham then what was Israel? So what or who was Abraham? Where was he from? Was he a Jew? What is a Jew? Should Old Testament Israel be an example for Christianity or any nation or religion? Who are the people in Israel today? Are they really the people in the Old Testament? After all, who has not seen Charlton Heston in the Ten Commandments? Let My People Go! Are they not God’s chosen people? They are not even close as we shall see. Where did Abraham come from? Gen 11:27-28 -27 This is the genealogy of Terah: Terah begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran. Haran begot Lot.28 And Haran died before his father Terah in his native land, in Ur of the Chaldeans. (NKJ)By all biblical and historical accounts, we must declare that Abraham was a Gentile just like everyone else on the planet when he encountered God. To understand why God selected a few individuals and created a nation in the Old Testament called Israel, you must keep in mind that it had nothing to do with the blood type of a man. When God appeared to Abraham, he was not a Jew. There was no such thing as a Jew, Judaism, a Temple, and the word Israel was an unknown word.Before we can understand the spiritual significance of what God was doing, we must first understand that Israel, the Temple, and the Jew were never a race of people on the earth. Even today, there is no such thing as a Jewish race. When we trace the origin of Abraham we can see that Abraham was from a country that was just a little north of Kuwait. Abraham came from a place that was right in the middle of what most of us now know as the battleground for the Desert Storm war. A country we all know today as Iraq. That Is Right. Abraham Was a Gentile from Iraq.If Anyone Has a Right to Claim Blood Lineage to Abraham that would have to be the divine right of Iraq and Saddam Hussein.With this simple biblical understanding, we must also declare that the other patriarchs in the Old Testament Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph were also Gentiles. In fact, every person that left Egypt in the exodus were also nothing more than Gentiles. What was God doing with this selected group of people in Cecil B. DeMille’s film, The Ten Commandments, proclaiming through Moses (also a Gentile) “Let My People Go?” Are any of the people in Israel today actually related in any manner to any of the people in the Old Testament? They are not even close.Not a single theologian can dispute any of these facts. A rabbi who thinks that he is part of Old Testament Israel cannot dispute these facts. Abraham was a Gentile and so is the rabbi!So what was Israel in the Old Testament? What was God doing with a select group of people? We have already seen that the founding fathers were not of any special blood type. They were Gentiles just like everyone residing in Israel today. That is right. You read correctly. I said everyone in Israel today is nothing more than Gentiles. Not a single individual in Israel today can prove they have any blood lineage to any of the twelve tribes of Old Testament Israel. I will prove it.It does not matter what religion you practice. There is a message for all mankinds from God to you about Himself in the Old Testament. This small group of people was set apart by God to show the entire world man’s dilemma. It would reveal man’s futile attempts to become justified before God by the practice of organized religion, even when God had ordained that very religion.In reality, every religion establishes itself on nothing but faith. Every religion must have the faith to believe that the gods they serve actually exist. Even an atheist has faith, he has to believe that God does not exist. Think about it. An atheist has to believe just as hard that there is not a God, as does a Christian in believing that there is a God. The God of the Old Testament was and always will be the God of faith. He only worked through a few selected individuals in the Old Testament who responded to Him on the basis of faith alone.The God of the Old Testament had a relationship with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph for one reason. They each related to him by faith alone. It had absolutely nothing to do with Jew, Judaism, The Law, or a nation Israel. It is critical for you as a Christian or a non-Christian to understand that the entire nation of the Old Testament Israel existed for only three reasons. READThe birth of a messiah.Heb 1:1-3 - 1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; (KJV)Heb 2:16 -16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Gal 3:14 -14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (KJV)Gal 3:29 - 29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. God started out with Abraham, a Gentile that walked with God by faith, and ended up through Christ offering redemption to all mankind based on one thing, faith and obedience. In the Old Testament God never made a single covenant with anyone based on the blood type of a man. Every covenant that God made with man in the Old Testament was based on one thing, faith, and obedience.I really do not like belaboring this point with you about Old Testament Israel. However, I feel it is critical to take away your inbred assumption that we had a "holy nation" of God's chosen people in the Old Testament Israel. If you will seriously study the Old Testament, you will come to only one conclusion. That nation spent the majority of its existence in REBELLION to God. Yet God continued to work through a few select individuals that related to Him by faith alone. I would say that anyone would be hard pressed to declare any nation wholly serving God. The second reason the nation Israel existed was so that we might learn from their failures how to relate to God by faith alone.Heb 3:16-19 - 16 For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses? 17 Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose corpses fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey? 19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.Faith was never a strong character trait of the majority of the people in Old Testament Israel. The actual number of patriarchs of faith in the Old Testament is quite limited. This is why the nation repeatedly walked in cycles and patterns of sin and disobedience with God.The third and final reason they existed briefly in history as a nation was to give us a clear picture of man’s futile religious attempts to justify himself before God. The whole thing was a complete set up. On one hand, we had a select few individuals like Abraham and patriarchs who related to God by faith and on the other hand, we have the rebellious nation as a whole. So rebellious and faithless were the people that from the minute they left Egypt they rebelled against God. Therefore, God introduced them to the law. By this God was giving the world a clear picture of how futile it is for man to attempt to appear righteous before God by practicing religion and the law.The futility of practicing the law for justification of sin. READ!Gal 3:21-29 -21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law.22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed.24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. I would venture to say there is not one person in all of Israel today that could prove blood lineage to any of the original twelve tribes. As I said previously, the entire nation is full of nothing more than Gentiles from all over the world who are practicing some form of the Old Testament religion of Judaism. Please understand that my comments are not directed at people that want to practice some form of Judaism. I do not care what religion anyone practices. My comments are to Christians that have been taught that there is something special about Israel in order to promote political Christianity.The people in Israel today are from over 100 different countries and speak over 85 different languages. Every true historian also agrees that well over 95 percent of all the “supposed” Jews in Israel today are of the Ashkenaz variety. To simplify a quick understanding of what most historians are saying about what kind of Jew is in Israel, think with me for a moment.Gen 10:1-4 - 1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.4 And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. (KJV)If you believe the Bible, then you must agree that everyone came from three men. These men were the sons of Noah who were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. The people in the Bible from Abraham through Christ were from the line Shem. They were the ones that God took to the wilderness, gave them the law, and promised the world that a messiah would come through them. The Jews that are in Israel today are not from the lineage of Shem. They were not chosen, they did not walk in the wilderness, or receive the law. In fact, they are not even related to anyone in the Old Testament. Not a single person practicing some illegitimate form of Old Testament Judaism in Israel today can prove that they are from the lineage of Shem. Most of the people in Israel today realize they are of the Ashkenaz Gentiles practicing some form of O.T. Judaism. Why would I say an illegitimate form of Old Testament Judaism? They have no offering for SIN according to the OT. If anyone has ever read the OT then you know the specific requirements for offering a sacrifice. Much less the numerous judgments that came immediately from God for offering "strange fire" or a defective sacrifice. If God were truly a part of what is being practiced by the Gentiles in Israel that are practicing some form of OT Judaism there would be many being STRUCK DEAD.So who are the people in Israel today?Most of them are historical descendants originating from the following historical account. Any good history book will validate these facts a long with the Encyclopedia Britannica. Anyone would be hard pressed to find a single historian that would dispute these historical facts. If they could, they would then have to produce someone with PROOF of blood lineage to one of the original twelve tribes. A fact no one can do. King BulanAround the year 700, A. D. there was a King named Bulan that had an empire known as the Turks and Huns. His empire was all along the southern border of Russia, as well as, many parts of Europe. King Bulan decided to adopt a national religion for his country. He inquired about Christianity, Muslim, and Judaism. He selected Judaism as the national religion for his empire.For around 300 years, these people practiced the religion of Judaism. They were not Jews. They were Turks and Huns who were from the lineage of Japheth, certainly not from the lineage of Shem. Please track with me a little more and I promise we will move on. I feel this is relevant to the world we live in today. If you are a Christian and you embrace Judeo-Christian values, I feel it is important that you understand what you are really embracing.After 300 years and nearly eight generations of Turks and Huns practicing Judaism, it should not be that difficult for you to understand that people began to believe that these people were actual Jews. Remember that this happened in a vastly different time period than the high-powered media world that you live in. Over time I am sure the surrounding countries considered them to be Jewish. Around the year 1,000 A. D. a war broke out between Russia and the Turks and Huns (Gentiles) that were practicing OT Judaism as a religion. Russia was the victor. So much so, that they drove the Turks and Huns or supposed Jews, whichever you prefer, completely out of their land. Guess where they drove them? To Poland and Germany. They developed their own language called Yiddish. Yiddish is a medieval German dialect with a mixture of Hebrew. It is not Hebrew. These people married into Polish and German families. They were the people that Hitler singled out for his horrendous Holocaust. None of them were from the lineage of Shem, the actual Jews of the Old Testament. From these Ashkenaz Jews, a movement emerged for political Zionism that would eventually lead to the establishment of the nation Israel that we see today.Really Think About - What Really Happened in Old Testament Israel.Remember God started out with one man that would relate to him by faith alone. Abraham, a Gentile from Iraq. God could have used anyone on the planet. Everyone was a Gentile when God chose Abraham. The selection by God was based on faith, not race, or blood type. No one on the planet ever had divine favor with God because of his or her blood type.In Old Testament IsraelWhen they left Egypt, they were still Gentiles. They wandered in the wilderness for 40 years because they failed to relate to God by faith and obedience. Because they could not relate to God by faith, God added the law. That corrupt nation with the Law given to them directly from God Himself proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that a nation cannot be made justified or moral before God by observing a single natural civil or moral law. Morally and ethically the Old Testament example of Israel proved they were incapable of obeying both civil and moral laws, even when that Law came to them directly from the finger of God Himself. They were not the example for the world to follow. A thousand times no! At best, they were the worst and best natural example from God Himself of what will never work.I personally feel that Old Testament Judaism practiced the law to perfection and Christianity prostitutes the grace and mercy of God to perfection. God has already sent forth judgment upon the men in this generation that prostitutes the Gospel for a dollar. You will see it happen! If He does not come in this generation with judgment; then He must resurrect the Pharisees and apologize to them. Jesus declared that they were of "their father the devil." If they were pronounced to be the sons of satan then what are the men of this generation? Today it is not hard to comprehend that Jesus would make the same declaration to the supposed "anointed leaders" of this generation who are not anointed, but are nothing more than self appointed businessmen. In the end you will find no hypocrisy in the King of Heaven! He will declare to the men of this generation "You are of your father the devil."Even governmentally the leaders of Old Testament Israel were selected, anointed, and appointed by God Himself just as he gives some apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and teachers to the church. From the beginning of King Saul through King David and Solomon, election in Israel was by divine appointment. This was a type and shadow for the reality of what the church (spiritual Israel) was to become.The entire New Testament exposes the futility of Judaism in its attempt to obtain justification with God by practicing the Law. The entire nation existed for a couple of reasons biblically and that was to expose man’s sin problem and his need for a Redeemer. That is why the Temple and the Levitical priesthood were destroyed completely in 70 A. D. The last prophecy recorded about the Temple was spoken by Christ Himself when he declared that there would not be one stone left standing. That prophecy is still in effect today! Matt 24:1-2 - 1 Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down." Furthermore, Christ declared that the entire Levitical priesthood had become so corrupt that they were of their father of the devil as I have previously stated. However there is more understanding to yet be discovered. While they claimed Abraham to be their father, they were still clueless of how to relate to God by faith and obedience alone. Read these profound words.John 8:44 - 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (KJV)If you are a Christian stop and think with me about what Christ was not only saying but also doing. The Son of God was actually proclaiming that the very institution ordained from God had become so corrupt that Satan was in charge. Few realize that Jesus' ministry accomplished TWO things. Salvation for mankinds and the destruction of organized religion even when God ordained that religion. His ministry exposed the futility and corruption that can infiltrate a religious system. Is it any wonder that after 2000 years we would find it odd that the enemy controls the pulpit? Furthermore, his manner of speaking in these two scriptures clearly exposed that God was going to abolish not only the Temple but the futility of the Levitical priesthood as well. Jesus pronounced judgment on the very system that God had ordained. Historically, we can see his word was true. There is no Temple and there never will be a legitimate Levitical priesthood again! I am sure the Ashkenaz Gentiles practicing Judaism in Israel today may eventually create some biblical form of Old Testament Judaism. When they do, it will be about as bogus as Christians giving them creditability based on blood type of a man! A vastly overlooked part of the ministry of Christ is his open condemnation of corrupt organized man-made religion. If you are a Christian and do not see that the Old Testament, the Temple, and Judaism under the law was defective, then what are you doing in the church? If you do not understand that natural Old Testament Israel was an example of what God does not want from a church, shame on you. Old Testament Israel was not an example of how a nation or a church should serve God. Have you any idea how much of a REPROACH it is to God to send money to Israel in hopes of helping them rebuild the temple one day? The foolishness of Christianity and the Israeli Hoax is a massive deception. To think that you are living in the last days waiting for the Anti Christ to walk in the temple and proclaim himself to be God is just plain stupid. Who has bewitched you? Yes, they were real people with real lives and we are to learn from their lives. They were nothing more than a tutor so that we might gain understanding of how to walk with God by faith alone. They were failures at faith so that we might see and learn. God used a few men of faith and millions who failed to teach us all. He kept the law isolated to this small group of mainly rebellious people in order to teach everyone that He is the God of faith! He also kept the law isolated to this small group of people to expose the futility of man’s attempt to justify his flesh with ordinances and observances. He kept the law isolated to this small group of people to expose the deathtrap of organized man made religion. This was not a message just for Christianity; it was a clear message for all religions on the earth created by man.They are not an example of a godly nation then and especially not now. How could anyone today expect a goat, a sheep, or even a red heifer to pay for their own immoral sinful behavior? Only pagan forms of witchcraft have animal sacrifices today equal to what took place in Old Testament Israel. God Himself abolished Israel, the Temple, and the Jew. He used them to expose man’s need for salvation apart from the law and organized religion. READ!Heb 10:1-9 - 1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. 5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you had no pleasure. 7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come— in the volume of the book it is written of Me— to do Your will, O God.' “ 8 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. (NKJ)Judaism and those who attempt to practice it is still the most incomplete religion on the earth today. They talk about Moses and the Law, yet they do not have atonement for sin according to their own religious Old Testament beliefs. My reason for addressing Judaism so openly and blatantly is because of its supposed ties to Christianity. Real Christianity knows that they are the fulfillment of the promises of the God of the Old Testament. There never has been and there never will be a covenant with the one true God based on the blood type of a man. As it was for believing Abraham (the Gentile) so it will be for you also, only faith and obedience. God started out with a Gentile that related to him by faith. If you are a Christian that relates to God by faith, you are the total fulfillment of the very reason Old Testament Israel existed. READ THAT LAST SENTENCE AGAIN. End of story! There is nothing past that!If you are a Christian, you must also recognize that many people do not desire to be a part of your denominational Christianity. With all of the hypocrisy within Christianity today, is it any wonder why. Denominationalism is nothing more than racism in its purest form within the Body of Christ. If we can find the real Body of Christ, there will not be a denomination. It will not be this ethereal movement of unity that you hear so much about today where we can all come together as one. A thousand times no! It will be the total opposite. There will be a clear a separation by a group of people who will not compromise truth for a chance to eat a meal with those who embrace false doctrines of demons.When you hear the cry for Unity, Denominationalism, READ this.1 Cor 5:9-13 - 9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner-- not even to eat with such a person. 12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside?13 But those who are outside God judges. Therefore "put away from yourselves the evil person." (NKJ)In your religious Christian piety you must realize that God alone opens the eyes of the blind and not you. Preaching the gospel is not trying to shove your brand of organized denominational religion down everyone else’s throat. There are few that really know how to preach the Gospel because there are few willing to PAY the price. Learn to love, accept, and forgive those who are spiritually blind by walking in meekness before God and man. Then, perhaps you will become real salt and real light and not just another religious hypocrite like the Pharisees in the Old Testament.Contend for the Real FaithRick Johnston

