Dr. Wesley A. Swift

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

Dr. Wesley A. Swift

with Extra

(Transcription Notes & Misc.)

03-19-98ALEXANDEAMERAWAKBERICBS-03-94BS208-64CHRISTCITYCLEONEEDCLEO-NYCCLEOPATR|COMFORTE

CWN1CWN2CWN3CWN4

EGY-RELELBS494ELLA-1ELLABIOGELWRITIN

EM-1844EM-1976EM-HATSH

E-MULLINEOCHAIDHESAU—-

EXODUS-1EXODUS-2

EZEKIEL

GENESI01GENESI02GENESI03GENESI04GENESI05GENESI06GENESI07GENESI08GENESI09GENESI10|GENESI11GENESI12

GW-DREAMHAARPHALE-BOPISABELLAISAIAHJEW-MLJOELJONAHJOSEPHUSJOSH–SO

JS-V1-1JS-V1-2JS-V1-3JS-V1-4JS-V1-5JS-V1-6JSV1-8-9JS-V2-11JS-V2-12JS-V2-14JS-V2-16JS-V2-17JS-V2-19|JS-V3-20JS-V4JS-V5JS-V6JS-V7JS-V8

KABBALAHLEV–DEULUCIFERMESSIAHMINISTRYN96-9-10NICODEMU

NL-40-97NL-87-00NL-87-04NL-87-05NL-87-06NL-88-05NL-88-06NL-88-07NL-88-08NL-88-09NL-88-10NL-88-12|NL-89-01NL-89-02NL-89-03NL-89-06NL-89-12NL-90-01NL-90-02NL-90-03NL-90-04NL-90-05NL-90-06NL-90-07|NL-90-08NL-90-09NL-90-10NL-90-11NL-90-12NL-91-01NL-91-02NL-91-03NL-91-04NL-91-05NL-91-06NL-91-07|NL-91-09NL-91-10NL-91-11NL-93-05NL-93-07NL-94-01NL-94-02NL-94-04NL-94-05NL-94-06NL-94-07NL-94-08|NL-94–2NL-94-8-NL-95-02NL-95-05NL-95-06NL-95-07NL-95-08NL-95-09NL-95-11NL-95-12NL-95-9-NL-96-01|NL-96-02NL-96-03NL-96-04NL-96-05NL-96-06NL-96-08NL-96-11NL-96-12NL-97-01NL-97-02NL-97-03NL-97-04|NL-97-05NL-97-06NL-97-07NL-97-08NL-97-09NL-97-10NL-97-11NL-97-12NL-98-01NL-98-02NL-98-03NL-98-04|NL-98-05

OLDRC-TBPEACE94PHOTO-1

Q&A-01Q&A-02Q&A-03Q&A-04Q&A-05

R-BORKREVEL-ELSANH-TAL

SC-ST-01SC-ST-02SC-ST-03

SLIBERTYSORCEKNWSOUTHCOTSTHCOTSYMBOLS

TAPE-001TAPE-002TAPE-003TAPE-004TAPE-005TAPE-006TAPE-007TAPE-008TAPE-009TAPE-010TAPE-011|TAPE-012TAPE-013TAPE-014TAPE-015TAPE-016TAPE-017TAPE-018TAPE-019TAPE-020TAPE-021TAPE-022|TAPE-023TAPE-024TAPE-025TAPE-026TAPE-027TAPE-028TAPE-029TAPE-030TAPE-031TAPE-032TAPE-033|TAPE-034TAPE-035TAPE-036TAPE-037TAPE-038TAPE-039TAPE-040TAPE-041TAPE-042TAPE-043TAPE-044|TAPE-045TAPE-047TAPE-048TAPE-049TAPE-050TAPE-051TAPE-052TAPE-053TAPE-054TAPE-055TAPE-056|TAPE-057TAPE-058TAPE-059TAPE-060TAPE-061TAPE-062TAPE-063TAPE-064TAPE-065TAPE-066TAPE-067|TAPE-068TAPE-069TAPE-070TAPE-071TAPE-072TAPE-073TAPE-074TAPE-075TAPE-076TAPE-077TAPE-078|TAPE-079TAPE-080TAPE-081TAPE-082TAPE-083TAPE-084TAPE-085TAPE-086TAPE-087TAPE-088TAPE-089|TAPE-090TAPE-091TAPE-092TAPE-093TAPE-094TAPE-095TAPE-096TAPE-097TAPE-098TAPE-099TAPE-100|TAPE-101TAPE-102TAPE-103TAPE-104TAPE-105TAPE-106TAPE-107TAPE-108TAPE-109TAPE-110TAPE-111|TAPE-112TAPE-113TAPE-114TAPE-115TAPE-116TAPE-117TAPE-118TAPE-119TAPE-120TAPE-121TAPE-122|TAPE-123TAPE-124TAPE-125TAPE-126TAPE-127TAPE-128TAPE-129TAPE-130TAPE-131TAPE-132TAPE-133|TAPE-134TAPE-135TAPE-136TAPE-137TAPE-138TAPE-139TAPE-140TAPE-141TAPE-142TAPE-143TAPE-144|TAPE-145TAPE-146TAPE-147TAPE-148TAPE-149TAPE-150TAPE-151TAPE-152TAPE-153TAPE-154TAPE-155|TAPE-156TAPE-157TAPE-158

TOT-1BK1TOT-1BK2TOT-1BK3TOT-1BK4TOT-2BK5TOT-2BK6TOT-3B12TOT-4B15TOT-SEAL

TOWR-IREV-MARY

WHATNXT1WHATNXT2WHATNXT3WHATNXT4WHATNXT5

WHITEGODWSWPTHO

Lev 20:26.. Ye shall be holy [separate] unto me,

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

THE EXCLUSIVENESS OF ISRAEL

A BOOK BY BOOK LOOK AT THE EXCLUSIVENESS OF ISRAEL

The verses listed below are all addressed to Israel and not to anyone else! In reading them, please take note of the emphasised words in each verse to see that this is so.

Exodus 6:7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be unto you a God: and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God ¼

We start here with the separation of Israel from other peoples. God, who is addressing Israel, is saying that He will be the God of this one people. Here it is Jehovah who is Israel’s creator. Throughout the Bible we cannot find any specific verse which says the God of the Bible is other than the God of Israel.

Exodus 19:5,6 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.

The words above all people immediately states that there is a different relationship established between God and Israel that does not apply to other races. It was Jesus who later said that unless a person was born from above he would not be able to see the Kingdom of Heaven, confirming they must come from the same people. The very Greek prefix ano suggests “upwards” or “superior”. Furthermore, the expressions Kingdom of Priests and an holy nation as a direct quotation is found in 1 Peter 2:9 [a royal priesthood] showing the people are the same. No other race is spoken of in this same unique way.

Lev 20:26.. Ye shall be holy [separate] unto me, for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be mine.

Here we find a clarity which witnesses the racial separation of Israel from other races. The Hebrew word badal’ means to separate, distinguish, select, divide and to sever utterly. The basic meaning of the words holy and holiness in both Testaments conveys the idea of being separate or set apart. God Himself is spoken of as The Holy One of Israel, but never as being the Holy One of any other race. Thus, in both Testaments, a holy nation means a “separated” nation. The Holy Spirit is also the Spirit of separation upon the holy nation. In Scripture we can find reference to The Holy People [Daniel 8:24], referring to Israel. When God severed Israel from the other races, there is no indication that the separation was to be for any limited period. In fact, it is the opposite that is shown.

Deut 4:7,8.. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them ¼ what nation is there so great that hath statutes and judgements so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day.

This verse establishes that the Law was given to Israel alone. Moses, speaking to Israel alone, declares in verse 13 that this involves the Ten Commandments. The Old Testament was made with Israel alone, even if there were a mixed multitude present with them at that time. The issue here is law and covenant relationship.

Deut 4:37 And because he loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them ¼

The genetic relationship between fathers and seed cannot be avoided! This reference continues through the New Testament!

Deut 7:6 For thou art an holy [separate] people unto the Lord thy God: the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all the people that are upon face of the earth.

This is not a popular teaching, but it is one of the early Bible statements about the unique, racially exclusive, place of Israel among all the other races. If Israel was to disappear as a race from the Bible, prophecy would forecast this. In the New Testament, Paul asks the question, Hath God cast away His people? – No! – God forbid [Rom 11:1]. At that point in time, Israel was separated into two Houses of whom “part” were blinded [v7], but Israel as a whole hath not obtained.

Deut 32:9 For the Lord’s portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of His inheritance.

There is not one Scripture anywhere which says any race other than Israel is genetically God’s inheritance.

Deut 33:29 Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like thee, O people saved by the Lord ¼

People are taught or like to think that God is unbiased or unselective, but as a Sovereign God He can do whatever pleases Him. Paul says, and so ALL ISRAEL shall be saved [Romans 11:26].

Numbers 23:9 ¼ lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.

In the New Testament, the call is still to come out from among THEM and touch not the unclean. It is God who made this sexual or physical separation for all time. Israel is not to interact with other races in any such common purpose or become unequally yoked with other races, particularly with their idols. This brings God’s judgement upon transgressors.

2 Sam 7:23 And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself and to make him a name …

We must note the singular emphasis here which tells us the same story about Israel being the one people Jesus came to redeem.

Psalm 78:5 For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a Law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers ¼

The triad, Jacob, Israel and fathers is a three fold bond that cannot be broken. Again we find here the confirmation that the Law was given to Israel. In the New Testament, we find the same expressions, fathers, Jacob and Israel which show the New Testament is addressed to the same people – those who had the Old Testament. That is, they are all Israelites by race.

Psalm 147:19,20 He showeth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgements unto Israel. ¼ as for his judgements, they [the other races] have not known them.

This is a very clear statement that His Word is not given to other races! This is not a popular concept or teaching but it is confirmed in both Testaments. But if God declares that He hath not dealt so with any nation, we dare not question it! Israel is unique by God’s sovereign choice.

Psalm 148:14 He also exalteth the horn of his people, the praise of all his saints, even the children of Israel, a people near to him.

This Scripture defines who and who only are saints. Saints appears in the New Testament without any new definition. It is God who made this separation for all time. Also, we do not find other races being “near” to God.

Isaiah 41:8-9 But thou, Israel art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.

“The seed” – this word is very important, as it defines which part of Abraham’s seed is continually referred to in both Testaments, as being God’s people racially. Not all the nations which spring from Abraham are regarded as his seed. Only the nation ‘named’ or ‘called’ IN Isaac is to be so regarded. Jacob and his descendants were accepted as this seed. To show this, Jacob was named ‘Israel’ – that is, he was given God’s name. Thus Jacob was the seed named in Isaac.

Isaiah 43:1 But now thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.

This verse includes the words, “created” and “formed” that are not the same. Jacob was created, but Israel was formed

Formed yatsar To fashion, form or make.

Created bara In context, this is to create.

Redeemed gawal Bought back, ransomed, recovered or avenged.

These things are never said of any other race. If God chose every race there would be no election, choosing or buying back. All mankind would be the same! These expressions continue through the New Testament. Do they sound familiar? There is a difference between the expressions the sons of Jacob and the children of Israel through Scripture, one being ‘created’ with the other being ‘formed’. Those ‘formed’ by fully believing God come from among those who are the natural descendants. We find a similar difference between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.

Isaiah 45:4 For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee ¼

Note: the elect is an important term also which defines God’s selection of a people [singular] which is genetic [national Israel]. Elect or bachiyr means “chosen one” [singular]. Jesus and the New Testament writers use the term in a way that does not change.

Isaiah 46:3 Hearken unto me, O House of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, which are borne by me from the belly, which are carried from the womb.

Note: This defines the racial origin of Israel as being from the womb of Sarah [see also Isaiah 51:1,2, the hole of the pit]. This is expanded later in this book.

Isaiah 49:3 ¼ thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

This shows Israel is God’s servant people. This again is a continuing expression which is used of those fulfilling God’s purposes. “Servant” is sometimes applied to other races which God is using to discipline Israel so that Israel might glorify God. God does not say that He will be glorified in any other race but Israel. In the New Testament we will see that and they glorified the God of Israel [Matthew 15:31].

Isaiah 53:8 ¼ for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

My people here are either God’s people or Isaiah’s people (who are the same people). It is popular to extend this limitation so that other races can be included. This is not valid; they are Israel only. This much-loved chapter with its all we like sheep have gone astray speaks of Jesus being wounded for our transgressions with mention of we and ourMy people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there in Isaiah 52:4 gives expression and positive identity of the people being addressed and this follows through to the following chapter. The “sheep” who had gone astray are the ones whom the Good Shepherd came to seek and to save.

Isaiah 59:20,21 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob saith the Lord. As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever.

It is impossible to spiritualise seed or “seed’s seed”; they are genetic terms which are on-going.

There does not appear to be a single reference to any other nation than Israel to whom the Redeemer would come. He is alwaysThe Redeemer of Israel and it is, as stated, to be forever. Jesus came to visit and redeem His People [Luke 1:68]. Jesus is the Kinsman-Redeemer of Israel. There is never any suggestion of any others than Israel being redeemed. From which broken Law-covenant would the other races need redeeming? Recall again how only Israel was given the statutes and judgements and only Israel needed redemption from that Law which they had broken.

We see that the covenant is for all generations to seed’s seed of Jacob, and it is to those who turn from transgression in JACOB whom the Redeemer saves. Here again we have the Spirit which is of the anointed race. Israel has My Spirit which IS upon thee.. This is not commonly taught today. We will see that this is the same presentation as that in the New Testament, believe it or not. This Scripture is not acceptable to tradition. Guess why? It is because racial Israel stays exclusive as being Jacob’s seed.

Jer 50:4 In those days, and in that time, saith the Lord, the Children of Israel shall come, they and the children of Judah together, going and weeping: they shall go, and seek the Lord their God.

A much talked about subject is the regathering of Israel which is supposed to be presently taking place in Palestine, but and at that time is not the present activity in the Israeli state. What is being established is just who is to be regathered. Is it a multi-racial church or is it only the House of Israel and the House of Judah [that is, the Twelve Tribes of Israel]? The latter is the consistent and frequent Biblical presentation, as it is in the verse above [see also Ezekiel 37:15-28 in particular]. The picture painted is always of a still very exclusive Israel. The House of Israel and the House of Judah are exclusive from the heathen races all around. This shows that at the end of the New Testament age they are still exclusive. So they must be exclusive through the New Testament age, even until the regathering. Note that there is no pattern of prophecy which presents a non-Israel content in the regathering, so something must be wrong with the traditional teachings.