As a student of the History of the Jews let me first off warn anyone who reads this tractate that it is so filled with misrepresentations, error and falsehood, that I should have to spend the whole of a month exposing it all. It is difficult to read all at once because it evokes such resentment.

Here is a good place to start if you are really interested in Jewish/Christianity issues. This is a very long thread- but contains a wealth of debate.The Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith

This is all rather contradictory it seems. From the standpoint of what he is attempting to state, it seems to recall the idea of seting up a scarecrow (Edit: Ah... "Straw-man" to be more accurate) and knocking it back down again...Stranger still, perusing his site, with links to many that would find some common amens here... Art Katz? Don't know how possibly more confusing than combing this here with Art's particular sentiments you could get.With you as well Robert, much was lost in credulity right from the get go. The heart, why is the heart being so slighted... just the first principles, evaded.

This is where he lost me:Please understand that my comments are not directed at people that want to practice some form of Judaism. I do not care what religion anyone practices. Secondly,If Anyone Has a Right to Claim Blood Lineage to Abraham that would have to be the divine right of Iraq and Saddam Hussein.But didn't Abraham LEAVE UR (present day IRAQ) and settle in present day Israel...therefore the people of Iraq don't have much blood lineage to Abraham because he left with his entire family.That is similar to saying the following:John Doe was born in Canada, then him and his entire family left and went to Britian, therefore if anyone can claim to be a decendant of John Doe it is the Canadians. When is all truth...it is the Britians.

mmh? do I want to get into this?I dislike the whole spirit of the article and would never call the current understanding a hoax. However, I do struggle with the general consensus of evangelicals (esp in the USA) that there is a detailed future programme for the 'restored Israel' and that they will be the end time evangelists. I have said enough on my comments on Art Katz' eschatology elsewhere on this site.I do think there is a lot of thinking about the connections between the words Jew/Israel/Abraham/ which I cannot receive. With so much of this I just have to say 'I am not convinced'. I am not convinced that the nation state of Israel is the carrier of the ancient promises to Israel.I am often branded as 'replacement theology' although I don't like this phrase personally. Some things are clearly 'replaced', some are 'fulfilled'.

Quote:"Hmmm... Replacement Theology to the core."Hi Krispy,Does Replacement Theology basically state that because the Jews have rejected their own Messiah, they are no longer the chosen people of God, and the old covenant has ended. (cut off from the vine so to speak) and that Christians having accepted the Messiah are Gods new chosen people, and the new covenant begins? (graphed on to vine so to speak)If this is what Replacement Theology is, then what are the specific problems you find with it and what are some good resources dealing with both sides of the issue.Thanks Krispy,

Dorcas, I did not add the following part, and I did not write the article or consider it to be Truth, but merely one mans opinion -“READ Carefully You will have to think … these truths once understoodWill change your Faith forever.”That is how the article read. Sorry if this “falls way below” the usually standard you have come to expect from me. And yes I absolutely can hear the attitude and condensation in this article. Some of what Rick Johnson has to say is pretty good and some is really, really bad. I don’t have much experience in this specific subject and am looking for Scriptural accuracy and verification on both points of view. I am interested in finding out more about the relation between the Old Testament Jews and the Jews that occupy the current nation of Israel and other countries around the world. I am familiar with some of what Art Katz and Michael Brown have to say on the subject, but am not sure that I 100% agree with such an interpretation and point of view. I am also interested in finding out more about what I think some refer to as “Replacement Theology” and why people would consider it Scriptural or un-Scriptural.I respect the knowledge and opinions of many posters here on SI, so I am looking to them for some opinions, thoughts and answers. Rick Johnston website is www.gotosimpletruth.com He speaks out strongly against the TBN crowd (which is probably how I ran across him) and many others most of us would consider false teachers, but I could find nothing about Art Katz on his site, but I’m sure he would probable consider Art a false teacher. (which I certainly do not - Art is one of my favorite teachers and speakers of all time and a true and rare man of God- even though I’m not sure I agree 110% with every last word he speaks) Anyway sorry if I picked a bad article to start such a discussion, but nonetheless any comments on the subject would be helpful in my studies.Thanks

Hi Patrick,First my apologies, got a little mixed up there. The site you have linked below your signature was what I was referencing earlier in regards to Art Katz. I thought this is where the original article had generated from, my mistake. Sorry for the confusion.The link you have to Rick Johnston was directing to a web hosting site of sorts, the reason being that at the end you had a "." at the end of .com(.)I took the liberty to remove that "." so it directs to the correct site. A lot of time it is helpful to put the title of an article in italics or bold text to show a division and beginning or even a series of ~~~~~~~~~. Just so there is a point of leaving off 'our' own words and those of another. There are some posts around here that spell out how to use HTML or the 'language' for doing this.Anyway sorry if I picked a bad article to start such a discussion, but nonetheless any comments on the subject would be helpful in my studies.Think Roberts suggestions earlier would be helpful. There was a lot of ground covered previously in this area and just to keep from repeating much of the same things again. But as to a discussion, think while it is something that can become a flash point for controversy that hopefully it can be done in the right spirit as with all things here.Don't have a full orbed running thought about a lot of this area, much to learn and much that is just kind of held in abeyance. I don't know if I find for instance Art Katz's take on things to be essentially true or more accurately, it's almost besides the point to me personally... I find him endearing because of his love for the truth and for want of a real reality in this walk and can find that even with the uncertainty of his particular end times views, and that would be the same for most of them. Actually becoming even less of a 'pan' millinest (It will all 'pan' out) and am leaning heavily towards.. It will happen, I don't know when... "No opinion" :-?

Some of you might be interested in hearing the 4-part teaching series by Steve Gregg on this topic. It's pretty thorough stuff. Just go to www.thenarrowpath.com and link to his "Tape Download Page." Then scroll down and find the series titled "What Are We To Make Of Israel?"

OK, let's make a start.What do we mean by 'replacement theology'?Heb. 8:7 (KJVS)For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. Heb. 10:9 (KJVS)Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. I think this second quotation might almost serve as a definition for the word 'replacement'. This is not addition, expansion, absorption, or even fulfillment; this is 'replacement'. To remove one thing and put another thing in the 'place' where the first stood is pretty much what I understand 're-place-ment' to mean. ;-) This may only be a small step for a man... but can we agree it? Do we agree that 'something' has been 'replaced' here? If so, we can move on to the second question...What has been replaced? I am not meaning to be patronising but just wanting to go a step at a time. A covenant has been replaced. Yes? What covenant has been replaced? The 'first covenant'! The 'first covenant' has been replaced. Everyone happy so far? ;-)What was the 'first covenant'? It was the covenant that Moses mediated.Heb. 8:5 (KJVS)Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. Heb. 8:6 (KJVS)But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Can I suggest that we read Heb 8:1-13 again, even if we know it well. There is a running contrast throughout this passage between two mediators and two covenants. The Jews of Christ's day seem to have had a fairly clear idea of where his teaching was going;John 9:28 (KJVS) Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples. This was heading for an 'either/or' conclusion.If we are agreed that the second covenant replaces the first covenant we then need to examine the terms of the first covenant; its participants, its maintenance, its goals, its scope, its duration. I'll pause to see if we are together so far... ;-)

Hi Ron,I think this second quotation might almost serve as a definition for the word 'replacement'. This is not addition, expansion, absorption, or even fulfillment; this is 'replacement'. To remove one thing and put another thing in the 'place' where the first stood is pretty much what I understand 're-place-ment' to mean. This may only be a small step for a man... but can we agree it?Absolutely. Even the Messianics I know would agree with this, but of course they would have an asterisk and a note to the apendix in the back. ;-)What has been replaced? I am not meaning to be patronising but just wanting to go a step at a time. A covenant has been replaced. Yes? What covenant has been replaced? The 'first covenant'! The 'first covenant' has been replaced. Everyone happy so far? :-)If we are agreed that the second covenant replaces the first covenant we then need to examine the terms of the first covenant; its participants, its maintenance, its goals, its scope, its duration. I'll pause to see if we are together so far..Together so far.I think the point I would wish to make is not that the Jews are in any way valid in their futile attempt to serve God through Rabbinic Judaism- because they are not valid in this. For those unaware this is not the Judaism of the Old Testament- it is not even the grossly modified version of Judaism of the Intertestamental and later Temple period (397 BC to 70 CE). It is a new(er) religion that came about as the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD (CE) when the Pharisees fled to Jamnia (Yavneh). For those unfamiliar I will post a minor history of that next.God Bless,-Robert

RABBI AKIBAS FALSE MESSIAH Compiled by Robert Wurtz II When it comes to understanding the significance of this particular segment, it is important to realize the impact that "one man" by the name of Rabbi Akiba Ben Joseph has had on modern Rabbinic Judaism and the Jews. I personally believe it would be next to impossible to overstate the negative impact this one man has had on the cause of God in the earth concerning His people the Jews. He is the closest “type” of the the false prophet of the book of Revelation that we have yet to see and his FALSE MESSIAH Simon Bar Kochba has been a “type” of the ANTI CHRIST to the Jews for almost 1900 years. After 70 CE and the destruction of the Temple, Rome attempted to stifle the Jews desire to revolt by bringing in pagans to strengthen the non-Jewish population and by founding cities with names like Flavia Neapolis and Flavia Ioppe. There was also a heavy tax imposed by them called the "fiscus iudaicus" on the Jews of Israel and the diaspora. They also minted coins to remind the Jews that Jerusalem had been destroyed which read “Iudaea devicta” or more simply “Judah Defeated.” The Romans then recruited Yohanan ben Zakkai and the group of Pharisees that followed him to help them rule the Jews. This grew into a national government under the Romans. Yavneh, or Jamnia (In Greek), became the center of Rabbinic authority. Gamaliel II joined Zakkai and with the help of Rome ruled the people until they had put down ALL the other competing Pharasiac groups that would compete with them for influence and AUTHORITY. However, from 90 CE onward rebellion and unrest continued to grow against Rome and ANYONE that competed with them for authority. The non-believing Jews were CURSING the Nazerenes and other “heretical” sects (sects not in step with their Rabbinic cause) with the Birkat ha Minim and it would not be long until Rome likewise would be on the receiving end of the academy at Yavneh’s thirst for POWER and AUTHORITY. Over the next 50 years a concerted effort to establise the total rule of the Rabbi’s was well towards being completed. Rabbi Akiba ultimately is responsible for driving the last nail into the coffin of the seperation of the Jewish Christians (Nazarenes) and the non-believing Jews (and all other competing groups as well). When Akiba exalted Bar Kochba to be Messiah the Nazarenes could not tolerate this and it spelled the end of that relationship. I believe it was an INTENTIONAL act on Akiba's part to ultimately seize authority and alienate the Nazarenes and their influence. it was also strategic in that is exceedingly made the Nazareens look like they were unpatriotic, etc.. According to McClintock and Strong “BarKochba, son of the star, or SIMEON BAR-COCHBA, was the Jewish false Messiah who applied to himself the prophecy of Balaam (Numbers 24:17), and incited the Jews to revolt against the emperor Hadrian (A.D. 130). He passed himself off for the Messiah, and his pretensions were supported by Akiba, the chief of the Sanhedrin. The better to deceive the credulous Jews, according to Jerome, he pretended to vomit flames, by means of a piece of lighted tow which he kept in his mouth. Bar-Kochba profited by the seditious state in which he found the Jews, and took Jerusalem in A.D. 132. He issued coins having on one side his own name, and on the other "Freedom of Jerusalem." (end of quote) He was a very violent man who was proported to once cut a finger off of thousands of his troops to keep them in subjection. I would characterize him as a throw back from the days of the Sacarii. He kept his troops in subjection by vile atrocities. Both him and Akiba were sorely judged for their behavior through unimaginable violent deaths (filleting, etc.)—but the Rabbi’s later exalted them as martyrs and heroes. They established an entire system of Judaism founded by a man who had deceived the people that Bar Kochba was the Messiah. This resulted in the death of Israel as the land of God’s people for centuries. After the Romans put their uprising down they renamed Jerusalem "Elia Capitolina" and renamed Israel PALISTINE as a mockery of them before the Philistines (Palistine is not what the land of Israel was called in the time of Jesus as many bible maps suggest). Thousands were killed and the Jews were evicted from the land until just about the last 100 years. Of all the mysteries in all my studies of the Jews, the greatest one of all is how so many non-believing Jews persecuted the Nazerenes, Ebionites, and Messianists because they siad they followed a “false Messiah” and yet they EXALT Akiba over Abraham, Moses, David, and God Almighty and he appointed the false messiah Bar Kochba. That is a hypocrisy that can’t possibly be explained. Notes:* No material from this lesson was taken from Internet sources.* Quotes are labeled from their sources.* Information is a synthesis of lectures and particularly excerpts from Daniel Gruber's bold and revealing book "Rabbi Akiba's Messiah" (The Origins of Rabbinic Authority). I recommend this book to everyone interested in the issue of why modern Jews do not believe in Christ as their Messiah. It is an integeral part of understanding so key issues. It is published by:Elijah PublishingBox 776Hanover, NH 03755