Jer 51:19 The portion of Jacob is not like them [that is, Babylon]; for he is the former of all things: and Israel is the rod of His inheritance: the Lord of Hosts is his name.

This completely excludes “Babylon” from God’s inheritance. The timing of this event is at the end of the New Testament age. Again, national Israel must go through the age. Israel is to be the rod over the other races to rule with God. Israel means Ruling with God. Ruling over whom if all races are the same?

Ezek 37:26-28 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them it shall be an everlasting covenant with them … and the heathen shall know that I the Lord do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.

This shows that God’s covenant is with Israel alone, and that the other races will be aware of this when God comes to dwell with His People Israel. The timing, again, is the end of the age at Jesus’ return and when God’s sanctuary is in the midst of Israel and nowhere else.

Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up … which standeth for the children of thy[Daniel’s] people: ¼

At the end of the age it is still only thy people who are delivered. Israel is still in existence as a people at the time of the end and through the New Testament age. Michael does not stand up for other races.

Hosea 1:11 Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, ¼

This and other quotations from the minor prophets are included to show the “unity of the Scriptures” that always presents the exclusive nature of Israel. Hosea again defines who is regathered, and also the timing. We will see that the children of Judah and the children of Israel are not united until this time. There is no suggestion of there being any other race, or of a multi-racial “Church” comprising of “Jews and Gentiles”, as being part of the regathering of the remnant of Israel in these minor prophets. It is always the two Houses who are regathered and come together.

Hosea 14:1-5 O Israel, return unto the Lord thy God … I will be as the dew unto Israel: ¼

This is at the time of the regathering when Israel as a nation returns to The Lord Thy God. [v9, Who is wise … he shall understand these things]. No other race is being asked to return to Israel’s God.

Joel 2:27 And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel ¼

Joel 3:2 I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshapet, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.

Again, there is no change prophetically about which nation God is in the midst of or which nation He will be in the midst of at this future time.

Amos 3:2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: ¼

The word used for known cannot be treated fully here, but it does not mean to acknowledge. It is used more as to recognise as a factrevelation knowledge or to discern in an intimate and chosen way. Here there is the complete isolation of Israel from the other races.

Note: This is important when we come to the New Testament where it refers to those who were foreknown of God. This identifies the people as being the same nation in both Testaments; those who were foreknown in the New Testament are those who were known in the Old Testament.

Micah 2:12 I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel: ¼

Are there still any lingering doubts that no other races are ever mentioned at this time of regathering?

Habakkuk 3:13 Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy People, ¼

Zephaniah 3:13 The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, ¼

There are a host of other Old Testament Scriptures that could have been quoted.

GOD PLACES HIS NAME ON THE ONE PEOPLE

Numerous references refer to “My name” as being placed upon the Children of Israel. For example:

Deut 28:10 And all the people of the earth shall see that thou art called by the name of the Lord; and they shall be afraid of thee.

Numbers 6:27 And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them.

Deut 26:19 And to make thee [that is, Israel] high above all nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honour; and that thou mayest be an holy [separate] people unto the Lord thy God, as he hath spoken.

The name of Jehovah [AV The Lord] is exclusive upon Israel as a race. All the people of the earth then does not include the Children of Israel, in this case. The name placed upon the Children of Israel who obey God is that of Jehovah Himself. God Himself decides just where He will place His Name, whether it be on a people or a place [Deut 26:2: which the Lord THY God shall choose to place His Name there].

This separation of Israel from all the other races is always distinct, but their blessing is conditional upon their obedience. In the next chapter we can now look at the New Testament in the light of what we have seen in the Old Testament.

CHAPTER 2: EXCLUSIVE nature OF ISRAEL in THE NEW TESTAMENT

The New Testament Scriptures show no disharmony or change of position from that which is written in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. In view of what has been written and shown from the Old Testament, this might be seen for the first time with new eyes. It will come as a shock for some people to realise that exclusiveness of Israel continues throughout the New Testament, because this cuts across the traditional doctrine that Israel is now “The Church” and that this Church is multi-racial. Redemption from the broken Law-covenant can never be multi-racial or universal, since only Israel was given the Law as a covenant. That is why this foundation has to be shown in detail in the last chapter.

In the quotations made from the New Testament you will note many references to the fathers referring to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The people addressed in the Acts and the epistles are the children [descendants] of these fathers, the fathers of Israel. It is not just to Abraham in isolation in the way most use this to try to say Abraham’s seed is a spiritual seed.

The harmony mentioned concerning the law being given to Israel is amply confirmed in the New Testament.

Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites, to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

So, the promises, covenants and the adoption do not apply to any but Israelites!

EACH BOOK IN the New Testament

The New Testament Scriptures below are in direct contrast to the way Go into all the world is interpreted as a doctrine. This may also be a shock and so we will look through some of these. We will quote from Gospel selections to save repetition and then comment from each book of the New Testament in order. Please note carefully the emphasised words, because this will help understanding.

Luke 1:16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.

There is no suggestion that any other than the Children of Israel will be turned to God. The “many”, rather than “all”, is found a number of times within the New Testament.

Luke 1:32,33 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, ¼

Jesus is always spoken of as being the ruler of Israel nationally, the “House of Jacob” including all the tribes. The House of Jacob is still the very same entity in the New Testament as it was in the Old Testament. This Throne [indicating Kingdom] is to be restored TO JACOB. God’s promises will be fulfilled in those to whom they were made. Everything which offends will be gathered OUT of the Kingdom, Jesus tells us.

Luke 1:54,55 He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy; as he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed forever.

Mercy is always spoken of as being to Israel only. This promise of mercy was to The Fathers and to their seed of Israel only. Israel is the servant race as this verse says. “The Fathers” were not the fathers of all races. Scripture does not present God as being the father of all peoples. Is there record of any other seed to whom God spake other than to the seed of Abraham? Some want to take the traditional position that the seed is now spiritual and not racial. Accordingly this will be looked into further in the chapter titled Seeds, Natural and Spiritual. But there is no suggestion of a “spiritual seed” in all of these Scriptures. They are too precise and specific! When we see that they are fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecy we have harmony.

Luke 1:68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his people.

There is never any mention of redemption for any outside of Israel. Here they are described as His People. Jesus is always spoken of as being The Redeemer of Israel.. Israel in the Old Testament is a precise racial term. None of all these Scriptures provide evidence of any change in that fact in the New Testament.

Luke 1:73,74 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,

As in all Scripture, the pronouns cannot be generalised. We and us contrast with enemies as two defined groups. Here the pronouns define a racial origin. There is much more about this through the New Testament as we will see.

Luke 1:77 To give the knowledge of salvation unto his People …

Again, is any other race included in the giving of the knowledge of salvation? Is it possible for any race but Israel to know salvation from the sin of breaking the Law since the Law was given specifically to Israel alone? This confirms the Old Testament prophetic Scriptures. This is a very specific statement of God’s purpose. Dare we meddle with God’s stated purpose?

Luke 2:34 ¼ this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; ¼

There is no mention of races other than Israel.

Matt 1:21 ¼ and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.

This again is confirmation of the Scriptures already quoted and is just as specific as to whom would be saved. One of the major problems traditionalists have is to find any continuing pattern of prophecy in the Old Testament which would back up their position that His People now includes all races. As pointed out earlier, the people Jesus saves from their sins here are already His peoplebefore they are saved.

Matt 2:6 ¼ for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

This defines the people of whom Jesus is the Lord and the race of which He is King. This is a straight statement of the fulfilment of prophecy made many times.

Matt 15:24 I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

It is impossible for the followers of the present traditional teachings to cope with this Scripture so it is ignored. There is a translation difficulty in this verse also, the word but meaning if not and therefore it includes the House of Judah as well. Jesus was then in the coasts of Tyre and Sidon but, as He says, He had other sheep which were not of the fold within Palestine. He dispatched His disciples to the House of Israel, the bulk of whom were scattered outside of Judea, mainly about Northern Greece and parts of the old Grecian empire. Note that Jesus even confirms the separation between Galilee and Jewry [John 7:1 and John 11:54].

Why should we not do the same instead of calling both parties “The Jews”? This is an error of tradition. The House of Israel were not so “lost” that the disciples could not find them, were they?

Matt 15:31 ¼ and they glorified the God of Israel.

This is a clear statement of whom He is the God.

Matt 19:28 ¼ in the regeneration, … ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Dare we say “The Church” has taken the place of the Twelve Tribes of Israel at the Time of the Regeneration, which is yet to come? The “Church” is not what we have been led to believe, as we will see.

Mark 12:29 The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord;

Is anyone other than Israel requested to “hear”? Only Israel can “hear”.. Remember how Jesus said in John 8:43 to the Edomite leaders of Jewry, Ye cannot hear my words? There is still the synagogue of Satan who call themselves “Jews” or Judeans [Rev 2:9 and Rev 3:9] who cannot “hear”.. These could not be of the House of Judah, as they claimed to be. Could this part of Jewry possibly be part of the Church of God or of the Israel of God? It is common to hear that the Israel of God is the multi-racial church, and then to use this statement as the basis of argument! It is easy to say anything without backing it up and especially without the full Biblical basis of argument.

John 1:11,12 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, ¼

Jesus came to his own territory, wherein was the temple, but all of His own people there did not receive Him as having any authority over what was His. Those of His own who believed, received, accepted and recognised Him were given the authority to once again become placed [that is, re-instated; AV:adopted] as the sons of God.

John 1:31 … but that he should be manifest to Israel ¼

Can we find reference to Jesus being manifest to others than Israelites? That is all men of Israel.

Acts 1:6 Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

The restoration of the Kingdom to Israel is a subject which the traditional teachings refuse to emphasise, despite Jesus’ instruction that this must be our priority prayer and the time to look forward to when His Will will be done IN EARTH, as it is in Heaven. This instruction is a statement of the Will of God. Instead of preaching the Kingdom, and the remnant out of Israel who will find it, traditional teaching preaches that the “Church” will be raptured away from Earth! But, the saints [separated ones] are to reign on earth when the Kingdom is restored to Israel.

Acts 2:17 ¼ your sons and your daughters shall prophesy …

The specific your refers to the children of those being spoken to and again there is, as usual, no mention of any who did not havethe Fathers as their pro-genitors being able to prophesy! The people being addressed are described in verse 22 as being men of Israel. And Joel’s prophecy which is the basis of this verse was only to Israel!

Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words, ¼

Acts 3:12,13 Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? ¼ the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers ¼

Can we pretend these men of Israel were from other racial stock?

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know …

This is specifically limited to Israelites.

Acts 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Please note that this verse is post-Pentecost and again isolates to whom the promise is made. The many of Israel are called, but few of Israel are chosen. Those of Israel who were afar off and not dwelling in Judea were not excluded. It is still our God, the God of Ye men of Israel [v22] who were being addressed.

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, ¼

Since every one of the prophets were Israelites by race, their children must be of the same race. [Note: Nationality must not be confused with race. This is a mistake often made by traditional teachers who try to prove non-Israel stock by nationality or place of domicile].

Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and the forgiveness of sins.

Yet again, we have definition of race which is post-Passion, and post-Pentecost. It is a definition which carries on through the New Testament.

Acts 7:37 ¼ A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me, him shall ye hear.

The question that has to be asked here is, “Were Moses and Paul both wrong?” This is what the traditional teachers are saying when they say Jesus was not raised up “UNTO YOU”, but unto all races. Their teaching is a blatant denial of Scripture and of what Moses and Paul have said. The of your brethren fixes very firmly to whom Jesus came as being to Israel only.

Acts 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ …

This confirms the Old Testament teaching that God gave His Word only to Israel, as a race. The peace was proclaimed to those who were near [Judeans] and to those who were afar off [the dispersion – called Grecians in Acts]. This is still no different from Psalm 147:19,20, he showed His word unto Jacob, or unto all Israel.

Acts 13:22,23 ¼ I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart ¼ of this man’s seed hath God, according to his promise, raised up unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus.

Is there any record of the promise of a Saviour being raised up to people other than Israel? All the references refer to the promise that is made to Israel only. This again shows this is fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy unto Israel.

Acts 13:32,33 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children ¼

Note to whom Paul was speaking and that he was speaking at Antioch. This Apostle to the Gentiles was still speaking to Israelites, to those among the stock of Abraham who feared God [v26]. For a long time it has been a traditional belief that the word “Gentiles” refers specifically to non-Israelites, but it cannot be avoided that the stock of Abraham is specifically mentioned in verse 26 of this passage! The word for “stock” is genos [race and offspring]. The children are shown in relationship to “The Fathers”. The us their children is too explicit to bend to fit the mould of tradition. There is still no change in the New Testament as to the exclusiveness of Israel.

Acts 26:6 And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers.

This is a typical example of a Scripture that is commonly generalised to say that the promise made to our fathers is now made to everyone of every race. The promise spoken of here is made to Israel alone.

Acts 26:7 Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night hope to come ¼

Some might not like having this Scripture pointed out, along with others in the New Testament that present the fact that the Twelve Tribes still feature in the New Testament, after Pentecost. The time of this quotation is about AD 59. All these Scriptures quoted from Acts onwards are post-Pentecost, after Jesus had fulfilled the Law of Sacrifices. In traditional teachings the people being addressed are supposed to be a multi-racial church as presented in the popular teachings. Again this promise of the resurrection is still made to Israel. Remember that Jesus had already been resurrected so this particular promise of resurrection could not refer to Jesus. This promise of the resurrection is here shown as being made unto the Twelve Tribes.. Can we find, in specific direct statements anywhere at all in the Bible, where this promise is shown to be made to non-Israelites?

Acts 28:20 For this cause therefore I have called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.

This verse, together with the previous one, speaks about “hope”. The subjects of this hope are stated to be Israel or the Twelve Tribes. Hope is sometimes connected with election [for example, 1 Thess 1:4] and this is connected with Israel in other passages, particularly in the Book of Hebrews where Law and Hope are contrasted [for example, Heb 7:19, For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did].

Rom 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints, ¼

Rom 1:13 ¼ brethren … and … even as among other Gentiles.

The people Paul is addressing in Rome are defined as those who are beloved of God and called to be saints. The emphasised words will be explained later, as will Gentiles.. These pin-point the racial identity of those Paul was addressing. Called is kletos or appointed. These words cannot be found identifying non-Israel races.

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law: ¼

The Law is not saying anything to anyone else but to Israel. It is not said to others who were not under the Law. This whole epistle is written to Israelites in Rome at that time.

Rom 4:24 But for us also to whom it shall be imputed, …

In context, for us does not refer to non-Israelites, but to Israelites who believe, as Abraham did, that the Law of Faith in the Atoning Sacrifice superseded the Law of Sacrifices contained in Ordinances.

Rom 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, … how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

The symbolism here is that of marriage under Israel’s law. When we consider this in the light of the Law having been given to Israel only, we can see that Israelites are those being addressed. Paul confirms this by calling them “my brethren,” [adelphos] or “kinsmen of the womb”.

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

The seed, [zera in Hebrew or sperma in Greek], refers to semen product, that is, it refers to a line of people genetically. Through the New Testament, the sperma is used this same way. The much-used expression The Fathers both implies and emphasises the genetic line.

Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them …

Could other than Olive stock be grafted into an Olive tree? This was part of the House of Israel which had “become as aliens” rejoining part of the House of Judah under the New Testament. The House of Israel had become as “wild” Olive trees. This is in full accord with the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. The popular teaching cannot be found prophetically on a proper foundation, or in fact.

Rom 15:8 Now I say the Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers.

Here we have a statement that is important, because it tells us the people to whom Jesus came, and why He came. These promises were not made to any but to Israel and this seed of Israel. The exclusive Israel content of this chapter [Romans 15] is extensive, as shown below. Verse 9 is a quotation from Ps 18:49 which shows David praising God within Israel.

v9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

v10 Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people comes from Deut 32:43 where the people [called Gentiles by the translators] are Israel. With his people is all the Israelites together – the dispersed Israelites together with the Israelites in Judea.

v11 Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles and laud him, all ye people. Psalm 117 from which this quotation comes, again refers to Israel.

v12 Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust. Isaiah was talking to Israel. The only nations [translated as Gentiles] who could trust God were Israelites.

v16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles. ¼. Paul confirms the statement in Rom 11:13 that he is a minister to Israel.

The word “Gentiles” in this section is a Latin word that is given a manufactured meaning, so do not be misled by it. It will later be shown that the word “Gentiles” often refers to the House of Israel as opposed to the House of Judah. Again, there is no prophecy for the traditional view which arose from the Latin Vulgate and has carried on ever since. Rome made the word “Gentile” to support the view that the Roman church was the Israel of God. Let this sink in! Early translators carried on the Roman church word meaning because they were blind to their identity as part of Israel, and they thought that they might be missing out on God’s blessing. A later chapter titled, That Unfortunate Word “Gentile”, examines this word in detail.

Going on to the Book of Corinthians, we find that these so-called Gentiles could only be Israelites. The brethren, our fathers andMoses confirm this.

1 Cor 10:1-4 Moreover brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all baptised unto Moses … for they drank of that spiritual rock … and that rock was Christ.

Our Fathers gives definition in a most positive way. The children of The Fathers are those who are being addressed. Note: it does not say and that Rock was Jesus Christ. ["Jesus" is inserted in some translations to change the meaning to make the verse comply with tradition]. What is said is and that rock was anointed.

Gal 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law ¼

Only Israel was given the Law so only Israel needed redeeming from the curse of the broken law. The pronouns are so important! To understand that only Israel had been given the Law is most important. It is deception to believe to the contrary against all the clear statements of Scripture. “Us” in this context is still the same exclusive people of Israel.

Gal 4:4,5 But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

Paul here quotes Isaiah 54:1 which refers to the Redeemer of Israel. Again redemption only concerns them that were under the Law, and these are the people to whom it is written. Two parties had been under the Law. This is important to understand. These two parties are known as:

Jews and Gentiles [the House of Judah and the House of Israel], or

The Circumcision and the Uncircumcision [the House of Judah and the House of Israel].

Both parties were Israelites and could not be otherwise since only Israel had been under the Law. What is traditionally taught about Jews and Gentiles is simply not right and could not be right because of this.

Eph 2:12 That at the time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world.

Those to whom Paul was writing had become estranged from Israel. Examination of the highlighted words give identification. The words aliens and strangers are not what they might appear on the surface. These particular strangers were the House of Israel. The exclusiveness of Israel in the book of Ephesians will be looked at separately. The ye refers to the saints as is found in the first verse of this book of Ephesians. A later chapter titled Pilgrims, Strangers and Israel discusses these particular “strangers”. In this verse we have the covenants of promise. Going back to identify to whom these promises were made, takes us back to Israelites by race.

Phil 3:1 Finally, my brethren, ¼

“Brethren”, as we will see in James, refers to a brother or a near kinsman.

Phil 3:5 ¼ of the stock of Israel, ¼

“Stock” is another genetic term.

Phil 3:9 ¼ not having mine own righteousness which is of the law, ¼

Here, as usual, there is the association with the Law that was only given to Israel.

Phil 4:21 Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. ¼

“Saints” are always Israelites. For example, Psalm 148:14, The praise of all His saints: even the Children of Israel.

1 Thess 1:4 Knowing, brethren, your election of God …

Isaiah 45:4 defines Israel as being God’s elect - Israel mine Elect. These elect are chosen by God and so are of Divine origin. They are of the seed “from above”. Remember to keep in mind this word “elect. The “your” in “your election” is related to “brethren” [of the womb].

1 Thess 5:9,10 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, ¼

In Scripture there are those who are appointed to wrath and vessels fit for destruction. That is their appointment.  1 Thess 1:4 shows that this book is written to the Elect [Knowing, brethren, your election of God].

2 Thess 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation.

It is the “brethren” who are “chosen” and no one else.. We will soon be looking at the definition of “brethren”.

1 Tim 3:15 ¼ how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house [that is, household] of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Examination here will define just who is “The Church”. The Household of God refers to Israel, as does “the church” which is called out of Israel. This is the remnant which still comes from Israel only, according to the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets.

2 Tim 1:3 I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers ¼

Paul again will not discount racial origin [My forefathers]. He says that he endured all things for THE ELECT’S sake and for the appearing of the Kingdom. Again, this Kingdom is the one of which Jesus is to be the King. The Gospel of the Kingdom, or the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel, is not proclaimed any more. This is because the doctrine of a multi-racial church has taken the place of Israel. My Forefathers and The Fathers do not signify all races as having come from the loins of Isaac.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Why would it be necessary to specify the seed of Abraham instead of the seed of either Adam or mankind in general? Throughout this chapter we find many references to “brethren” [of the womb], together with Old Testament references to Psalms 8:18 and 22. These are Psalms of Israel among which we find, all ye seed of Jacob glorify Him; and fear Him all ye the seed of Israel [Ps 22:23]. The Ye is absolutely specific and limited to Israel as the seed.

Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; ¼

So, there must be other houses [oikos] that Jesus is not over! This chapter then goes on to talk about Israel and the fathers of Israel.

Heb 6:13 For when God made promise to Abraham …

There is no recorded promise to anyone else but Abraham and certain of his descendants.

Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many, …

We are not told Jesus would bear the sins of every race. “Many” is not “all” of every race. “Sin” is transgression of the Law that was given to Israel only. Isaiah 53:11 and 12 agrees about this word “many” which is limited to “my people”.

Compare: Matt 20:28 ¼ and to give his life a ransom for many.

Matt 26:28 ¼ which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Rom 5:15 ¼ much more the grace of God, ¼ hath abounded to many.

1 Cor 10:17 For we (those Israelites being addressed) being many, are one bread and one body.

So, with whom is the New Testament made?

Heb 8:8,9 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; ¼

Of all the verses in this Book of Hebrews, this verse identifies clearly with whom the New Testament is made. If any one thing is clear, it is the continuing presentation through this book that the New Testament is made with those who had the Old Testament and there is never a statement to the contrary. The two Testaments are contrasted as they relate to one another, to the one people, through this book of Hebrews. Old Testament prophecy says exactly the same [Jer 31:31], where Jeremiah prophesies to whom the New Testament would be made. “The Fathers”, again, gives racial definition. The book of Hebrews begins, yet again, with reference to THE FATHERS. The immediate connection is made, hath in these last days spoken to US by His Son ["Us" being the children of "the fathers"; those whom Jesus came to redeem; "The Hebrews" being addressed]. These are the children of “The Fathers”. When God said I will put my laws into their minds, and will write them on their hearts, the Old Testament reference was, and is still, only to Israel. The historical references through this book of Hebrews would have had no meaning to those without the knowledge of Israel’s history or of the Law given to Israel. [At this point it is better to forget all you have been previously taught or thought about "Israel"].

James 1:1,2 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren, …

For two excellent reasons, this possibly is the best statement to show who the “brethren” are. They are the twelve tribes of Israel by statement, and they are adelphoi in Greek. Adelphos is translated 346 times as “brother” or “brothers”.. Dictionaries and lexicons give the prime meaning as a kinsman [racially related].

Strong 80 from the womb – near or remote.

Vine: Adelphos denotes a brother, or near kinsman: in the plural, a community based on identity of origin, or life.

Thayer From the same womb.

The words brotherhood or brethren are mostly used to indicate those having a kinsman-blood relationship, rather than some common belief. From the translations the common belief might sometimes appear to be the meaning but the proper meaning of ‘brother’ should never be overlooked. The words are used in both the near and remote relationships. Because the words brethrenor brothers are much used word in the New Testament books, it is important to know the common usage. In James it is given as being those of the Twelve Tribes [Israel]. The remote relationship is given in James 2:21 as our father Abraham. James suggests a spiritual origin in James 1:18: Of His own will begat He us with the word of truth. This only confirms the word of truth being given to Israel. The wrong use of the words in a belief connection or a spiritual application does not eliminate this from its proper relevance to kinsmen of Israel.

In some of the post-KJV translations, either the Twelve Tribes or brethren are omitted, thus hiding the troublesome-to-them truth of Scripture. This book is addressed to the Twelve Tribes. A glance at an interlinear literal Greek-English translation will immediately show the misleading translation in some versions. Sad to say, some modern, religious translators and teachers seek to insert or substitute their particular doctrine, especially when it comes to the racial issues in the Bible. The Living Bible is probably one of the worst in this respect. Paraphrases cannot be used to study the Bible.

James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, …

“Father” here is pater meaning an earlier member of the same family. When we look at these two quotations from James we have to admit or deny that this letter was written in this present age [AD]. Anyone who wants to say this letter is written to other than the Twelve Tribes as well as to those whose father was Abraham, has to explain when the transition took place to make it include everyone else. This explanation is required also for other New Testament books.

1 Peter 1:1,2 ¼ to the strangers scattered … elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, ¼

Comparison of this verse and also pilgrims and strangers [1 Peter 2:11] with other places in the New Testament, and with the counterparts in the Old Testament [see Psalm 39:12], will quickly identify these particular strangers as being Israelites who had been living apart from God and the temple system. A chapter titled Pilgrims, Strangers and Israel deals with this in detail. These particular words are used of Israel when Israel is scattered among the other races. They were “elect”, a word covered lightly earlier on in the Old Testament texts. They were “holy” or “sanctified” by the Spirit upon them [both are the same word in the original texts, meaning "separated" or "set apart"]. They are holy in a way in which no other race is separated unto God.

1 Peter 1:10 Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you.

The “you” here refers to the strangers etc of verses 1 and 2. The prophets all prophesied about grace which would come to Israel. There is no prophecy about this grace being to others. Peter was writing to Israelites!

1 Peter 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify …

This anointing Spirit was in them [note this well because we will come upon this again later] and the Word goes on to say:

1 Peter 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation.

This is another quotation from the Old Testament which shows that there is no New Testament change in the separate nature of Israel. This separation is to be maintained. The KJV translates Lev 11:45 as, I am the Lord that bringeth you up out of the Land of Egypt to be your God. Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.. It is God who made Israel a holy people. God is holy now. Israel also is holy [separate] to God now. This is what the verse is saying. “Holy” does not mean righteous as some would lead us to believe.

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; ¼

We have looked at this quotation from Exodus 19:5 which Peter quotes here. Israel is still an holy nation and not a “church” in the commonly accepted meaning of the word “church”.. Peter goes on to show that this nation had a king that they were to honour. This nation must have been in existence at the time of writing. In a later chapter we will show that this king was not the Emperor of the Roman Empire, as some modern translations say in their footnotes.

2 Peter 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: …

These promises are stated in Romans 9:3,4 to be given to kinsmen of the flesh who are Israelites and that the promises pertained to them. Peter also wrote to Israelites!

1 Peter 2:17 ¼ honour the King.

In prophecy, the House of Israel would always have a monarch on the continuing Throne of David, whereas the House of Judah would not have a monarch in the last days. When the two Houses regather to the Holy [separate] Land, they will have one Headagain [Hos 1:11 and please note the timing of this]. It has not happened yet!

1 Peter 2:24,25 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body … for ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

This is under the New Testament which some of the House of Israel had come under. Jesus bare the sins of Israel and Jesus describes Himself as the Shepherd of the sheep, but never as the shepherd of the Tares or the Goats or of any other race. Again, the pronouns refer to those being addressed, again they are brethren, etc.

2 Peter 3:2-4 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy [that is, separated] prophets, and the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour.

These prophets were prophets of Israel. The Lord and Saviour is the Lord and Saviour of Israel and never of others.

The words of the Apostles do not override the words of the Prophets. The Apostles confirm the Prophets. In this verse the Apostles and Prophets are linked together. Peter had already written about the false prophets which would be among you and he describes their character.

In John’s letters there is much separation by pronouns.

1 John 2:12 I write to you little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake.

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, because they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: ¼

1 John 2:20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, ¼

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, ¼

1 John 3:9 whosoever is born of God [that is, from above by spirit and by water] does not commit [practise] sin.

1 John 5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not, ¼

Your sins refers to the sins of those to whom John is writing. Jesus did come to save HIS People from their sins. John also refers to certain people who are false and by pronoun separation these are “they” as opposed to “ye” and “we“. They were not of ustells us that they were different in some way, even if they professed to believe in Jesus! It becomes self-evident that the anointingwhich abideth in you could only abide because the anointed people are conceived with this potential. How else could it abide? This bears witness to the anointed race in the Old Testament. These alone have the capacity to “hear” and to “believe”.

The first chapter of John’s epistle speaks of hearing, seeing, looking upon and handling that which was from the beginning. These were Israelites to whom Jesus was manifest. John the Baptist said, that He might be made manifest to Israel [John 1:31]. In 1 John 2:7, he shows that he is addressing those who had the old commandment from the beginning.. These can only be Israelites. I John 2:24 indicates that what was heard from the beginning about the old commandment must remain in the hearers in order to continue in the Son and in the Father. These also can only be Israelites.

Jude 3 ¼ the common salvation [that is, common to Israel and Judah] the faith which was once [that is, without change] delivered unto the saints – [that is, the separated people].

Jude 19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

Amongst God’s saints are others who separate themselves from God through their disbelief. They were not born in such a state – they become that way by their own choice and their own actions. They are described as not having the spirit, that is, they may as well have been born outside Israel. They are in the same category as foreigners who try to separate themselves from other nations by living in Israel – they are not begotten from above and hence are also not having the spirit.