So how did the Rabbinic Jews just take over and lock the people up in thise false religion? Did they not have to deal with God Himself? We deal with issues of God being in authority in the Church today. Read how the Rabbi's dealt God out of the picture completely! IT IS NOT IN HEAVEN (Bath Kol) By Robert Wurtz II There reached a point when the credibility of an “audible voice from Heaven” had to be contended with. An audible voice from God was considered authoritative in all matters in the time of Christ among the Jews. But there were too many cases in the New Testament when this happened and it authenticated the New Testament and Christ (among other things). There was only one way for the Rabbi’s to deal with this and it was with one fail swoop of a statement… “IT IS NOT IN HEAVEN!” Consider the commonly told story of how this came about. This adaptation is from Lightfoot Commentary on Mark 8, but is commonly found in many sources: "On that day, R. Eliezer answered to all the questions in the whole world, but they hearkened not to him. He said therefore to them, 'If the tradition be according to what I say, let this siliqua [a kind of tree] bear witness.' The siliqua was rooted up, and removed a hundred cubits from its place: there are some who say four hundred. They say to him, 'A proof is not to be fetched from a siliqua.' He saith to them again, 'If the tradition be with me, let the rivers of waters testify': the rivers of waters are turned backward. They say to him, 'A proof is not to be fetched from the rivers of waters.' He said to them again, 'If the tradition be with me, let the walls of the school testify': the walls bowed, as if they were falling. R. Josua chid them, saying, 'If there be a controversy between the disciples of the wise men about tradition, what is that to you?' Therefore the walls fell not in honour of R. Josua. Yet they stood not upright again in honour of R. Eliezer. He said to them, moreover, 'If the tradition be with me, let the heavens bear witness.' The Bath Kol went forth and said, 'Why do ye contend with R. Eliezer, with whom the tradition always is?' R. Jonah rose up upon his feet, and said, 'It is not in heaven' (Deut 30:12). What do these words, 'It is not in heaven,' mean? R. Jeremiah saith, When the law is given from mount Sinai, we do not care for the Bath Kol." According to Daniel Gruber there is five major things that this story teaches:1. The Rabbis do not accept the miraculous in determining the correctness of a teaching or tradition. Deuteronomy does warn against following someone with a sign, if they are proclaiming let us go after other gods. So signs can be in an anti-God context.But the issue with Rabbi Eliezar doesn’t fall into this category, since he wasn’t talking about following other gods. It wasn’t a question of idolatry but AUTHORITY. Can proof be brought from a carob tree or a stream of water or a voice from heaven? Scriptures says so. (E.g., Aaron’s rod, or blood in Nile, fleece of Gideon.)2. The Rabbis paid no attention to a heavenly voice (Bath Kol) after Sinai.Rabbi Joshua says, "lo ba-shamayim hi, It is not in heaven." So after Sinai, we pay no attention to a heavenly voice. This is quite convenient considering how God spoke from Heaven concerning Jesus SEVERAL times in the New Testament. The ruling was quite ex post facto. Yet throughout Scripture a voice from Heaven from God speaks out in Job, Psalms, and Ezekiel, God DID speak from Heaven. Indeed, everywhere else in Talmud itself, a voice from Heaven is authoritative.3. The authority to determine what is acceptable does not rest with God but with the majority. Pay no attention to a heavenly voice (bath kol). Yet in Exodus 23:2. "You shall follow a multitude to do evil," by implication you must follow a multitude to do good. But who defines good? In the story, God didn’t know he had decreed this! He didn’t know that he’d given up his authority to the majority of Rabbis(?!). In Tanakh (Old Testament), the majority is almost always wrong! Throughout Tanakh, God acts as if he’s still in charge, bringing judgment upon the majority when it is in sin.4. Yet this story portrays God as laughing, "My sons have defeated (outwitted) me!" Yet is God ever portrayed in Tanakh this way? Are men ever smarter than God?It’s a humorous story when you read it, but when you think of it, it’s not so funny. Contrast Psalm 2 and other references to God laughing, in supreme authority.5. The Rabbis will excommunicate anyone who will not submit to their decision.This is not normative first century Judaism.It’s fitting that it’s Rabbi Eliezar the Great that’s been excommunicated, circa 115 CE.Consider these cases in Scripture when a VOICE from Heaven Spoke (bath kol)Genesis 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?Genesis 22:11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.Exodus 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.Deuteronomy 4:33 Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?Job 38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,Daniel 4:31 While the word was in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, saying, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken; The kingdom is departed from thee.Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.Mark 9:7 And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.Luke 9:35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.John 12:28-30 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.Acts 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.2 Peter 1:17,18 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.Revelation 10:4 And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.Revelation 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.Revelation 14:2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.Notes: “Five major things” taken from notes and supplemented: "The Day the Rabbis Were Wrong" Yeshiva course at Messiah 2000 taught by Daniel Gruber)“Consider this list “compiled by: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/butterfly/rev/bathkol.htm or philologos.orgGoogle yields 1,190 entries for “bath kol”(Encyclopedic Dictionary of Judaica)Lightfoot commentary can be found at:http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/mark/light/mark8.htmDaniel Gruber "Rabbi Akiba's Messiah" c. 1999 Elijah PublishingBox 776 Hanover, NH 03755

There is much more that could be said as to how subverted the things of God had become and how the Rabbi's assumed authority. They are still in authority as far as those who practice Orthodox Judaism is concerned. So what we have here is a people that have been raised up generation after generation after generation locked up in the falsehood of Rabbinic Judaism. They do not look to the Old Testament (Torah) as many think they do- they look at the Talmud as being in authority. The Talmud is a combination of Oral Law and traditions + former Rabbi's writings and rulings. They are taught from childhood that Christians have used the cross as a sword against them for 1600+ years shedding their blood and persecuting them on the right hand and the left. And they have a tremendous amount of history to fortify this teaching. They believe Luther to be partly responsible for Mein Komph and Hitlers diabolic philosophy because of the tractate "On the Jews and their Lies". Because of all this- we have a people group- however we want to define them- that can be traced back to Israel- however complicated that may be- who are locked up in falsehood. I can give several reasons as to why I am certain they have a direct link with the people of the Old Testament genetically, culturally, and religiously. Some have already been given in this thread. The issue of the nation state of Israel is different to me all together. The people who have that specific identity as Jews who have maintained that identity- distorted and marred though it be- in almost every country of the world are the Jews. Not the Jews that are Jews inwardly- who serve God in the Spirit and have no confidence in the flesh- but the Jews who are the children of those who rejected Christ and are locked up in the doctrine of the Pharisees. Are they saved in their Rabbinic Judaism? Nay verily! Do they need the Gospel? Absolutely! Am I to drop everything and try to reach them at this moment? Only as God leads and opens opportunity.

Patrick,I did not read the entire article, but I am familiar with its concept. [Some] Amelleniumism (sp?) will work hard to debunk Jews and any possible role they may have in the future. It seems to me that if you have to work so hard to destroy peoples' appreciation of Jews, you must be pretty desperate and this s not the way thinking Christians act, is it? This my understanding on this issue because I have heard it before.ginnyrose

KrispyFrom your latest post I think I shall have to plead guilty to 'replacement theology' in most of your points. I still think the phrase is confusing. you sayThere are really only two views, either the Church is a continuation of Israel (Replacement Theology) Ought that not to be 'Continuation Theology'? How can 'continuation' be described as 'replacement'?Would you be prepared to agree that the verses I quoted from Hebrews point to some kind of 'replacement'? If so, what kind of replacement?I don't subscribe to premillenial dispensationalism, so I guess that's another strike against me.

[Some] Amelleniumism (sp?) will work hard to debunk Jews and any possible role they may have in the future. I think a lot of the eschatological teachings of the last 170 years have been very destructive and counter productive to the cause of Christ. Ravenhill repeatedly points this out. As a young Christian I was fascinated with end time things, but as I read the Bible I realized that a lot of those charts could not possibly be right. Way too many anomolies in them. I say just be ready for what ever comes. Be a true martyr- ready to live and die for Christ. I figure if I prepare for the worst case scenerio then if I am pleasantly surprised by some other happening (such as a pre trib Rapture)- then I am ready anyway. I have nothing to lose by being ready for the worst- I have much to lose if I am caught un-prepared. Either way I don't get caught up in all the end time prophesies, dispensationalism, ect. etc. Nor do I necessarily take the views of those who see the Jews as critical to end time prophecy. The messianics will blast a pretrib person and ask them- "Why it is the pretrib guys believe the Jews need to suffer more anyhow? How many halocausts are they supposed to go through for rejecting Christ? What about the Gentiles who reject Christ and sin highhandedly in light? where is their judgment?etc. etc. " See what I mean?God Bless,-Robert

Hi Ron,I don't subscribe to premillenial dispensationalism, so I guess that's another strike against me.I would be interested to hear your eschatological views sometime. ;-) I have always wondered, but never could piece it together from your audio and text messages. Maybe I just have not found the right one yet.God Bless,-Robert

Hi Robert, I have a feeling he may subscribe to the "pan-trib" viewpoint!Ron - ;-)

There are web sites that use DNA tests to find your ancestral blood line. People that are into genealogy sometimes use web site data bases to extend their family genealogy charts. The DNA tests are suppose to tell the percents of your ancestry from regions on earth and sometimes where your ancestors migrated from. One of the DNA blood lines is suppose to go back to Aaron.I’ve always understood the following scripture to be a prophesy that is to be fulfilled near the second coming of Christ to the earth. It is my understanding that there will be a Jewish remnant that will finally recognize Jesus during the tribulation.Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. In Christ,GaryE

Hi Robert, I have a feeling he may subscribe to the "pan-trib" viewpoint!Pan-trib? :-?

by the way what is pan-trib?