ISRAEL IN THE REVELATION

Jehovah is not the God of all nations. He is confined to one nation – the sons of Jacob. No Biblical record can be found that Jehovah is the God of any people other than Israel.

In the book of Revelation, THE TWELVE TRIBES still feature! They have in no way become some non-Israel, non-twelve-tribed church! This book begins by speaking of the revelation, to show unto His servants things which must shortly come to pass. This revelation is to His Servants of the twelve tribes only and this is confirmed in many places.

Rev 1:2 Who bear record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, …

This book does not bear witness to anything outside of what has been revealed in the Word of God or the Spirit of Prophecy. The testimony of Israel racially has been clearly revealed through the Word.

TO CONCLUDE

These Scriptures show the exclusive nature of Israel as a continuing theme throughout both Testaments. If we do not want to accept all these references, then what is to be done with them? The acceptance or non-acceptance of an exclusive Israel determines the prophetic stream one subscribes to. When exclusive Israel becomes the foundation of prophetic interpretation, much of the common conflicts in prophecy are found to disappear. But, above all, the acceptance or non-acceptance determines our ability to believe and to understand Jesus’ words.

It is not difficult to conclude that the Bible is a book primarily about Israel [as a people] because Jehovah is consistently declared to be the God of this one people. We find other Biblical statistics, such as:

Israel as Yisra’el 2,514 times [Old Testament]

Israel as Israel 70 times [New Testament]

Jacob [KJV] 358 times [24 in New Testament]

Judah 813 times

Ephraim 172 times

Manasseh 143 times

Hebrews 21 times

Lord God of Israel 110 times

God of Israel 90 times

Holy One of Israel 31 times

Lord God of the Hebrews 5 times

Mighty God of Jacob 4 times

Hope of Israel 2 times

Congregation of Israel 160 times [as qahal]
173 times [as edah]

Assembly of Israel 21 times [as atsarah]

Ekklesia 116 times in New Testament

Tribes [shebet] of Israel 190 times [Old Testament]

Tribes [phule] of Israel 31 times [New Testament]

People of Israel 19 times [KJV]

My people 231 times

Of Israel 1,692 times

To Israel 23 times.

For Israel 24 times

Then we find expressions like, Israel’s God, the Light of, the Rock of, the Redeemer of, the Stone of, the Shepherd of, the Portion of, the God of; all of which refer expressly to Israel.

Then there are expressions like the God of your fathers and fathers of Israel ["fathers" is mentioned 549 times including 56 in the New Testament].

There is the intimate word Jeshurun for Israel. There are about 5,000 direct references that isolate Israel as a people. Their personal God, Jehovah, [Yehovah] is mentioned 6,528 times. In most cases the AV wrongly renders this as ‘Lord’ and only four places as ‘Jehovah’ The true pronunciation of God’s name is unknown.

The remainder of this book is based on the foundation of an exclusive Israel. This presentation might well come as a shock to sincere dedicated Christians and there will be immediate reactions. Accordingly, we must look at these reactions next. Then we will consider the hinge-point Scriptures of those who hold an opposing view. Their hinge-point Scriptures are Go ye into all the world and God so loved the world. After looking at the reactions we will then look to see what “world” it is that God so loved.

CHAPTER 3: REACTIONS to an EXCLUSIVE ISRAEL

Through the New Testament there are many topics and words that originate in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament there are words such as promises, know, elect, called, chosen, seed and variations of them which are generally agreed to refer only to the Israel nation. We have to ask if there is adequate reason to suggest a switch which might allow the equivalent Greek words to apply to some multi-racial church in the New Testament.

First it would be well to review what was written in the last chapter. It can be seen that there is an overwhelming weight of evidence from simple direct statements against the traditional teachings. The traditional teachings do not arise from any weight of simple direct statements. In a separate chapter we will look into aspects of the basis of the traditional teachings.

To use words like deception and another Gospel cannot be done lightly. These are very serious considerations and if the weight of evidence as shown in the previous two chapters is accepted, then the popular teachings must have cultish elements. The implications of this conclusion are vast and almost devastating to many Christians and churches. It would have bearing on missionary activity as well. But, please note well, it has not been said or suggested that all the non-Israel nations should not be made subject to the Law of GodNeither has it been said that they are condemned by God.. This matter is a later consideration in this book. When we come to God so loved the world as taught, traditionalists have to immediately get around every reference to the exclusiveness of Israel (in both Testaments), if they want to change the nation of Israel into some multi-racial church, or if they want to say there is both a national Israel and a Church consisting of non-Israelites. This is impossible to do from any pattern of consistent direct statements. We would have to get around it from the foundation of the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets, and this cannot be done.

God has told us that He will do nothing He does not reveal first to his servants the prophets of Israel. He will fulfil His Word to Israel.. Some of what has already been written in this book will cause immediate (and common) reactions among Christians who think they know their Bible. This is why it has been necessary to lay a good foundation from both Testaments and to demonstrate the consistent direction and weight of evidence in that direction.

Now we can have a look at some of these common reactions. Only brief comments are made on these reactions, because they are all expanded at various places elsewhere in this book.

REACTION ONE [THE MOST COMMON]

“Yes, that is true, but God was speaking to them, and not to us. Now God is speaking to everyone”.

This would be the thought of the majority of church-going people today, and is a thought that is wrongly encouraged. So should we go along with that reaction just because it sounds right? As soon as it is asked, “When in this church age did God’s speaking change from ‘them’ to ‘us’?”, there is no answer at all. If this question cannot be answered from Scripture, then it has no basis.

It would be profitable for any who would like to retain this particular thought and reaction, to look at the root word grapho which is used in the New Testament 194 times. It is used in the expression it is written and refers to the Old Testament Scriptures. It would be profitable too, to look at written in a concordance where it will be seen afresh that many times the basis of all doctrine isit is writtenIt is written means written in the Old Testament and so these quotes refer to Israel.

If the basis of a belief or doctrine appears to be in the New Testament alone, it must be suspect because it is not written in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. This is important because there are a number of such ideas which are generally accepted, but which do not have it is written as a basis. In fact it might be said that much of what is debated has no foundation at all in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. Some traditional teachings cannot present a clear pattern of simple direct statements from the Old Testament to support these views. They rely mainly on fabricated “types”, “shadows” and analogies. Man’s tradition therefore is not established in the mouth of two or three witnesses as is required by Scripture. Israel cannot be changed to mean non-Israel just by making such a statement without the right foundation.

If a New Testament book, written in the ‘Christian age’, [for example, James’ Epistle to the Twelve Tribes] was written and addressed to Israelites, then either the writer was wrong or there would need to have been something that happened since Pentecost in order for men to be able to say, God is now speaking to everyone [meaning every race].

REACTION TWO

“Yes, but Israel has now become the church, so all these things belong to the church”.

This says that “Israel” and “The Church” no longer have any connection and that Israel has vanished. The church is supposed to consist of non-Israelites, the so-called “Gentiles”. However, the Hebrew word goi, upon which the “gentiles” thought is based, is also used of Israel. So goi does not always equate with so-called non-Israel “gentiles”.. The whole subject is simplified when we accept what we find when we build upon the right foundation and have the Cornerstone.

Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, …

The Cornerstone, the prophets and the apostles all agree. Since “apostles” is put before “prophets”, this Scripture is used to say that New Testament apostles have new prophecy and doctrine that was not contained or forecast within the Old Testament. Just to say something like that does not make it fact. In the books of Galatians and Romans in particular, modern teaching says that the Apostle Paul has made a turn around from what is recorded in Acts where he tells King Agrippa that he spoke nothing other than what was said in the law and the prophets! In Romans and Galatians he is now supposed to be writing to certain so-called Gentiles who are supposed to be non-Israelites. The internal statements show that each letter in the New Testament is written only to Israelites. This is discussed in more detail in a chapter titled That Unfortunate Word “Gentile”.

Let us look again at the Apostle Paul’s famous speech in Acts 13 which was made long after Jesus’ death and resurrection. Here, right in the New Testament age, Israel is still a genetic term. There is still no sign of “The Church” as this is commonly perceived. Consider all the following highlighted words from Acts 13:17-42:

v17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, ¼

v23 Of this man’s seed hath God, according to his promise, raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus.

v24 … the baptism of repentance to all the people of Israel.

v26 Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, ¼

v32,3 ¼ how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, ¼

v39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses..

In the last verse we see the first “all” that people most like to generalise to include everyone on Earth. But the “ye”, and the context, nails it down to Israel alone as the ones to whom the Law of Moses was given. All the highlighted words in these verses give a very specific definition of who is being addressed in the New Testament; it is always to a genetic Israel! We can no longer say that these children of the fathers, (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob), come from other stock. These are the people who had been under the Law of Moses! In the above passage, Paul was addressing those whom he described as MEN OF ISRAEL, who feared God. The only way we could say that “The Church” has replaced Israel is to prove that the New Testament Church comes from within Israel via the mechanism of the New Testament; this is discussed later in this book.

REACTION THREE

“The Gentiles are now adopted into Israel, so the promises made to Israel are now made to everyone who believes in Jesus”.

A short answer to this reaction is not possible because there are so many aspects to cover. These are covered as individual sections on “gentiles”, “the church”, “strangers” and “adoption”, and the promises made to Abraham and his seed.

REACTION FOUR

“The seed of Abraham has now become the seed of Jesus … it is now a spiritual Seed”.

The promises were made to Abraham’s seed, but not to Jesus, who came to fulfil them. The promises were made to Abraham and his seed, which is named in Isaac [Gen 21:12]. The promises were therefore given to the Israel people as a whole. Now, as Jesus was born into Israel, He is regarded as the seed of Abraham and of David [Matt 1:1]. But the promises were not specifically given to Jesus as the ‘one seed’ of Galatians 3:16. And, of course, Jesus had no ‘seed’.. If Jesus was that one seed, then everyone between Abraham and Jesus would be disinherited, including Isaac and Jacob. Israel then, could not have existed as the seed of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob, if Jesus were that seed. A more accurate translation of Gal 3:16 reads:

And to Abraham and the seed of him the promises were spoken. He says not, ‘And to the seed of thee’ as of many, but as of one. And to the seed of thee which is anointed.

Note: “seed” is used here and elsewhere as a collective noun.

REACTION FIVE

“It is said that the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile has been broken down so that all are now one in Jesus.”

Here we have another hinge-point of much of what is taught in the evangelical churches today. But, in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets, the partition is found to be between The House of Israel and The House of Judah. It is not between Israelites and non-Israelites [see Isaiah 11:13 Ephraim shall not vex Judah any more]. In all of the New Testament Scriptures quoted above where the exclusiveness of Israel was shown, all the people addressed by Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, are clearly shown to be Israelites. All the books of the Bible provide the same evidence. It will be shown that the House of Israel had been “scattered” among the nations and that any pattern showing a gathering or the joining together of Israel with non-Israel races cannot be found in prophecy.

REACTION SIX

“The Jews are God’s natural children, but the members of the Church are God’s spiritual children”.

Two sets of parallel promises cannot be found in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. Neither are the promises made to Abraham’s seed directed specifically to Jesus. The promises made to the fathers are always presented as being fulfilled in us their children. Israelites are the children of the promise. There is only one promise in this respect. There is not a second similar promise found for non-Israel races.

NOTE: The “children” still have to be redeemed individually from the curse of the broken Law. They are born at physical birth as heirs of salvation. This sixth reaction results from attempting to get around the problem of a national and racial Israel and retain tradition at the same time. The word Jew has to be made to equate with Israel and the word Gentile has to be made to equate with non-Israel. This is not the world of reality! Yet it has been drummed into most Christians, conditioning all their thinking, teaching and writing, on almost every subject.

REACTION SEVEN

“That seems to be true, but no one knows who is an Israelite today.”

May we quote 2 Timothy 2:19? Never-the-less the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his. There is a holy [separate] people which are stone, elect and precious, above all other people which have now obtained mercy. They are brethren from the womb and are anointed [christos]. They are born from above (that is, begotten from above). The Bible does give marks of identification that are clear and unmistakable, but this identity factor is outside the scope of this book.

REACTION EIGHT

“This is all very well, but now everything is spiritualised.”

It is unfortunate for such a belief that the Twelve Tribes of Israel keep appearing in the New Testament. In this present New Testament age they are not spiritualised away! To react this way is to say that Jesus and Paul are wrong. Paul said unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come – Acts 26:7. How can twelve individual tribes be spiritualised?

REACTION NINE

“The law has been fulfilled, therefore nothing in the law applies any more.”

Jesus says in Matthew 5:17,18:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

The Law has different aspects. In Romans 13:8-10 we have a discourse about fulfilling the Law which concludes with, therefore love is the fulfilling of the Law. This Scripture is sometimes quoted as proof that everything relating to the Law is finished, but verse 8 is about people, as individuals, fulfilling the Law by their actions. It is not about God fulfilling His covenants and promises. This is confirmed in Matthew 7:12 where Jesus is saying, therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do YE also unto them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.. Jesus has fulfilled what is written in the Law concerning Himself [Luke 24:44]. His sacrifice has fulfilled that part of the Law concerning sacrifices.

Possibly the short answer to the rest of the matter of fulfilling the Law is that heaven and earth has not yet passed away. When they are passed away, all will have been fulfilled. What has been written in the Law, The Psalms and The Prophets will come to pass. The promises to the seed of Abraham still stand and will yet come to pass!

REACTION TEN

“Everyone is now the same because all are one in Christ Jesus.”

This epitomises the traditional teachings.

Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which be of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

It sounds right at first glance, particularly when the pronouns are ignored. The ye are the people being addressed. That is why it is necessary to establish that the so-called Gentiles in the Epistles were Israelites. A later chapter is devoted to this subject. There is no pattern through The Law, The Psalms and The Prophets to support tradition. It is not there, so something must be wrong with the traditional teaching.

REACTION ELEVEN

“It makes no difference now because all nations are blessed in Abraham. All is now of Grace.”

Some teachers actually do say this, believe it or not. Now, if this were true, it means that the Old Testament is invalid. It is like the Roman Catholic idea of saying that the Church is the authority rather than the Bible and yet quoting the Bible wrongly about Peter and the rock to support their view.

But to whom is God gracious if all is of grace? Is it every one of every race on Earth?

Exodus 33:19 ¼ and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.

Rom 9:15-18 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, ¼ so then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy … therefore hath he mercy upon whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

This question of the Grace of God is a subject in itself; but the over-riding principle is the Sovereignty of God. It is whom He will. To say glibly, all is of grace is to include everyone and to make a mockery of the Sovereignty of God. If redemption is for every man of every race, then the whole choice is man’s choice and this is another gospel [2 Cor 11:6 and Gal 1:6].

In the New Testament, “grace” refers to the Divine influence upon the heart. We can find no reference to God writing the Law on their hearts other than to Israel, nor can we find a word of prophecy about a new heart being given to any other than Israel.

ARE THERE two or THREE WITNESSES for “EXCLUSIVE ISRAEL”?

2 Cor 13:1 In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

First witness:

The Old Testament is contained in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets.

The New Testament is contained in the Gospels, the Epistles and Revelations.

Second witness:

The Old Testament speaks redemption being for Israel ALONE.

The New Testament speaks of redemption being for Israel ALONE.

Third witness:

The Old Testament was made with Israel ALONE [Psalm 147:19,20 etc].

The New Testament is made with Israel ALONE [Hebrews 8:8].

Let us go on to look further into these issues and to meet the objections and the things that might appear to be at variance.

We will look at a chapter devoted to the world as found in Go into all the world, and follow this with a chapter on specific stumbling blocks placed in the way to comprehending the whole Bible witnesses concerning the exclusiveness of Israel.

Chapter 4: WHICH WORLD DID GOD “SO LOVE”?

When we consider the volume of Scriptures which have been presented in the two chapters detailing the exclusiveness of Israel, if we had no mind-set or pre-conditioning, we would have to agree to the following:

They are all consistent statements of fact, [not inferences].

They all relate to Israel alone, as a race, no other race being included.

Israel alone is God’s inheritance.

There is no conflict about redemption applying to Israel alone.

The covenants and promises referred to were made with Israel only.

That Israel is a holy, that is, set-apart race [what is commonly called The Chosen Race].

That the Statutes [choq] and the Judgements [mishpat] were given to Israel alone as a servant nation [this is vital to comprehend and remember in the chapters to follow].

That the word Jews is not mentioned in any of these Scriptures.

That there are different seeds and that Abraham’s seed is genetic.

That none of these Scriptures can be ‘spiritualised’.

If we come to the conclusion that there is a unique, racial Israel, we will be in conflict with the following viewpoints:

What is inferred indirectly from verses used by universalists.

What we think we see manifest in terms of Christian experience in other races.

Universalists may use what appear to be direct statements. But they rely on certain words that have been given new meanings. Sometimes completely wrong and deceptive meanings have been placed on words and some of these have become accepted modern teachings. To these manufactured word meanings, “types” are added to fit the interpretation. This is the common way of teaching, but it is not teaching that is based upon the foundation of the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets.

Over the years, accumulated errors in translations have led us away from the meanings contained in the original texts. One consequence has been that the commentaries and reference dictionaries often perpetuate and magnify the problems by using statements such as, this has come to mean, and then applying their own interpretations based upon such new meanings. Apart from errors in pure translation, there are errors due to words being added in English that are not supported in the original text. Also there are words deleted from the English text that are supported in the original text. An example of this is the frequent omission of the Definite Article from the English translations, where this is included in the Greek and vice versa.

This chapter provides several typical examples of these deviations.

WORD MEANINGS

In the New Testament there is a call to separation which few will deny. In today’s preaching, this is presented primarily as a separation from uncleaness and sin. This is not an incorrect presentation in itself, but it is a half truth.

2 Cor 6:16,17 ¼ I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be MY PEOPLE. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing], and I will receive you.

The addition of “thing” [akathartou, genitive, singular, neuter] at the end of this verse is grammatically justified. But, preachers use it in the sense of things rather than people. When we look at this verse, it is obvious that “them” signifies the separation of one people [not thing] from another. The word used in Greek is aphorizo that means to border off … to limit off … to separate and to sever from the rest. In the next verse below we see how this word is used; it is used of the separation of goats from amongst Israelite sheep. [Note: nations is a neuter noun whereas them is masculine and thus refers to the people within the nations].

Matt 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: …

This specifically mentions nations. Any such suggestion of election or national separation horrifies some Christians because of the conflict between this and their understanding of God so loved the world and similar Scriptures. So it might be well to immediately look at these verses and see what the world means.

GO INTO ALL “THE WORLD”

John 3:16,17 For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

These are two much quoted verses. In each case “the world” is the same word kosmos in the original Greek. Kosmos is probably one of the least understood and misused words in the New Testament and perhaps we should take a short-cut and make statements about kosmos which is usually translated as “world”.

Kosmos does not mean every race or the inhabited earth [oikoumene]. Nor does it mean the land mass of the earth or its soil [ge and ghay].

Kosmos has the prime meaning is “order”, “arrangement” or “beauty”, but never the common multi-racial meaning as taught.

Kosmos often means that particular world which is being spoken about, to the exclusion of other “worlds”. In English we speak of the “world of music” – in Greek we would say the kosmos of music.

Kosmos can mean the whole world of wicked and reprobate men as opposed to the “world” of God’s elect.

Kosmos is used of the Roman Empire [John 8:23].

Kosmos is used of the world that was before the flood [2 Peter 2:5]. That world was destroyed [Heb 11:7].

Kosmos is spoken of, not only as the world that now is, but also of that which is to come. [Do we preach to the world to come?].

Kosmos can refer to things other than people, for example, the adornment of a woman’s hair [see 1 Tim 2:9 wherekosmos is translated as "modest"]. It is particularly difficult to proclaim the gospel to a woman’s hair clip!

Kosmos is used of many other things and these can include either order or disorder, fame and honour, the orderly universe, the stars in the universe and even heaven!

So, which “world” of all these “worlds” did God so love? From the Scriptures, we can see that there are differing kinds of worlds. Think about this and how this relates to what has been shown as written in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets. In the Old Testament we are told that God loved Israel. There does not seem to be a single direct reference to God loving any other race. Let us consider the Israel order whom God says He loved in the Old Testament.

Deut 7:8 But because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he sware unto your fathers … [that is, of Israel].

Psalm 47:4 ¼ the excellency of Jacob whom he loved.

Isaiah 63:7-9 I will mention the loving kindness of the Lord … and the great goodness toward the house of Israel … in his love and in his pity he redeemed them …

Hosea 3:1 … according to the love of the Lord towards the children of Israel.

Hosea 11:1-4 When Israel was a child, then I loved him … I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love: ¼

Zeph 3:17 The Lord thy God in the midst of thee [that is, Israel] is mighty, he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy, he will rest in his love ¼

Malachi 1:2 ¼ yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, ¼

In the Old Testament we have these expressions of the Israel people that God so loved. Cast your mind back to all the Scriptures in the New Testament we have looked at which show the exclusive nature of Israel. Both tell of the love of God for Israel in a way which separates them from the other races. Are we now to believe that this people Israel have somehow disappeared, despite prophecy to the contrary? If God said that He hated Esau, then Edom could not be included in the “all” or “the world” of Go ye into all the world and God so loved the world.

Just in case anyone still has reservations about “the world” having different meanings, we will look at pairs of verses each of which contain the words “the world”.

Pair One:

John 7:7 The world cannot hate you, but me it hateth, ¼

1 John 3:13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.

If both of these two “worlds” were the same, then the disciples could not be hated by a world that was not able to hate them. Both worlds are kosmos.

Pair Two:

John 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world ¼

John 17:14 ¼ they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

In one verse they are out of “the world” and in the second they are not of “the world”.

Pair Three:

John 17:9 ¼ I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine.

John 3:16 God so loved the world, ¼

Might it not be blasphemy to suggest that Jesus would not pray for that world He loved. So He must pray for one “world” and not for another! Here are demonstrated three pairs of Scriptures which show contrasts in the “worlds” they are talking about.

THE WORLD – KOSMOS OR OIKOUMENE?

These two words are both translated “world”, but they are different in application and meaning. The meaning of kosmos is determined by its context to identify which particular world is under discussion, whereas oikoumene means the inhabited or civilised earth of the Mediterranean region. We can see oikoumene easily in verses such as Luke 2:1 where Caesar was to tax allthe world and Acts 11:28 about a famine throughout all the world. In Acts 17:6 we read where the disciples turned the world upside down. In Acts 19:27 we read about all Asia and the world worshipping the goddess Diana and in Acts 24:5 about Paul being said to be a mover of sedition throughout the world. In Rev 3:10 Jesus speaks about the hour of temptation which shall come upon allthe world. In Romans 10:18 we are told the Word of God went into all the earth and unto the ends of the world.. When we remember that both parts of Israel were scattered among the nations this is easily understood. We might say that the kosmos of Israel was scattered throughout the oikoumene. Jesus came into the oikoumene [Heb 1:6] to minister to the kosmos of Israel.

Once we understand this, we can correct verses which the universalists use, such as 1 John 2:2: And He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for [that is, the sins of] the whole world. Here the word for world is kosmos, not oikoumene. The “whole” is holos which means every bit and every whit of the kosmos it refers to. The context shows John is saying that the propitiation applies to all of Israel.

It also helps with Matt 24:14 where Jesus speaks about the gospel being preached (proclaimed) in all the world. Here we findoikoumene for “world”, not kosmos. The expression in the world is not to the world.. Here Jesus was addressing Israelite disciples about the gospel being a witness to all the Israel nations who were dispersed in the oikoumene at that time.


WHO ARE THE HUNTERS

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

hunters

Why Doesn’t Your Pastor

Ever Speak Of Them’?

Did you know while the Holy Bible speaks of ‘fishers’ it also speaks of ‘hunters’ in the very same verse? If you are unfamiliar with this pregnant fact, I will quote it from Jeremiah 16:16:

‘Behold I will send for many fishers, saith Yahweh, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks.’

Have you ever wondered why your pastor emphasizes with very much intensity and vigor the subject of the ‘fishers’, and never so much as mentions the ‘hunters’? It’s as though the Bible had never mentioned the topics of the ‘fishers’ and ‘hunters” in the same verse! Have you ever asked your pastor why he never mentions the ‘hunters’ in all his lengthy and seemingly detailed sermons? After all, your pastor graduated from seminary and knows all of this, right? Of course, it is probably just a slight oversight on his part that he has never taken the time to explain this to you, right? Or, maybe, he has so many other more important things to dwell on, he simply does not have time for the insignificant ‘hunters.’ Has your pastor ever used Jeremiah 16:16 for his text?

The pastors are seemingly very quick and prepared to expound that Christ (whose real Hebrew name was Yahshua), when He called his disciples, had stated to them, Matthew 4:19: And he said unto them, Follow me and I will make you fishers of men.’

Whenever your pastor has quoted this passage, has he ever made reference to Jeremiah 16:16 and expounded on the relationship of the two verses? If he hasn’t, it would seem quite strange, for The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, edited by Jerome H. Smith (a special book of cross-references) takes you to this verse. If then, the calling by Christ (Yahshua) of His disciples was the fulfillment of Jeremiah 16:16, just when is the fulfillment of the ‘hunters” supposed to take place? Has your pastor ever addressed the question of the ‘hunters’? If the calling of the ‘fishers’ is all that important, it would seem the calling of the ‘hunters’ would be equally significant. Maybe, if your pastor doesn’t want to explain to you who the ‘hunters’ are supposed to be, with a little ingenuity on your own part, you can figure who these ‘hunters’ might be, and just what they are to be hunting for. Remember that Jeremiah 16:16 said, ‘out of the holes of the rocks?’ Who in the world would go ‘hunting’ in ‘the holes of the rocks’? Do you suppose it is talking about archaeologists as being these “hunters”? If so, who would be the “them”, for whom these archaeologists would be looking? If your pastor wishes to remain mute on this topic, maybe I can help answer this question of who these ‘hunters” are. Do you suppose the ‘hunters’ were to hunt for the same people the “fishers’ were to fish foO Maybe, if one were to read the rest of Jeremiah chapter 16, one might find who these people are, to whom Yahweh through Jeremiah referred.

IF THE ARCHAEOLOGISTS ARE THE “HUNTERS”

IN QUESTION, THEY HAVE BEEN QUITE BUSY

In 1717, the Society of Antiquaries was set up in London. It received a royal charter in 1751 and issued its first Archeologia’ in 1770. In 1798, Napoleon Bonaparte occupied Egypt, which resulted partially in archaeological investigation. In 1799, the Rosetta Stone (a trilingual inscription) was found which provided the key to unlocking Egyptian hieroglyphics. In 1805, Ulrich Jasper Seetzen discovered Caesarea Philippi, Ammon and Gerasa. In 181 1. C. S. Rich, the first British consul at Baghdad, excavated and partially mapped the ruins of Babylon. In 1812, Johan Ludwig Burckhardt discovered Petra. In 1815, Lady Hester Stanhope made an attempt to unearth statuary at Ashkelon. In’ 1817, Giovanni Battista Belzoni began the search of tombs and temples of the pharaohs. In 1821-2, Jean Francois Champollion finally broke the code of the Rosetta Stone. In 1833, Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson went to Persia as a young officer to organize the Shah’s army; became interested in cuneiform; deciphered and later published the trilingual inscriptions of Darius I on the Behistun. In 1838, Edward Robinson and Eli Smith traveled throughout Palestine identifying and describing Biblical cites.

In 1842, Paul Emile Bofta began investigation of the mound of Kuyunjik, discovered Khorsabad and the palace of Sargon 11, which opened the way to Assyriology. In 1845, Sir Austen Henry, Layard began excavations at Nimrud, discovering the palaces of, Ashurnasirpal, Shalmaneser 11, finding the famous Black Obelisk and later making other important discoveries. In 1848, F. de Saulcy cleared a site at Jerusalem. In 1849, Karl Richard Lepsius published the results of Prussian expeditions to Egypt. In 1850 Auguste Ferdinand Francois Mariette began investigating Egypt. In 30 years he excavated and found 15, 000 monuments from Memphis to Karnak in 37 sites. In 1850, W. K. Loftus succeeded Rassam at Nineveh, visited Erech and other sites in the Euphrates. In 1859 Konstantin von Tischendorf discovered the Codex Sinaiticus. In 1863, J. T. Wood explored Ephesus for the British Museum and came upon the temple Artemis. In 1864, Giovanni Battista De Rosse began study of the Roman catacombs. In 1865 the foundation of the Palestine Exploration Fund promoted archeological research in, and later publication of, Jerusalem and western Palestine. In 1867, Chades Warren, a British artillery officer, was financed by the fund to investigate Jerusalem. In 1870, Charles Clermont-Ganneau came to the French consular service in Palestine, later sent the Mesha Stele to the Louvre; discovered the famous notice prohibiting aliens from intrusion into the Temple Court and identified the site of Gezer. This same year, the American Palestine Exploration Society was founded. Also, Heinrich Schliemann discovered Troy, and, with his successor Dorpfeld, first understood the importance of a tell. in 1872, the Palestine Exploration Fund sent a party to Palestine to make an inch-to-mile survey of Western Palestine, headed by Claude Regnier Conder and Horatio Herbert Kitchener. This survey was indispensable, basic work for, later archeologists and geographers.