Pan-trib is the belief that whether the rapture takes place pre-tribulation or post-tribulation everything will "pan" out alright! 8-)

Hi Neil,I'm sorry you were not strengthened by them. Hopefully you have a better understanding of where the Jewish people are in terms of their religion if you were to encounter one. Your comments sound selfish, but maybe thats just how thay 'sound'.

Vituperativeness (n) - Using, containing, or marked by harshly abusive censure.I had to look it up so I thought I would post it.. :-P

Hi Neil,I was born a Jew, I was raised a Jew, I was taught in the synagogues, I was bar-mitzvahed in a synagogue, so I believe that I might have passed the "encounter" litmus.I recall that it your testimony and am quite surprised at your reaction. I seemed to have touched a nerve. My apologies. The articles were taken directly from the previous study of this topic which I alluded to with the link. Don't make me say how your comments sound.You can if you wish, I have a thick skin. It would not be the first time I had been skinned by a Jewish Believer in Christ. ;-) However, it would be the first time to have the contents of what I posted ripped by a believing Jew as I received the information directly from their materials and my studies with them. I believe I have been faithful in my dealings with both the Jew and Gentile side of these issues. As a general rule, I have been the point of contact in many situations for the Church as it is defined today (how ever one may define it) in Messianic contexts in heated debates. I took a considerable amount of fire from both Jew and Gentile over the years. I'm used to it. Any quarel with the contents of the posts? God Bless,-Robert

Hi Neil,Good to hear from you again brother, and I agree with what you have to say,Yes Neil, you are absolutely correct. R. Johnson defines himself by what he is against and with all the things we see that has happened to the church in the past 50 to 100 years I think that is a trap we must all be careful to not fall into ourselves. I have personally been guilty of that in the past and have to check myself from time to time on an ongoing basis. I remember about six month ago Jesus speaking to me very clearly and in no uncertain terms that I had better start talking and writing and defining my self by what I am for - Him. This was not a still small voice or suggestion but a direct command as loud and clear as a bell.I am pretty sure that R. Johnson thinks he is the only correct teacher out there and everyone else is false. As far as I can tell he supports nobody else's teachings except his own. (RED FLAG) This is a terrible and sad condition to find ones self in, but does not mean that he is 100% incorrect on 100% of what he says. I think I ran across his site when I was looking for some information on Joyce Myers to give to a friend who was attending her performance last time when she was in town.I am not looking to start some fight of words or some endless back and forth trying to prove the other interpretation wrong. I am interested in studying and learning about different ideas and the Scriptures used to back them up concerning “Replacement Theology” and “Premillenial Dispensationalism” I would love hear your thoughts on the subject. I am searching for the truth with an open mind. I can assure you that I am not trying to open a can of worms but rather trying gather views from each side in order to better my understand and grow in my knowledge of the subject. I am not trying to strengthen the Body so to speak - just looking for some theological insight from some people who I respect and who may know more than I do about certain things. :-) P.S. I did see how Johnson racked Doc Brown over the coal. Disgusting in my opinion. He is absolutely wrong. Dr. Brown is certainly not 100% right in everything he says and his theology (no man is - me and you included) but I respect his heart for God and Truth and have learned a lot for his teachings and writings

I have to ask you this, How do these "compilations" and "histories" that you just presented in this thread strengthen the Body of believers on this forum?Sorry, I forgot to answer this one question. The reason for the short compilations to bring awareness is that most Christians have no idea what is going on when it comes to the Jews. I know I did not and thought I had a good grip on the issues. I still need to continue my studies. The topic just keeps unfolding. Many are simply not aware of where a person who practices Judaism at any real level is coming from. They have no idea about the years of persecution coming from Christians over the centuries or any of the non-Jewish related issues. On the flip side of that coin even fewer would understand the history of how things got here. My little blurb is just that. It is a sorely truncated history of how New Testament Judaism became Rabbinic Judaism. Moreover, I did not start this thread. The first post in this thread set out to dismiss the existence of the Jews from the beginning. I take great issue with that. If I error in my defense- may I always have errored on the side of the defense of such a people. If I offend in my defense then I can work only with the best means I have available. If I err in my heart may it be in my zeal for God and His people.God Bless,-Robert

RobertThanks for your input on all this. I am going to go very slowly otherwise I am going to be taking balls from all directions at the same time.One of the problems that I have previously mentioned on this topic is of terms. Jews/Israel/Judaism - are these synonyms? For some reading this my next comment will be a giant stride and not a single step but 'is there any biblical justification for Judaism in any of its present forms?' It seems to me that modern day Judaism is a pragmatic replacement for the practice of the 'first covenant' and I would like to open this out a little at this point.The 'first covenant' was a package deal and its elements cannot be separated from each other. It was established with a law and a priesthood. “For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.” (Heb. 7:12, KJVS) I think we should notice the deliberate way in which this is expressed 'of necessity'. If there had been no 'law' there would have been no necessity for a 'priesthood'. But God gave a law and obedience to that law was an essential part of the making of the first covenant.“Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.” (Ex. 19:5-6, KJVS)Speaking in programming terms this is a classic 'if/then' statement. In such a computer programme a section of the programme is unaccessible unless the necessary conditions have been met. If the conditions are not met the programme will either stop in its tracks or move on to some other section. These opening words of the covenant making between God and people who had been delivered from bondage in Egypt are vitally important to our understanding of the nature of the 'first covenant'.We must ask ourselves what the outcome will be if the people do not accept or fulfill the conditions? We must conclude that in such a case the people WOULD NOT BE a peculiar treasure above all people, and that the people WOULD NOT BE a kingdom of priests, and that the people WOULD NOT BE an holy nation. This is the plain consequence of such a conditional statement in grammar or programming. God, of course, knew that the people would renege on their side of the covenant and that consequently the 'covenant' would be rendered null and void. The reason it did not cancel it was because God instituted a priestly system with sacrifices which enabled God to 'continue to dwell' among this people. The priestly system provided both gifts and sacrifices for sin, and we know that they all prefigured Christ. What would happen then to such a covenant if the priestly system were inoperable? It would be ruined instantly and irretrievably.The simple point I am making is that the 'first covenant' cannot operate without a priesthood. The 'law' and its accompanying 'priesthood' are inseparable. If they become separated there is no forgiveness, no reconciliation and no 'people of the covenant'. The Levitical priesthood no longer functions and modern day Judaism cannot fill the gap. Robert frequently tells us the number of laws in modern Judaism; I have forgotten the number, please remind us. If these are 'God's laws' and are broken there is no remission of sins possible for these transgressions. Heb. 9:22 (KJVS) And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. Modern Judaism, even if it were valid, could only add to the terrible list of transgressions; it has no means of remitting them.That leaves us with some important questions. Is modern Judaism a mistake or a rebellion? Either way, it has no validity and can safely be removed as a element from this particular thread.

Hey Nasher! That was my line! You need to come up with your own material! your line? I first heard that from Denis Clark in the UK in 1968 and it has been going the rounds since. 8-)

Strength: May I Encourage You?We must not limit the power of God or his Strength inside of us. His word says that his Strength is made PERFECT in our WEAKNESS.In saying this, immediately the Holy Spirit reminds me of JESUS. Who strengthened Jesus when he had to stand before Caiaphas, before Pontius Pilate, when he was taken into the Praetorium and stripped and had a crown twisted of thorns placed on his Head?When he was spit on and mocked, when he was given sour wine with gall to drink, who strengthen him? Who strengthened him when he was being crucified, when he had nails being pierced into his flesh and a sword piercing his side, who strengthened him?I’m sorry to say, that I can’t! I can not nor will I ever be able to strengthen you with the strength that was given to him, to bear all of this because he loves us. I can howeverRemind you that he LIVES, that his word is true, that his strength is true; I can remind you that his word says that in our weakness we are made strong, because his strength is made perfect in us.