In 1873, The Daily Telegraph financed an expedition and George Smith began working at Nimrud; later to Kuyunjik. In 1877, Ernest de Sarzec worked Lagash, finding statues of early governors and the Victory Stele of Eannatum, awakening the world to Sumerian archaeology. In 1878, Rassam resumed work for the British Museum at Nineveh finding a haul of tablets, a clay prism and accounts of the campaigns of Sennacherib. In 1879, Hormuzd Rassam investigated the ruins of Babylon. In 1881, Sir Gaston Camille Charles Maspero discovered many royal sarcophagi at Deir-el-Bahri and continued clearing work on the temple of Karnak, later publishing his findings. In 1882, Efouard Naville investigated Egypt. This year also saw W. Dorpfeld join Schliemann at Troy. In 1884, M. Dieulafoy continued excavations of the royal buildings of Susa. In 1887, a peasant woman, grubbing for compost in the ruins of Akhenaton’s town at Tell el-Amarna unearthed the priceless Tell el-Amarna Letters. In 1888, John P. Peters, directing an American dig along with Haynes and Hilprecht, discovered 20,000 tablets at Nippur. In 1890, Flinders Petrie spent six weeks on the mound of Tell-el-Hesi, in southwest Palestine. He succeeded in setting a standard in the principles of stratigraphy and the utilization of pottery to establish dating. In 1894, Sir Arthur Evans began work in Crete probing the Minoan civilization. In 1895, Bernard Pyne Grenfell, with colleague A. S. Hunt, began searching for Greek papyri, developing the science of papyrology. In 1895, Sir William Mitchell Ramsey, Professor of Humanity at Aberdeen, did archaeological work in Asia Minor and established the reputation of Luke as a true historian.

In 1896, G. M. Legrain initiated work at Karnak temple. In 1897, J. de Morgan saw work at Susa. In 1898, M. Loret discovered the tomb of Arnenhotep 11 in the Valley of the Kings. 1899 saw Robert Koldewey at Babylon. 1900 saw George L. Robinson at Petra. 1901 saw Gaston Cros at Telloh (Lagash). 1902 saw R. A. S. Macalister begin his excavation of Gezer, which lasted seven years, and, also, Ernst Sellin begin a three-year survey of Tell Taanach. In 1903, G. Schumacher, trained by Sellin, oversaw investigation of Megiddo, the well-known Jeroboam seal being discovered. 1904 saw David G. Hogarth at Ephesus. In 1905, James Henry Breasted contributed his Ancient Records of Egypt and 2nd ed. History of Egypt, showing striking advances in Egyptology. 1906 found Hugo Winkler working at Boghazkoy, a Hittite site. 1907 saw Herman Thiersch, Herman Kohl, Carl Watzinger and Ernst Sellin surveying the synagogue of Galilee, with Watzinger and Sellin overseeing a dig at Jericho. 1908 saw D. G. Lyon, C. S. Fisher and G. A. Reisner at Samaria. 1909 saw Duncan Mackenzie at Bethshemesh. 1910 saw Howard C. Butler at Sardis. In 1913, Watzinger and Sellin investigated Shechem. 1917 saw The Palestine Department of Antiquities founded, headed by John Garstang. 1919, with WW I over, saw Albright, Woolley, Fisher, R. L. Hall, Wace, Montet, and Dunand at various digs. 1922 saw Albright working at Gibeah, Howard Carter discovering Tutankhamen’s tomb in the Valley of the Kings, A. Schmidt and H. Kaer working at Shiloh and Sir Charles Leonard Woolley digging at Ur. 1923 saw W. J. Phythian-Adams and John Garstang at Ashkelon. 1924 saw David M. Robinson on the Pisidian Antioch. 1925 saw Dr. Edward Chiera at Nuzi discovering the Patriarchs were true historical people. 1926 saw W. F. Bad6 at the Biblical Mizpah. In 1928, Elihu Grant began a series of five campaigns at Beth-Shemesh. 1929 saw Dorothy Garrod investigating Palestinian caves. 1930 saw Theodore D. McCown with C. S.

Fisher continue work at Gerasa, G. L. Robinson discovering Petra’s ‘high place’ and John Garstang working at Jericho. In 1931, Ernst Herzfeld was at work at Persepolis and A. Maiui at Pompeii and Herculaneum. 0. R. Sellers with W. F. Albright was working at Bethzur. Also, J. W. Crowfoot continued the project at Samaria where Reisner left off. Then M. E. L. Mallowan appeared on the scene with work at Nineveh. In 1932, G. E. Ederkin explored the site of Syrian Antioch. J. L. Starkey began a dig at Lachish. R. W. Hamilton investigated a site at the foot of Carmel. In 1933, Roman Ghirshman began work at Tepe Siyalk. P. Dikaias was working at Cyprus, Charles Morey continued work at Syrian Antioch, aided by Richard Stillwell. In 1934, excavations at Bethel were conducted by J. L. Kelso and W. F. Albright. 1935 saw J. P. Black working at Samaria, Erich Schmidt at Persepolis, and Gordon Loud at Megiddo. 1937 saw Nelson Glueck excavating a cemetery at Jebel-et-Tannur. In 1938, J. L. Starkey was murdered while Lankaster Harding and Charles H. Inge continued briefly at Lachish. 1947 brought to light the Dead Sea Scrolls, of which, W. F. Albright later commented. In 1948, Robert Braidwood worked at Qalat Jarmo, in NE Iraq. 1950 saw William Morton at Dibon in Moab. 1953 saw Joseph P. Free at Dothan. 1954 saw Kurt Bittel at Boghazkoy investigating the Hittite Empire, Zakarie Goneiun busy at Saqqara, Richard Haines at Nippur, Philip Hammond at Petra, Kamal el Mallakh at Giza and Jean Perrot at Tell Abu Matar, near Beersheba, etc. etc. etc.

? WHAT DID THESE HUNTERS FIND ?

While all of these archaeologists found many things verifying Biblical places, times and events, probably the most important of these were the cuneiform clay tablets found in the excavations of the Assyrian royal library at Nineveh. It might appear today, after a lapse of 2500 years, all hope of tracing the Israelites has been lost in the midst of antiquity. Archaeologists have, though, during the last 100 years, unearthed and published the original contemporary records of the Assyrians who took the Israelites captive. From these records, in recent years, vital clues have come to light. These records consist of cuneiform clay tablets which ran be found today in the British Museum. These tablets serve today as archaeological evidence of Israel’s migrations. These clay tablets were frontier post reports of Assyrian spies, to the Assydan king, keeping watch over the captive peoples. Among these tablets were over 1,400 different texts, including reports of how the captive peoples (Israelites) were breaking away in small groups and heading northwest in the general direction of Europe.

The texts of these Assyrian clay tablets were not deciphered until about 1930. These Assyrian reports were saying in effect: ‘The last time we saw those sons of Omri (as the Israelites were called by the Assyrians), they were breaking away and heading in a northwesterly direction toward Europe.’ Not to inquire about this evidence, found by the prophesied ‘hunters’, would therefore be foolhardy; for there is nothing imprudent in Scripture! After all, who are we to condemn, repudiate, disavow or scoff at Jeremiah’s inspired written prophecy? If Jeremiah predicted ‘hunters’, you can be assured there would come a time for ‘hunting.’ To accept the ‘fishers’ without the ‘hunters” is to embrace only half of Yahweh’s Word!

Besides, all this is substantiated by the ‘apocryphal’ book that used to be in the original King James version of the Bible before they removed it, 2 Esdras 13:39-45. 1 have a 1611 edition of the KJV and it’s there:

39 And whereas thou sawest that he gathered another peaceable multitude unto him; 40 Those are the ten tribes which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Saimanasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them over the waters and so came they into another land. 41 But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt. 42 That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land. 43 And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river. 44 For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over. 45 For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half. and the same region is called Arsareth.’ (Also check Josephus, Antiquities, 8:1 1: 1; 10:9:7 and 1 1:5:2)

At this juncture, we can no longer say no one ever told us who the “hunters’ are, or the people for whom they were ‘hunting’! As a matter of fact, our Redeemer made it quite clear who the people were to whom He was sent when He instructed His disciples, Matthew 10:5-6:

’5 These twelve Jesus (Yahshua) sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles (heathen), and into ozy city of the Samaritans enter ye not. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the HOUSE of Israel

This passage is reinforced by Yahshua the Messiah Himself when He said, Matthew 15:24: ‘… / am not sent but unto the lost sheeo of the house of Israel

This coincides perfectly with Amos 3:2 where Yahweh speaks of Israel: ‘You only (Israel) have I known of all the families of the earth…

These passages also accord with Deuteronomy 7:6 where it states: ‘For thou art an holy (set apart) people unto Yahweh thy Mighty One: Yahweh thy Mighty One hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.” This is the same idea brought forth in, and conveys the same meaning as I st Peter 2:9 which says:

‘But ye air a chosen race, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar (set apart) people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.’ (check Exodus 19:5-6)

The same concept is expressed in Psalm 147:19-20: ’19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto IsraeL 20 v nation: and zcfo.- A6r judgments, they (the non-Israelites) have not known them.’ Again, the same thought is advanced in Deuteronomy 14:2, which says: ‘For thou art a people set apart unto Yahweh thy Mighty One, and Yahweh hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the other) nations that are upon the earth. ‘

For another rendering of the same basic precept, Isaiah 41:8 says the following: ‘But thou Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom / have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.’ Contrary to what some advance, Yahweh does not promote the doctrine of universalism.

MORE ON THE FISHERS AND HUNTERS

For this phase of this presentation, I will quote from Howard Rand’s Study in Jeremiah, pages 81-82 entitled ‘Fishers And Hunters’ (I will use Yahweh (Tetragrammaton) instead of God):

‘Yahweh sets forth the method by which He will bring Israel back to Himself. This is a most important prophecy for in sending for fishers and hunters the way in which Israel is to be awakened to spiritual values and to the need of obeying His Covenant is revealed to Jeremiah:

Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith Yahweh, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. (Jeremiah 16:16)

‘Who are these fishers and hunters and what is the particular task each is to perform in the respective fishing and hunting periods? The sending of these two groups designated as fishers and hunters indicates that there are two entirely different methods by which an appeal would be made to Israel. A Fisherman patiently waits as he undertakes to snare the rish in a net or catch it on a line, but t he hunter tramps through the woods and over the hills and mountains exerting energy and strength as he travels in search of his especially selected prey. Actually Jeremiah prophetically referred to the two distinct phases of the Gospel in their respective appeals to Israel for the purpose of bringing them back to covenant relationship with Yahweh. The first would require fishers and the period of their Fishing is clearly defined by the events of the Gospel Age. The second would require hunters and the period of their activity would be at the end of the Gospel Age. This is demonstrated by the activities of those who have sought to establish the identity of Israel in these last days, hunting out the evidence and tracing Israel from Palestine, throughout her years of wanderings, to the present time. History reveals how faithfully the predicted Fishing and hunting missions have been carried out by those chosen of Yahweh for each purpose.’

Now for some excerpts from this same book from pages 85, 86 & 87 on this same subject of the fishers and hunters:

Page 85: ‘The fishers were to be followed by many hunters according to Jeremiah, thus indicating a change in method and message. The task of the hunters was to seares for Israel. The fisherman blindly casts his net and gathers into it all kinds of fish, some good and some bad [Some Israelite which are to be kept, and some non-Israelite which are to be ‘cast away’at the end of the world, Matthew 13:47-49.1 That is not so with the hunter who seeks to find the particular object of his search. All this points to the modem endeavor to identify the House of Israel in the world today…’

Page 86: -Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.’ (Matthew 10:23) … But the Gospel of the Ongdom was to be proclaimed exclusively to the Israel peoples. All the cities and towns in the Israel lands have not yet heard this message which the hunters have been commissioned to proclaim…’

Page 87: ‘Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek Yahweh: look unto the rock wkelzce ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit that ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah tfat bare you. (Isaiah 51:1-2)’

THE NEW JERUSALEM

In the Book of Revelation, chapter 21, we are told of a city four-square having twelve gates in all. The city is described as having a great, high wall. There are three gates on each of its four sides, east, north, south and west, with the names of the twelve sons of Jacob-Israel. In order to enter this city, one is required to be able to enter the gate according to their tribe. Because nothing abominable will be allowed to enter, each one entering will have to be a racially pure Israelite with his father’s line going through one of the twelve Patriarchs. Unless one can enter through one of the gates named after the twelve Patriarchs, there simply is no other way into that city. If you are a racially pure Israelite, it was your father and mother who made it possible in qualifying for entering into that city. When we consider all of these things, it becomes quite evident why we must understand just who the ‘hunters’ are of Jeremiah 16:16!

“JEWS” ARE NOT HIS SHEEP

It may come as a surprise to many, but the ‘Jews’ are not Israelites. I know that this is the message echoed throughout the Church-world and among the ‘Jews’ themselves, but it simply is not true. And, wishful thinking is not going to make it so. Not one single ‘Jew’ on the face of the world is an Israelite. Therefore, the biggest lie in the world is: “the ‘Jews’ are God’s chosen people.’ The second biggest lie is: ‘Jesus was a ‘Jew.” Anyone making these statements is a liar, or is repeating another person’s falsehood. Yahshua told the ‘Jews”, John 10:26: ‘ ‘.. ye are not of my sheep.’ Again, Yahshua told the ‘Jews’, John 8:47: “He that is of Yahweh heareth Yahweh’s words: ye therefore hear there not, because ye are not of Yahweh.’ Yahshua further disassociated Himself from the”Jews’ by saying to them, John 8:23: ‘… Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world,- I am not of this world.’ In Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, Yahshua said of the false Jews: ‘ ‘.. I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews (of Judah), and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.’ From this, you can plainly see the ‘Jews’ will not be able to enter the gate of the city mentioned in Revelation 21:12 which is inscribed ‘Judah.’

William MacDonald, in his Believer’s Bible Commentary, pages 2356 & 2359 remarks thusly on Revelation 2:9 and 3:9:

‘As Jews, they claimed to be God’s chosen people, but by their blasphemous behavior they showed that they were a synagogue of Satan … Those who claimed to be God’s chosen people, though actually a synagogue of Satan, would be forced to admit that the despised Christians were actually the chosen flock.’

Matthew Poole’s Commentary On The Holy Bible, volume 3, page 954, goes one step further in identifying the ‘Jews’ as being the descendants of Cain the murderer: collection of devils, or children of the devil, whose works they do, continually reviling true Christians, and murdering the saints, after the manner of their father.Cain was the murderer from the beginning who was fathered by Satan himself in the seduction of Eve. The ‘Jews’ are actually genetic descendants of Satan himself walking about in shoe-leather. What does the future hold for Israel then? Jeremiah 46:28 says to our people:

‘Fear thou not, 0 Jacob my servant, saith Yahweh: for am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee: but I will not make a full end of thee, but correct thee in measure: yet will J not leave thee wholly unpunished.’

Again, I ask the question: Who are the hunters? Don’t you think it is about time the pastors in the churches of our Israel lands are asked this question? Why is it that they refuse comment? After all, the subject of the “hunters’ is in the Bible and it is not going to go away, and the Almighty is going to demand an answer to this question! In Isaiah 56:10-1 1, it speaks of ‘shepherds efat cannot understand.’ If our ‘shepherds’ won’t inform us, in the end, it becomes the responsibility of each one of us to, (2 Timothy 2:15):

‘Study to shew thyself approved unto Yahweh, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.’

Bibles are available today, and we are without excuse!

Clifton A. Emahiser’s Teaching Ministries

1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830

Genesis 4:1 – 4:17

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

genesis


Genesis 4:1 – 4:17

This study concerning the ‘act’ in the Garden of Eden between Satan and Eve is very important in that it helps to unlock a very large part of God’s Word. Without understanding this event and its repercussions, the Christian will be apt to allow evil influences to turn their mind away from God’s Truth picking up on many traditions that are foreign to The Word of God. Many tend to think that this teaching of the ‘evil seed’ is foreign to God’s Word, mainly because they have never heard it taught in their Church system. However, it’s strange that these same people will listen to anyone with seminar credentials teaching the false “secret rapture” doctrine which began in Scotland around 1830 from an ill hallucinogenic woman; and that Christ never got angry; that all twelve tribes of Israel now live in the nation State of Israel and are all Jews; that teaching The Word chapter by chapter and verse by verse is for children; that no one truly understands The Book of Revelation; that we don’t live in The Old Testament anymore and thus It is all historical for Christians today; that all of God’s Law is now done away with, and all you’ve got to do is ‘believe’ and you’ll be saved and then don’t need to study The Word; and teaching from Church Quarterlies sent them from some organizational ‘system’ in some far away city, penned by only God knows who. I have even heard a retired preacher teach about the coming of Christ, but admitted ignorance of what‘the evil day‘ is, showing a lack of knowledge as to the events which Christ taught dealing with His return (2 Cor.11).

Those ‘sealed’ with The Word of God would love to help these people, accordingly as Christ gives ability through His Holy Spirit, but it is evident that many of my sisters and brethren in those Churches would rather listen to man’s popular doctrines of the day, chasing fads and ‘smooth’ feel-good emotions, instead of opening up their mind and allowing Jesus to come in. I know they love Jesus, and He loves them, but they want to do things their own way instead of His Way. It’s nothing new, for the same problems existed during the days of the Old Testament prophets also. The True Church is God’s many membered Body of Christ, not some building. It’s up to the members to make changes within their Church. You might start by ‘demanding’ that The Word be taught chapter by chapter and verse by verse in your congregation. That’s the mark of a real Pastor who can teach It all, even the controversial parts. Get rid of all those ‘old bottles’ (man’s traditions) that will break when the ‘new Wine’ is put in them (Matthew.9). But, for all of this, many of these will still condemn a teacher documenting from God’s Word every step of the way, Truth that sets us free and gives true peace in a world gone astray.

In the last Letter we covered the teaching by Jesus Christ in Matthew 13 of the existence of a ‘
seed line‘ of ‘children’ that were spawned by the ‘devil’. I have seen some who deny the Truth of Christ Himself explaining the full meaning of that ‘parable of the tares‘ to His disciples in that same Chapter 13, trying to link the idea of ‘children’ in that parable to ‘sowing crop seed’, as in the ‘parable of the sower‘. Those two parables are distinctly different from each other, and it’s not difficult to see, if you read it for yourself. Yet these ‘doctrinists’ will write a full volume book attempting to match the ‘parable of the tares‘ with sowing The Word, totally masking the idea of an ‘evil seed line‘ generation which Jesus did teach, and in more places than Matthew 13. Instead of accepting the simple teaching by Christ Himself, they try to change it to fit their own deceptions, and of course, they’ve got to write a lot in order to get off track far enough to bring in their own doctrines. Christ gave warning to not let any man deceive you in the latter days (Matt.24; Mark 13; Luke 21).
The greatest method that false apostles use to deceive is to get further and further away from the original Manuscripts of our Father’s Word, supplanting their own doctrines and ideas, changing a word here and there until you’ve got confusion (some newer Bible versions even edit out many Scriptures in the original Manuscripts, totally omitting them). So common sense tells us that going back to the best and oldest sets of Manuscripts will give more understanding as to God’s Word than many long philosophical discourses by so-called experts.

If these studies here at Word Alpha Omega seem too technical to understand because I constantly refer back to the Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, and the Massorah notes, then maybe you have never truly heard The Word of God before. If you understand what I’m talking about then you have found one place that you will hear The Word. Am I being arrogant by saying this? No, because I’ve been there already down that road with deeper questions in The Word that many Church systems could not answer. I knew there was more to God’s Word than what is normally taught.
By the way, ‘the evil day’ referred to above was from Eph.6:13, and is about putting on the ‘whole Armour of God’ in order to stand against the ‘fiery darts of Satan’. For us today, that time of ‘the evil day’ is fast approaching, for it means the ‘hour of temptation’, the tribulation of the wicked one, the five month period given in Rev.9, shortened for the elect’s sake from 7 years given by Daniel, when Satan and his army are given to sting all those not sealed with The Word of God in their minds (see Rev.9).
We now continue the study in Genesis with the 4th Chapter, and we ask a Word of Wisdom from Yeshua Messiah, The Christ, Amen.
Gen 4:1   And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, “I have gotten a man from the LORD.”

Here we have Eve conceiving from the Adam, but…, why this ‘I have gotten a man from the LORD‘? Why would Eve say that about Cain? Hold that thought until the next verse.

Gen 4:2   And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

This phrase ‘And she again’ is from the Hebrew word ‘yacaph‘, and it means ‘to add or augment (often adverbial, to continue to do a thing)‘ (Strong’s no. 3254). Continued to do what? It means Eve continued in labor, to bear Abel, after the brother of Cain who came out of the womb first. According to the Hebrew, Cain and Abel were twins. However, Cain and Abel are not ‘identical twins’. Ok, you’re going to maybe get an education here on the idea of twins; that is to say, the idea of twins from two distinctly different fathers. Not all twins born of woman are ‘identical twins’, meaning they look very much alike. There is another type of twins called ‘Fraternal’ twins. Fraternal twins are from two separate eggs and each have their own bag of water in the womb. Do some medical research, or ask your doctor if you don’t believe this.


What’s being said here? The seed of Cain was from Satan, much in the same way that ‘the sons of God‘ (fallen angels of Gen.6) took wives from the daughters of Adam, and begot the ‘gibbor‘, or giant race. This is what Eve meant when she said ‘I have gotten a man from the LORD‘. Don’t misunderstand me. The Hebrew ‘from the LORD‘ is ‘ish ‘eth Jehovah’. The King James Revised Version has ‘with the help of the LORD’ in italics, which is probably a better translation from the Hebrew. Who places all souls in the flesh? God of course. Satan can’t do it because he’s just an angel that God created (Ezek.28). So God placed the soul of Cain in this conception between ‘the serpent’ and Eve. That’s when her first conception took place, in the Garden of Eden remember? (see 1 Timothy 2:14). This second conception by Adam truly was the seed of ‘the Adam’, that seed being righteous Abel (Heb.11:4). In 1 John 3:12, it is stated ‘Cain, who was of that wicked one…‘; the word ‘of‘ in the Greek is ‘ek‘, a preposition denoting origin’ (Strong’s no. 1537).
In I Chronicles 2:55, we are given some of the Kenites (sons of Cain) who moved to Jerusalem and were figured as ‘scribes’, meaning they had crept into the positions of Moses Law, and began calling themselves ‘Jews’, because they now lived in Judea. These are who Jesus was talking to in John 8 when He said to a later generation of those “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.” (John 8:44). Now why would Jesus Himself link the first murderer Cain with the devil? If you still need more proof for Cain not being the son of Adam, notice you won’t find Cain and his offspring in Adam’s genealogy of Gen.5, nor of Jesus’ lineage in Luke 3 going all the way back to ‘the man Adam’ (eth’Ha’adham).

I can hear many saying right now, “Well, I never heard of such an awful thing!” I guess those who think that, well, they probably intentionally leave out a lot of God’s Word also, eh? No wonder they sit in Church every Sunday and are just as Biblically ignorant as when just after the time they were baptized, still sucking on the milk bottle with very little maturity as a Christian. Let’s do a little test here. Do you believe that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin called Mary who conceived by The Holy Spirit? Yes or no, which? Do you believe that ‘fallen angels’ took wives of the daughters of men and they begat giants, as written in Gen.6? Yes or no, which? Thirdly, do you believe God’s Word here in the Hebrew with this conception of Cain by Satan and Eve? Yes or no, which? No maybes allowed. Either you believe God’s Word, or you don’t. Yes, there is a bloodline offspring of Satan’s own children in the flesh who dwell upon this earth. That sort of explains all the evil going on around us doesn’t it? If the sweet philosophers are right that evil is just a state of mind, and serial killers can even change their lifestyle, then why isn’t it happening, but instead, why is the evil really piling up today? We even have a hard time carrying out God’s Law for convicted murderers by allowing them to live, and per chance they’ll turn their life around, and come to Christ. God said execute them, with no feelings of guilt or remorse, because He is the One doing the judging, not us. The longer these murderers are allowed to walk the streets and are not punished, others will follow by example. Execution is God’s example to keep this evil away from His People (see Deut.21 & Numbers 35).
Gen 4:3   And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
4    And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

Here begins the sacrificial offerings of the ‘firstfruits’ (firstlings) by Abel, which is a very important act of ‘faith’ also by Abel. The offering here by Cain says nothing of ‘firstfruits’, and his offering was of the ground, not of the flock. So possibly Cain just brought some produce, not even his ‘firstfruits’ or best, and thought it good enough for God. You’ll notice from hence forward, Abel’s type of sacrifice of the firstfruits of the sheep was the standard which God later told Moses to write down, and the method for atonement to be used by the priests for sins. Since Christ also was sacrificed for us on the cross, shedding His blood, Jesus became the replacement for this animal sacrifice, for one and all time (Heb.9; 10:10). None other Blood can give us Salvation.
(In my ‘opinion’, even though God had not given the ‘Seed’ of the woman The Law through Moses yet here with Cain and Abel, I believe that Adam did know, similar to Enoch who ‘was not’, also knew and prophesied about the coming destruction by the flood of Noah’s time. In other words, how else would Abel know the process of sacrifice which would please God. And if Abel knew, then why not also Cain?)

Gen 4:5   But unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
6    And the LORD said unto Cain, “Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7    If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto theeshall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.”

If you remember back in Gen.3:15 when God said He would put ‘enmity‘ between the ‘thy seed’ and the ‘Seed of the woman‘, here we have the very first start of it, meaning also the spiritual war Paul talked about in Ephesians 6; one ‘seed’ controlled by Satan, and the other ‘Seed’ by Christ. Cain is ‘wroth’ because his sacrifice was not received by God. The word ‘wroth‘ in the Hebrew is ‘charah‘ meaning ‘to glow or grow warm, figuratively (usually) to blaze up, of anger, zeal, jealousy’ (Strong’s no. 2734). You tell me friends, what type of person has murder in their heart because of their own jealousy and failure, and the envy of the blessings to God’s children?

Gen 4:8   And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

The Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Vulgate, the Syriac Version, the Targum, all versions from the Hebrew Old Testament have the wording for ‘talked’ in the sense of ‘Let us go into the field’.1 This shows that Cain was premeditating to murder Abel, so there should be no doubt as to his intent. Let’s get some more evidence that Cain was the first offspring of ‘the serpent’. Turn to Matthew 23:29:

Matt 23:29  Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30    And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

This is our Lord Jesus Christ speaking here, and He’s addressing this to the Kenites, which means ‘son of Cain’. Again, as written in I Chronicles 2:55, these ‘sons of Cain’, the Kenites crept into ‘Moses seat’, and Jesus referred to many of them as ‘scribes and Pharisees‘. This does not of course, label all of them, for Paul also was a Pharisee, and Joseph of Arimathaea himself a member of the Sanhedrin. The difference is that Paul and Joseph’s lineage is from the ‘Seed’ of the woman, the Kenites are not.

Matt 23:30   And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31    Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

Here these Kenites which Jesus is pointing out wish to kill the very Christ, which is proof of who their father is (Satan).

Matt 23:32   Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33    Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Remember, this is Jesus Christ speaking to them. These are our LORD’s words. The word ‘generation’ is‘genema’ in the Greek and means offspring, by analogy, produce (literally or figuratively)‘ (Strong’s no. 1081). This is not a parable, nor figurative. It is literal ‘offspring’ of ‘vipers‘ which is ‘echidna’ in the Greek, meaning‘of uncertain origin; an adder or other poisonous snake’ (Strong’s no. 2191). Of course, we know who that ‘snake’ is by now.

Matt 23:34   Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35    That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Jesus is ‘laying the hammer down’, so to speak. Notice our LORD is linking these particular ‘hypocrites’, ‘scribes, and Pharisees’ with the murder of Abel also? Murder is one of the ‘modus operandi’ of the Kenites, the ‘sons of Cain’. They have no problem with assassination and murder to remove their obstacles, etc. To hide one murder, they’ll murder again and again. They are here upon this earth to work the negative side of The Plan, so get used to it and gird yourself up for battle putting on the full armour of God, and kick dragon. That’s what God’s Children do that have His blessings. Naturally these Kenites want you to believe in a pacifist dogma, where everything is just so sweet and nice…, while they do their dirty work behind your back and you’re not even aware of it! Wake up. Where do you think all those socialist and communistic doctrines come from? This spiritual war has been going on for a long time, and it’s not over yet. Of course, God’s People have the ‘Victory’ through Jesus Christ. God is our ‘Rock’, our ‘Hope’, our ‘Salvation’, trust in Him, as our forefathers of America did, and I guarantee most of them understood this ‘spiritual war’ also, and who it was with.