Hi Ron,First my apologies to all (especially Neil) for not being more tactful in my posts. It seems to me that modern day Judaism is a pragmatic replacement for the practice of the 'first covenant' and I would like to open this out a little at this point.It is. The various Temple rituals are replaced by what are called "Tzedekiah" (sp?) or "acts of righteousness" (good deeds). Because the Law is "outdated" (as it were) an entire system of halakah was developed. This was what our Lord was referring to when He talked about "tradition" (making void the law, etc.). Today when we say 'halakah' we mean the collective corpus of Jewish rabbinic law, custom and tradition. It guides all aspect of life because Rabbinic Jews view life sacred and secular as one and the same. The Rabbi's (as I understand this) assumed the authority to keep the law as relevant as possible to the people with the Temple not in service. Things were merely adapted to keep the system propped up. in other words, the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, which should have brought things to a halt, was essentially replaced by the whole of Rabbic Judaism. Jews/Israel/Judaism - are these synonyms?I will try to be more pedantic in this. The answer is no, technically speaking. We may need to define these terms and keep that definition clear as we dialogue.Robert frequently tells us the number of laws in modern Judaism; I have forgotten the number, please remind us. If these are 'God's laws' and are broken there is no remission of sins possible for these transgressions.That would be 613 not including the Talmudic regulations. :-? However, the Rabbinic Jews by and large do not view law(s) like we do- i.e. as laws that are not to be broken- but they view them as a code of life for those who wish to maintain that unique identity as God's Chosen people in the earth. This is a major hitch when trying to demonstrate the need for a Savior. What do you mean I need to be saved? Saved me from what? I am already God's chosen, etc. Orthodox (Hasidic) Jews are said to be the most likely to perceive their need as they believe in the Torah. Other groups (Reform, etc) are more liberal in their view of scripture. Some in the State of Israel are pushing for the reconstruction of the Temple and would likely desire to return to the Temple sacrificial system. The oversimplifications of the previous statements are terrible. Hopefully we can press along though.They are essentially trying to serve God without God being manifestly present. Many want the Book (the Torah) and the identity but not the Glory. It is no different than ever. If religion is worship in the absence of God, then this is religion at its finest (worst). The Bath Kol article tells it all in my book. But more than that, it speaks to my own heart! Is that what we have done often in the west? Taken the book and made all kinds of religious stuff from it and cast thrust God out as unwelcome? The parallel is horrifying.

The Rabbi's (as I understand this) assumed the authority to keep the law as relevant as possible to the people with the Temple not in service.Moses has authorityHeb. 8:5 (KJVS) Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. but Rabbinic Judaism has none. I don't mean to be offensive in this. I am not questioning their integrity or motive, I am simply saying that we can eliminate Rabbinic Judaism from this enquiry. The modern synagogue then has no validity, biblically.I have studied Jewish history too, for many years. On occasion I am accused of being 'anti-semitic' because I cannot give my approval to pre-millenniel dispensationalist views of 'Israel' but I know in my spirit that I am not. I have wept my way through Auschwitz, more than once, and made my pilgrimage to Maedenik. I have a deep sorrow for the remnants of natural Israel. To me they represent to ultimate 'might have been' tragedy.If we are agreed that the 'first covenant' has been replaced it will be helpful to identify just what we mean by Israel. The word 'Israel' is, as far as I can recall, only ever used in a 'modern' sense of the 'nation-state' in reference to the Northern Kingdom of Israel and to distinguish that 'nation-state' from the 'nation-state' of Judah. This is where things can get very complicated. The term 'Jews' derives from the remnants of the Judah nation-state who returned from captivity in Babylon. However, as soon as these 'Jews/Judah' people arrive back in the land they are referred to as 'Israel' and from that time we have to read the Ot scripures with great care to ascertain what 'Israel' means in any given context. The classic example of this is in the account of the first return in the book of Ezra.Ezra 2:70 (KJVS) So the priests, and the Levites, and some of the people, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, dwelt in their cities, and all Israel in their cities. Using the older nomenclature this ought to have said 'all Judah in their cities' as this is a return of Judah to the territory of Judah, but it doesn't because 'Judah' has now become 'Israel'; the carrier of the ongoing promises.What kind of people constituted the original 'Israel'? This is where we will need to look at blood lines, but it may not be as simple as we have thought. Again, I'll pause before trying to answer this question.

In light of this old argument that the Apostle Paul had to face of the church in Rome, I think he gives a much better explanation of what a really matters pertaining to one's Jewish DNA/Heritage:Romans 2:17-2917 But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God, 18 and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, 21 you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written. 25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.Clearly, the idea of being a Jew--even from way in the begging of this Abrahamic covenant--had to do with the "circumcision of the heart." In fact, there's nothing special about having a Jewish DNA or any hint of heritage thereof found in your blood. Abraham wasn't always a Jew; he was a pagan out of the land of Ur, in the Mesopotamia. God was the one who "called Abram" out to follow God. And even so, circumcision came "after" God had made a covenant with Abraham--as a mere sign of the covenant between him and God.Hence the Apostle Paul said, "28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God." (Rom. 2:28-29)Paul also clarifies this issue when he reprimanded the church in Galatia:Galatians 3:28-2928 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, heirs according to promise. Clearly, this speaks of a "Spiritual Nation of Israel" and not just a physical one--although, I am not despising the fact that God did choose the physical Israel. He did so to be this "Holy" or "Separate" people who belonged to God; being united as One in Him, they were supposed to be a people whom the nations look to and see the Glory of God. But, even if we as Gentiles were the Jews whom God had separated to be, we would probably do the same things they did--because inevitably man's heart is "deceitfully wicked, who can even know it?" (Jer. 17:9).So, I believe and know for a fact that God has always been looking for a people whose hearts are circumcised to Him. In other words, the God of Love who died for the mankind (John 3:16) did so by sending His only begotten Son to propitiate for our sins (Rom. 3:21-24)—but in return, Jesus Christ asks us the same question that He asked Peter: “Do you AGAPEO me?” Our response should not be like Peter, who mere responded by saying, “Yes Lord, I do PHILEO You…” (Agapeo being a covenant-commitment-unconditional type of love, versus Phileo as a mere brotherly-benefit type of love).Thus, Jesus doesn’t care much of who is Jewish physically by DNA or tradition (or one who became a proselyte to Judaism). God cares about our HEARTS circumcised or pierced and covenantally-commited to HIM.“IT’S ALL ABOUT GOD!”Glenn Llorente

Robert, I understand perfectly what you mean. And I think we all need to have that mentality regardless of our views on eschatology. Revelation is a fascinating book to study and people can get so bent out of shape when others will not agree with their interpretion. To me the message is there will be a lot of calamities BUT Jesus will emerge victorious. Now let's see.... there is a thousand year reign, the beast, the city 1500 miles square, the harlot..... :-D Wanna have a discussion? On the other hand, I am not interested..:-) ginnyrose

Hi Ron,I have a deep sorrow for the remnants of natural Israel.This is exactly where I am also. Moses has authorityHeb. 8:5 (KJVS) Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.but Rabbinic Judaism has none. I don't mean to be offensive in this. I am not questioning their integrity or motive, I am simply saying that we can eliminate Rabbinic Judaism from this enquiry. The modern synagogue then has no validity, biblically.We are absolutely agreed in this. The question for me has not been if it is valid or not- but exactly how can light be shed on this whole web of deception to expose the falsehood. You and I see it as a matter of indisputable fact that the Rabbi's have no biblical authority; but there are some variables in play that we do not acknowledge or 'give weight to' that many Jews believe absolutely in, one of which is the whole issue of Oral Law. The authority the have has been assumed and bolstered by tradition. It is a fortress of ideals really. To the Rabbinic Jews there is an addition to what they call the Tenach (Old Testament) know as the “Oral Law” that was added to the teachings of the Rabbi’s in the second century. It is purported by the Jews that the “Oral Law” was given to Moses on the Mount and was to be communicated to each person in leadership and then down to the people until everyone had been taught it 4 times. This is supposed to have taken place all the way down to the second Century CE. We find this impossible to believe, but it is a fundamental aspect of Rabbinic Judaism. It is supposed to be an extended interpretation designed to elaborate on the written law. I will post a seperate little blurb from the last thread to bring folk up to speed on the "Oral Law." I believe this is the place where the first blow of the axe would have to fall. Many Messianic Jews and even my former non-Jewish teachers spoke of the Oral Law as though it we legit. To may that would be like validating the D&C and Pearl of Great Price to the Mormons. When we talk about authority doctrinal resources have to be established or exposed as false (in this case).

Note, please be advised, article is in its raw form. A Brief History of "The Oral Law"r.w.There are a multitude of arguments that can be presented that refute the authenticity of the Oral Law, but perhaps the most practical one I have come up with is that the thing which the Children of Israel was legally bound to was the written covenant that was written down, rehearsed and agreed upon by the people, and finally the covenant was sealed in the blood of sprinkling. To then offer a “manual” (as it were) for the interpretation of that covenant some 100+ years after Christ is as great of error as to believe in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. This was supposed to be a covenant that was rehearsed to the people 4 times each and it was to “supposedly” be memorized and transferred to each generation. If the enemy had a “Bible commentary” it would be the Oral Law that he has used to cut the LIGHT down coming off the Old Covenant and the Tenach. Consider this quote from Menahoth 29b:Rav Judah said in the name of Rav, When Moses ascended on high he found the Holy One of Blessing, engaged in affixing coronets to the letters. [6] Said Moses, "Lord of the Universe, Who stays your hand?" He answered, "There will arise a man, at the end of many generations, Akiba b. Joseph by name, who will expound upon each tittle heaps and heaps of laws." "Lord of the Universe," said Moses; "permit me to see him." He replied, "Turn around." Moses went and sat down behind eight rows [and listened to the discourses upon the law]. Not being able to follow their arguments he was ill at ease, but when they came to a certain subject and the disciples said to the master "Whence do you know it?" and the latter replied "It is a law given to Moses at Sinai" he was comforted. Thereupon he returned to the Holy One of Blessing, and said, "Lord of the Universe, you have such a man and you give the Torah by me!" He replied, "Be silent, for such is my decree." Then said Moses, "Lord of the Universe, you have shown me his Torah, show me his reward." "Turn around," said He; and Moses turned around and saw them weighing out his flesh at the market-stalls. "Lord of the Universe," cried Moses, "such Torah, and such a reward!" He replied, "Be silent, for such is my decree." [7]This depicts Akiba to be greater than Moses and creates a story with which to pass off the whole farce. It is almost blasphemy of the word of God to suggest a man who believed in a false prophet could actually be “greater” than Moses. The passage itself is an indictment on those who promoted the concept (Akiba, etc.). It wreaks with cultish deception. It is the Oral Law that in a sense codified the traditions that made the word of God of none effect by the Rabbi’s. To this fact I must sharply disagree with Dr. Ron Moseley in his condoning of such a book or at the least to present it with any validity at all. It is clearly standing in the way of the Jews and the perfect law that converts the soul. The Jews are VICTIMS of such a horrible teaching and this revelation SHOULD NOT be used as ammo to fuel anti-semitic causes! It is for the purpose of bringing an awareness to help win the Jews to their Messiah. There is literally nothing more unChristlike than hatred and especially of the Jews. For us as believers in Christ these things may seem almost laughable; but they are a deeply entrenched and rooted system of beliefs that exist in Judaism and we have to deal with that reality. Putting together your own personal study of the Oral Law and its falsehood is a vital tool in the hand of anyone trying to lead a Jew to their Messiah. You have to learn their language and you must use caution in addressing the sensitive areas that they are dealing with concerning Christians (in a later lesson we will look at some of those). However, it must begin with the illumination of the Holy Spirit and once that is in place YOUR apologetic will come into play as a necessity to help point them in the direction of truth once their eyes begin to come open. *notesDaniel Gruber, Rabbi Akiba’s Messiah Elijah Publishing c1999 http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m0411/4_49/68738707/p2/article.jhtml?term=

Hi Ron,I have studied Jewish history too, for many years. On occasion I am accused of being 'anti-semitic' because I cannot give my approval to pre-millenniel dispensationalist views of 'Israel' but I know in my spirit that I am not. I have wept my way through Auschwitz, more than once, and made my pilgrimage to Maedenik. I have a deep sorrow for the remnants of natural Israel. To me they represent to ultimate 'might have been' tragedy.I do not believe you are anti-semetic at all. It is sort of the same as some in my camp that were once concerned that I was becoming Jewish just because I was studying with them. Trying to sort things out biblically leads people to wrong conclusions if we don't listen long enough. Thats the key- we have to keep listening to the person and not make quick summaries. God Bless,-Robert

Hi GrannieAnnie and Glenn,Between you both, you covered a lot of ground we needed to in this study. :-)One passage I have always struggled with is:In relation to the Good News, the Jews are God's enemies for your sakes; but in relation to God's choice they are dearly loved for the sake of their forefathers (Romans 11:28 WEY). This is as close to the RSV in the underlined portion as I could readily find. From here we are entering into the whole Art Katz eschatology discussion I think. Is God going to save every single living Jew at some point in history, or is the whole thrust of God's purpose in the earth in relation to Jew and Gentile a generation by generation purpose?

Is natural 'Israel' the blood line from Abraham or is it the people who were 'baptised into Moses'? The second half of this question may seem a strange way of expressing the question, but I am quoting from “Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,” (1Cor. 10:1-2, NKJV) The continuing thought is found a little later in a well known verse“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.”(1Cor. 12:13, NKJV)This second quotation speaks of a 'baptism' (I am deliberately being vague so as not to start another theme going. ;-)) which constitutes an entity. Sorry if that sounds a bit technical but something is happening in this verse which sets the direction of the 'baptised'; the goal is one body under one head. Another way of expressing this would be to speak of the role of 'mediator'. This 'new entity' is dependent upon its mediator for its beginnings. The mediator of the 'first covenant' was Moses; the mediator of the 'second covenant' is Christ. In each event many individuals are brought into a single unity. In Christ they are brought into 'one body'; in Moses they were brought into 'Israel'.The 'genetic' aspect of this thread can be examined a little here. Sometimes the Bible uses a phrase out of its strict chronological order; this grammatical feature is called prolepsis. A classic illustration of this is found in place names. Abraham pitched his tent in between Ai and Bethel according to Gen 12:8 but according to Gen 28:18 it did not receive this name until many years later; that is prolepsis where the use of a name is used in anticipation of its proper origin. I might say, living where I do, that the Romans marched through southern England, south of Reading. In fact, neither England, nor Reading existed at that time. The phenomena of prolepsis is widespread in the Bible. The reason for this elaborate detail is because I want to draw attention to “For they were departed from Rephidim, and were come to the desert of Sinai, and had pitched in the wilderness; and there Israel camped before the mount.” (Ex. 19:2, KJVS)Israel at this point are the people who have been freed from Egyptian slavery and have been gathered at the foot of Sinai. 'Israel' are about to become 'Israel' in another sense.Who were these people? Well, certainly they were bloodline descendants of Abraham; the family of Jacob/Israel who had taken residence in Egypt during the time of Joseph. But there are clues that they were not exclusively the bloodline of Abraham. One of the clearest is the man Caleb. Caleb was selected to represent the tribe of Judah in the reconnoitering of the promised land. The 'prince' of Judah at this time was a fascinating character named Naashon, but Caleb was chosen for the task. According to the qualifications demanded by Moses he must have been a recognised and highly respected leader within the tribe of Judah which was the premier tribe in numbers and influence.“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Send thou men, that they may search the land of Canaan, which I give unto the children of Israel: of every tribe of their fathers shall ye send a man, every one a ruler among them.” (Num. 13:1-2, KJVS)The subsequent history of Caleb is well known; he is one of Israel's all time heroes.There are a few places where Caleb is introduced more fully eg“Then the children of Judah came unto Joshua in Gilgal: and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite said unto him, Thou knowest the thing that the LORD said unto Moses the man of God concerning me and thee in Kadeshbarnea.” (Josh. 14:6, KJVS) The full list is Num. 32:12; Josh. 14:6,14; 15:17; 1Chr. 4:15. Caleb's father is described as being a Kenezite. This is important information as the Kenezites were descendants not of Jacob/Israel but of Esau!“These were the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz, the firstborn son of Esau, were Chief Teman, Chief Omar, Chief Zepho, Chief Kenaz,” (Gen. 36:15, NKJV) Othniel, Caleb's brother and also a high profile character in Judah is also described as being 'a son of Kenaz'. How did a descendant of Esau come to be a leading figure in the tribe of Judah the son of Jacob? In fact, Caleb's genealogy can not be made to link up with the tribe of Judah and we must conclude that Caleb and his brother Othniel had somehow been 'adopted' or 'co-opted' into the tribe of Judah. There is no evidence of a bloodline to link him to Jacob/Israel, and yet there is no doubt that Caleb was 'baptised into Moses' and thus became part of the covenant community. There is another interesting clue in that the name Caleb means 'a dog'. If we examine the use of this idea we find that 'pure-bloods' often used this disparaging term to describe 'the gentile'. How did that 'gentile dog' become one of the heroes of 'Israel'?There are more clues. Ex. 12:38 (KJVS)And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle. Num. 11:4 (KJVS)And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? There are different words used here but it seems that each passage is speaking about the same people. Who are they? and what happened to them? If they are present in Numbers 11 they must be part of the covenant community en route for the promised land. Is this distinguishing between the 'sons of Israel' (the Jacob/Israel blood line) and others who although not part of that bloodline were still part of the covenant community? We know that others could 'join' the covenant community but with varying times of quarantine. (Deut 23) The conditions relating to the Moabite are significant because David's great-grandmother was a Moabite, and his great-great-grandmother (Rahab) was a Canaanite. (Ruth 4:17) It looks as though that ought to have banned him from being recognised as part of the congregation of Israel. However the Ruth passage is interesting for another reason... Ruth's child Obed was reckoned to be the 'son of Naomi' (Ruth 4:17). This blood-line thing begins to get a bit muddy to say the least. ;-)The events of Sinai brought into existence a new entity; Israel. This entity was not exclusively the blood-line of Abraham although it contained it. (this is an important concept to be revisited later). The entity came into existence as the result of definite conditions being fulfilled and the entity was able to continue because of the provision of a priesthood. I have a illlustration which comes to mind; seed and husk. Within the 'husk' of the covenant community founded at Sinai there existed 'the seed'. The promises and conditions of Sinai apply to all the seed and the husk, and the husk will be blessed because of its proximity to the seed. The purpose of the husk, in some ways, is to protect 'the seed', but there are promises relating to 'the seed' which the husk does not share. We will need to be able, in our minds, to separate between promises for the 'seed' and promises to the covenant community.another pause...

We will need to be able, in our minds, to separate between promises for the 'seed' and promises to the covenant community.When I think about the word seed (Gk. sperma) I am thinking of three primary things:1: THE Seed.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. (Galatians 3:16 AV)Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (v19 AV)And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (v29 AV)This is THE Seed. Those who are in Christ (the Seed) are "Abraham's seed" in the same sense that those who are in Christ are sons of God- though Christ is the Son of God. 2: The second is in a prophetic/geneological sense. We trace the geneology of the Seed through various prophesies. * Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. (Romans 9:7) * Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; (Romans 1:3)* Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel (II Timothy 2:8)*For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. (Hebrews 2:16 and also 11:180And of Paul tracing his lineage;* I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. (Romans 11:1)* Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. (II Corinthians 11:22)3: Sandwiched in the middle of the two above I see a group who were descendants to some degree or another of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were baptized into Moses and rejected the promised Seed. Paul gives their description:* For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: (9:3)This group that were his kinsman according to the flesh, even though they may not have been a pure blood "Hebrew of an Hebrew", seem to have been still considered his kinsman according to the flesh even though at the time of the writing of the epistles the Ark of the Covenant was not in the Holy of Holies (as the writer to the Hebrews stated concerning the mercy seat or seat of propitiation "of which we cannot now speak particularly", etc.) and the whole of the system was basically in shambles. It was propped up then by man's device. They had no mercy seat- so they altered the Laws halacically to keep things propped up. Hence- you make void the commandment by your tradition. So it seems that as the Ark was gone even before the advent of our Lord- soon would be the Temple and the whole of the priesthood (Saducees at that time; not to fear, they just kept on making adjustments. They refused to see any of what happened to them as God's judgment). In this I see that though things were in shambles even in Paul's time- he still acknowledged the people as his "kinsman according to the flesh". They were lost spiritually- but kinsman physically. I'll pause also for you comments...

Ron, you asked a question in a post on the previous page, addressed to Glenn and me.Annie, can you remind me what my question was? :-) I guess, for a quick answer ... that is why I keep asking and waiting for that 1/3rd part so many times so far. The answer to this will be down the track somewhat. In fact, on the track I am on it may not be on our route at all. ;-)

Thank you everyone for your cordial respectful and inspiring post and comments. You have helped me a great deal in my knowledge and understanding, although I am still working out some thoughts and interpretations. I am so pleased and thank God that this hasn’t turned into some “I know more than you - I'm right and I WILL prove you wrong” type of discussion. I have gained a deeper respect for the posters on this thread for their tactful and respectful discourse.I have a few questions at this point, so I would like to interject with a very brief testimony of sorts and then some Scriptural observations and questions as to interpretations and applications.Here it goes -I love the Word of God with all my heart and have read through the Bible numerous times (couple of dozen) with an insatiable hunger for God and Truth. I have always applied the principle of hermeneutics I have written about and posted on my website (http://www.thesearchforbiblicaltruth.org/hermeneutics.htm) and have tried as hard as I can put aside any preconceived notions and be led by the Holy Spirit as to meaning and interpretation. I had an extensive theological and doctrinal education in my youth, (years ago) most of which I have chalked up as “modern christian” nonsense after reading the Scriptures as a simple believer. I was at the lowest point of human existence in utter misery, depression and despair on verge of death when I cried out in desperation to God and was compelled searched His Word for freedom, Truth and life. I was set free and born again thought the Word of God and His Holy Spirit. Praise God I am set free, a new creature in Christ and glad give my very life for the grace and freedom from bondage and despair He has so graciously bought for us with His blood on the cross. I was called to Christ a fresh after years of living like hell rejecting the lies twisted around Truth I was taught as a youth. I by the grace of God was shown that the Truth of Christ was outside knocking and not in the lies of the modern churches, cemeteries (seminaries) and Bible colleges, so I sought Him through His Word as a simple believer with a pure heart and thirst for His Truth. I long to learn and grow in knowledge, and I know for sure that I don’t have all the answers, and I am 100% certain that some of my thinking and doctrine is wrong, but I stand bold on the word of God and speak His Truths (not mine) that He has shown and taught me regardless of the consequences. I have forsaken all to follow Him as a obedient love slave thirsting and hungering after His Heart, His Truth and His Word. I am simple humble believer who loves God and His Word with all my heart, mind and soul.I love the whole word of God unfolding like the petals of a beautiful flower chapter by chapter, book by book. But the books of the major and minor prophets and the New Testament are the books that that ring most true to my heart and are my favorite to read. (if I dare make such a statement) With this brief testimony and a little history as to where “I am coming from“, I would like to pose the following questions and statements for contemplation and comment. Remember I am not looking for controversy and argument , but contemplation and comment, searching for the Truth of God and His Word. I know the difference between the two (contemplation - comment and controversy - argument) can become blurred and the later gets us nowhere - so I want to reiterate my purpose. I happy to admit I am wrong when I am wrong - let’s all be willing, happy and eager to do the same seeking after God with a meek, humble and contrite heart.When I read the books of the major and minor prophets I am utterly flabbergasted at how closely ancient Israel resembles the modern American western church today. I can’t believe that the exact image of what we see in 2005 western American christianity was described so accurately in these books written about ancient Israel. It blows my mind that these are writing from thousands of years ago and not written last week or last year. (this has lead me to more of a “replacement theology” way of thinking) If you start at Isaiah and read through the end of the Old Testament, verse after verse, chapter after chapter, book after book scream MODERN AMERICAN WESTERN CHRISTIANITY!!!!!!! We modern western American christians are the epitome and exactly the same as these Old Testament Jews written about in the major and minor prophetic books. (one of the reason I like Wilkerson so much is his continual preaching from the Old Testament prophetic Books and how they relate so closely to the modern christian church - this “replacement theology” is new to me, but I would have to believe and assume Wilkerson is of that camp - right? or wrong?)So when we see our pitiful condition so closely, accurately and almost exactly described in the books that describe the pitiful, wrath inspiring condition of the Old Testament Jews, how do we relate this to ourselves? Isn’t this the result of the “pressure” and “impending doom” and “urgency” felt and described by myself, brother Hans and many others on this forum? How are these “Major and Minor Prophetic” books (Isaiah - Malachi) supposed to be applied to modern christianity? Is “replacement theology” the worst case scenario? How does the book of Revelation play into this discussion?Searching for Truth and contemplative prayerful discussion - not endless argument and backbiting trying to prove ones opinion right or wrong!!! :-)

Thank you sister Annie,I am not sure whether I am “replacement theology” or not. I think I might be, but I am not sure at this point. I think my thinking and Biblical interpretations tends to lean that way.With that being said, how do relate the books of the major and minor prophets to modern Christianity? How do you feel the “Major and Minor Prophetic” books (Isaiah - Malachi) are supposed to be applied to modern Christianity? Is “replacement theology” the worst case scenario? How does the book of Revelation play into this discussion? And what do consider to be the remnant or 1/3 of which you speak and what Scriptures do you apply to your current understanding?

Hi ChristisKing,With that being said, how do relate the books of the major and minor prophets to modern Christianity?My first thought here is to answer, that we relate the books of the major and minor prophets with caution. Many of the historical accounts are written as our ensamples and for our learning- so we can apply them as the Holy Spirit leads to our times. This is not a deductive process or something we do logically- it is a matter of the Holy Spirit leading. Is “replacement theology” the worst case scenario? I don't know that it can be looked at in this way because really the doctrine only deals with the Church and its relationship to Israel. Messianics (and if you ask 2 you may get 3 opinions) view Israel as distinct from the Church, but at the same time as one substance as it were (heirs to the righteousness of God by faith). I do NOT know any Messianic Jews who believe that their non-believing fellow brethren are Saved. One of the most solumn moments in all my classroom experience was when the professor, a Messianic Zionist Jew, told the students that as he understood the scriptures there was no hope for those, his fellow Jews, who did not Trust in Messiah as Savior. He made the comments and then bowed and turned his head from us as if he were breaking down at the thought. He took a moment and gathered himself and we went on. So I guess what I am saying is- that Messianic Jews believe they are an entity (Israel) in terms of their own unique identification as Jews existing alongside the non-Jewish members of the Ecclesia of God. Sort of like a circle within a circle. Not that they esteem themselves better- but just distinct. They would tell you that their uniqueness in Christ is maintained in terms of identity just as a man and woman maintain their identity as men and women, etc.. Actually the materials I have read are quite complex and don't really know if they understand them fully. They esteem themselves as the "natural branches"- BUT, they view the root as Israel and not Christ (generally). They will tell the Gentiles that they were grafted into Israel. I generally agree in part and add to this the fact that Christ is the True Israel of God. He is the promised Seed. To natural Israel was the Law, promises, covenants, etc., but He saith not unto seeds as many, but unto thy Seed, which was Christ. Jews are naturally grafted into the Olive tree- but we are also considered Olive- but 'wild' by nature. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature (Agrielaios), and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree (Kallielaios): how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? (Romans 11:24) Olives were and are used to make oil. The symbology is awesome. The one olive tree just grew wild and was grafted into the garden version. Israel was tended by God and cultivated through the knowledge of God- hence it is the Kallielaios variety. Yet, Christ is the Good Olive Tree. He IS the Word of God, covenant, Testator, Great High Priest, etc. It really just boils down to the presence of the Holy Spirit. When we are grafted into Christ we are enabled to produce fruit.

Hi Annie,I dunno Robert. If folks don't see how God has made promises to the Remnant of Israel and how He has NOT turned His back on Israel, and that His were an Eternal Promise, and that they 'will' be saved in the end.... and some, not until His Appearing, then I think it's sad that they just don't read God's Word more "Literally" and knock off all of the spiritualizing of His Word and self-centering of all on just The 'Church', as we know it.Art Katz holds a similar position to this though the line he takes is that a combination of another 'Holocaust' of some sort and the emergence of the glorious Church will cause them to turn, so that "all Israel shall be saved." The weird thing about his messages is that I hear a tremendous amount of wisdom in them- though I don't always agree with his conclusions. This is kind of off the topic but...I was in a class once when a lady spoke up and stated to the class that God was going to save Israel, etc.; and the instructor told the lady, "You know what the Jews in the trenches would tell you if you told them that?" She says, No, what? "Thats fine, but, Pass the ammo!" I learned from those types of remarks that even my grandious ideas of Israel may be taken offensively. I guess how that applies now is- if we believe God will save some Jews unconditionally ultimately in the end (though I am not convinced of this due to how Paul defines the true Israel or the remnant in Romans 9-11) we still ought to preach the Gospel to them as we would anyone else. :-)God Bless,-Robert

Art Katz is a nice guy ... but you know I'm post-trib, so that would cause a little difference there.Yes. I think Art is also probably post trib as he talks about an almost universal persecution of both Christians and Jews. God Bless,-Robert

This message he ministered in Kansas City gives you a little glimpse into his views as well as the following messages in this series.