Gen 4:9   And the LORD said unto Cain, “Where is Abel thy brother?” And he said, “I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Cain’s a little sassy here lying to our Father isn’t he? Don’t you be beloved, for The Almighty will definitely bring discipline your way. I don’t believe any of His true children would talk back and lie to God anyway.

Gen 4:10   And He said, “What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground.
11    And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand;
12    When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strengtha fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.”

‘Thy brother’s blood’ is all the potential offspring Abel would have, if Cain had not murdered him. This is why Abel is left out of Adam’s genealogy in Gen.5. The word ‘earth‘ in ‘now art thou cursed from the earth’ is the Hebrew word ‘adamah‘, and is better translated ‘ground or soil‘ (Strong’s no. 127), since the ground opened up to receive Abel’s blood.
Also today, the Kenites can not properly farm because of this curse God put upon Cain. They then had to turn to other craftiness, such as building cities. The Kenites are expert ‘middlemen’. They are experts at making a living off the hard work of others, hence they are very disciplined and meticulous in their art (see Jer.35).

Gen 4:13  And Cain said unto the LORD, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.
14    Behold, Thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from Thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.”

Use a little common sense here. Where are all these people Cain is talking about, who will try to slay him when they find him? They must already be out there somewhere, otherwise Cain wouldn’t have been so scared of being cast outside away from God’s presence. Remember ‘adam‘ without the article from Gen.1:26, the sixth day creation races of ‘general mankind’? They were already out there.
There is an excellent work called Sargon The Magnificent posing a solution to the Assyrian (ancient Babylonia) cuneiform writings that go back to around 3800 B.C., which especially draws a link to ‘Enoch’, the first city built by Cain we will soon discover about in the next few verses of Gen.4. The Sumerians (who are called the ‘blackheads’ in the cuneiform texts) of that ancient land left writings which name a Sargon I as being Semitic, and gave them knowledge of agriculture and of building cities, crafts, etc. The Sumerian history alludes at this certain Sargon’s arrival, since he was not of their people. They state that this Sargon was also ‘the son of bel’ (meaning ‘son of the dragon’). Archaeologists have even traced this land as the birthplace of Baal worship, and the ‘root’ of all later Egyptian, Greek, and Roman mythologies and paganism.2

Gen 4:15   And the LORD said unto him, “Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

Here’s the beginning of the ‘mark of the beast‘ written in Rev.13; 16; 19. The meaning from the Greek in Rev.13 of that number 666 of the beast, means to ‘enumerate or count, a stone worn smooth by counting over a long period’. This simply means to understand this ‘mark’ here, which God put upon Cain, and all the events that led up to this point in Gen.4; and to also trace that lineage of the ‘sons of Cain’, even down to today’s time. This is very important for God’s People to know, especially in the near future, for by understanding this ‘enumeration’, or counting, you will recognize God’s Plan, be able to understand all parables in The Word to their deepest level, and will be prepared and ‘sealed’ with The Word in your forehead, which means in your mind. This means you cannot be deceived by Satan when he comes playing the false Messiah. Nor will he be a temptation to you, but an ‘abomination’, the ‘abomination of desolation‘, sitting in God’s Temple, pretending to be Jesus Christ on earth (Ezek.28; 2 Thess.2; Matt.24; Mark 13; Luke 21: 2 Cor.11; Rev.12 & 13; Daniel 9).

Gen 4:16   And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
17    And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

This word ‘Nod’ is ‘Nowd’ in the Hebrew meaning ‘vagrancy, exile‘. This same verse links the word ‘land’(erets) with Nod, so don’t think this just means Cain became a ‘nomad’ wanderer; because he built a city ‘Enoch‘ named after his son. This first city in God’s Word, the Sumerian cuneiform names ‘Unuk’ and ‘Erech’.3
Let’s see, there’s nothing written about other children of Adam and Eve yet, so this wife of Cain couldn’t have been his kin, so, maybe she was from the ‘land of Nod’, where God states he went? I think so, in an obvious way.

Here’s a little message about ‘bloodlines’. God places all souls to His purpose, in order to fulfill His Plan. All souls, except Satan and the fallen angels can attain Salvation through the Blood of Jesus Christ. This means the ‘sons of Cain’ have a chance at Salvation also, if they will turn away from their ‘father’ and worship Christ. God is most fair, and does not wish to destroy any of His children which He created, and will not until they have heard His Truth, but after this only when they decide to turn away from Him, and worship Satan. The teaching of a first earth age, when we all were with God, is written in His Word in The Manuscripts. I feel that I have done my part in helping to reveal to you this first earth age of Satan’s rebellion in my first Letter on Genesis.
There are many more references to the first earth age of the spiritual nature throughout The Word, and you can be assured I will mention it as they occur in Scripture. This first earth age when Satan rebelled, drawing a third of the sons of God with him, leaves two-thirds of God’s children that did not follow Satan during that time. Some of those children followed God with no doubts during that time, and are the ‘chosen’, the ‘very elect’ (Matt.24:24), such as the Patriarchs, prophets, and Apostles of Christ. This is how Jesus can claim them as His during this present earth age of flesh. Those who followed more on the side of Satan during that first age, more than likely deserve to be born a Kenite.
The soul is the most important matter, not the flesh. Bloodline heritage is important for God’s People (election of the promise seed) so that they will know what God expects of them to accomplish for Him in the flesh. Those with ‘free will’ which did not make up their mind to worship God in that first earth age must do it now, in the flesh, and learn what God demands of us as His servants. These become ‘elect’ (election of grace) along with the ‘chosen’ or ‘very elect’. If you still don’t understand this idea of the ‘very elect’, study more of Paul’s Epistles.
May peace be with you in Christ Jesus,
Dave Ramey.
Print Page

Footnotes:
1 The Companion Bible. Kregel Publishing, Grand Rapids, MI., 1990, p.9, margin note.

2 Sargon The Magnificent by Mrs. Sydney Bristowe. The Association Of The Covenant People, Ferndale, WA.

3 Ibid., p. 27.
All references to “Strong’s nos.” are from Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, PC Study Bible, Biblesoft, 1993-1996.
Next »




© Copyright 1999, 2006 Word Alpha Omega

GENTILES

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

gentiles

<>

GENTILES”Arnold Kennedy [email protected]

INTRODUCTION.When we examine verses such as, “For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth” (Deut.7:6), they establish the exclusive nature of Israel as being a holy (set apart) race among all the other races of this globe. Because these verses are so precise, we can see that there is a racial message that conflicts with the common belief about “Jews and Gentiles”.

The common teaching is that “The Jews” are Israel and the “Gentiles” are everyone else. The two views are against each other; one cannot be held together with the other. This is being examined and it will be seen that “The Jews” cannot equate to all Israel and that some “Gentiles” may be Israelites in Scripture. That is, the all-inclusive all-race message is not that of the Potter in Romans 9 who says in verse 18, “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth“. In the next verse Paul says, “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest [contradicts] against God?” On this basis those who hold the “Jews and Gentiles” doctrine are contradicting God Himself.

Because the traditional teaching is so ingrained in commentaries, concordances, Bible dictionaries, books and in people’s minds, it is very hard for anyone brought up with this belief to shake it off.

Accordingly we will make an examination of the word “Gentiles” as commonly used in the “Jews and Gentiles” doctrine, and then give some answers to particular popular Bible verses that are the mainstay of the “Jews and Gentiles” belief, and how there has been an identity switch made.

That there are two parties in the New Testament does not mean to say the two parties have to be Jews and Gentiles in the way that this is taught. Rather than that, the existence of two parties confirms what is taught in the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets about the division of Israel into two kingdoms from which arose the House of Israel [ten tribes] and the House of Judah [two tribes]. These two houses are shown in prophecy to be a continual vexation to each other, with a “middle wall of partition” between them, until they are reconciled together under the New Testament [Isaiah 11:13]. But both parties are still Israelites!WHERE DID “GENTILE” COME FROM?

This word, GENTILE, originated from the Latin Vulgate translation, where the Roman doctrine said that the Roman Church had become the Israel of the Bible. Even more recently, Pope Pius XI reinforced this saying, “Spiritually, we Christians are Semites“. The inference of the word “Gentile”, in the Roman Catholic context is, “one who is not of Rome“. In the English translations that were partly based upon the Latin Vulgate, this Latin word has carried on with a similar interpretation but instead of meaning “not of Rome” it has become to mean “not of Israel”. In the minds of those to whom Rome and Israel were synonymous, there was no difference; to be of the Roman Catholic Church was to belong to and to be part of Israel. Rome accommodated all races that could buy citizenship. Effectively, this is redefining “race” as being “belief” and this is still done today in the field of “Human Rights”. Rome calls herself a universal church with a universal Pontiff and is the originator of both modern and ancient universalism in the Christian religion.

But, unfortunately, translators have transliterated this Latin word, “Gentile”, into their versions, and it has carried forward even into recent translations. By transliterating the Latin form, it has allowed scope for the idea that the untranslated Latin word “gentilis” referred to non-Roman to continue. Switch the “Roman” to “Israel” [because Rome said she was Israel] and we then find how Rome expressed the two parties as “Israel” and “non-Israel”. This has continued even to this day. This doctrine has found its way into commentaries and Bible dictionaries and through these media, most Christians are still influenced, and deceived.

The meaning of “Gentiles” which comes from the Latin is confusing. The Latin noun “gen” means ‘a nation’ and is equivalent to “ethnos”. However, the wordGentiles does not come from the noun but from the adjective, gentilis, which means “of” or “belonging to” a nation. In all Paul’s writings that are to Israelites, he uses ethnos to refer to his outcast kinsmen of Israel because that is how they were addressed in the Old Testament Scriptures – Gen 19:4-6; Gen 18:18; Deut 32:41 (the “with” is not in the Hebrew text); Ps 22:27,28; Ps 57:9; Ps 67:4; Ps 81:8; Ps 108:3; Ps 117:1; Is 5:26; Is 11:12; Is 34:1; Jer 1:5,10. The Latin distorts and obscures these facts and we need to check its context every time it appears in the text.HOW THE WORD “GENTILE” IS MISUSED

In both the Hebrew and the Greek there is no word even approaching the way “Gentile” is used today. In the concordances we can see the influences of the religious teaching of the day and age where the Roman influence is manifest.

Strong H1471. Gowy or goi [goyim Pl.]: a foreign nation, hence a Gentile, also a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts, heathen.

Strong G1484. Ethnos [Ethne Pl] a race [as of the same] habit, that is, a tribe; spec. a foreign [non-Jewish] one [usually by impl. pagan] Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

We must remember that concordances give usage rather than definitions but within these we can see part of the true meaning “like of the same habit and tribe”.The lexicons are more definitive.

Thayer: A multitude [whether of men or beasts] associated or living together … of the same nature or genus.

Vine Denotes firstly a multitude or company, then a multitude of people of the same nature or genus. It is used in the singular of the Jews for example, Luke 7:5, Luke 23:2; John 11:48:50-52.

Vine goes on to show that Gentile is used in Scripture of both Jews and non-Jews. [Strong and Vine use the word "Jew" for "Israel" following the understanding of the periods].

HOW THE HEBREW AND GREEK WORDS FOR “GENTILE” ARE TRANSLATED

It is time to look at the words translated as “Gentile”. In the KJV translation of the Bible, immediately the strange fact of multiple inconsistent translations can be seen.

HEBREW. GREEK.

Gowry – goi – goyim ethnos – ethne

374 times as nations 64 times as nations

143 times as heathen 5 times as heathen

30 times as gentiles 93 times as gentiles

11 times as people 2 times as people.

Now, when we compare versions, we find that the number of times we find the word “Gentiles” increases from 93 times in the KJV to 129 times in the NASB. This immediately alerts us that there is a problem with this word. It at once suggests that the NASB is writing doctrine into its version, even more that the KJV does.

In the author’s paper, “Galatians and Israel Exclusive”, we can look at the “Greeks”. In the original text the word Hellen is used thirty five times, but our translators have also chosen to translate this word (wrongly) as “Gentile”, particularly in the Book of Romans. Ethnos and Hellen are quite different words! Sometimes the justification is to say that the Greeks were not “Jews” and therefore they must be “Gentiles”. This is not translating; rather it is interpreting Scripture in the translations. There is neither rhyme nor reason for all these various translations and mis-translations, other than to perpetuate a wrong belief!

The commonly accepted meaning of the word “Gentile” immediately falls down from the translation point of view alone. When we add the fact that the word in Hebrew is used also of Israel it falls further! When we show the real meaning from the New Testament, it falls right out of sight! The Hebrew and Greek words mean “nations” as races and peoples. They mean any group of a common origin, including Israel, when this is the context.

Let us look at some Old Testament Scriptures where the word Gowy, Goi or Goyim are used. If we apply the logic concerning Gentiles for these verses, we can see the ridiculous conclusions that could be reached by transposing translations. Remember that goi and ethnos are used of Israel as well as of other races.

Gen 12:1,2 Now the Lord said unto Abram … and I will make of thee a great nation

Gen 17:5 A father of many nations have I made thee.

Did God make a great non-Israel “Gentile” nation out of Abraham and did Abraham father many Gentiles? Was the great nation other than Israel? We need not comment here on the singular “nation” and the plural “nations”.

Gen 25:23 And the Lord said unto her (Rebecca), Two nations are in thy womb ¼

Could Rebecca have what would become two non-Israel “Gentiles” in her womb?

Gen 48:19 And his seed shall become a multitude of nations.

There is no evidence in Scripture that Ephraim would produce a lot of non-Israelites. Indeed, Ephraim became the leading Tribe of the House of Israel.

Gen 46:3 And he said, I am God, the God of thy father (Isaac) fear not to go down into Egypt; for I will there make of thee a great nation.

Could the sons of Jacob be a great non-Israel nation of “Gentiles”?

Jer 31:36 If those ordinances [the sun and the moon] depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel shall also cease from being a nation before me for ever.

As the word for “nation” is the same as that translated “Gentile”, we could equally read the seed of Israel shall not cease from being Gentiles before Me. We could even say Israel would not cease from being heathen! This is absurd!

When we consider the word ethnos, which is sometimes translated as “Gentiles” in the New Testament, we have another block of translations among which we could make transpositions. The consequences are equally absurd!

Luke 7:5 For he loved our nation, and has built for us a synagogue.

Would that section of Jewry be pleased if the Centurion had built a synagogue for the so-called Gentiles or the heathen? “Nation” is the word ethnos.

Luke 23:2 We found this fellow perverting the nation, ¼

Would “The Jews” care so much if Jesus were perverting the “Gentiles”?

John 11:48 ¼ the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

For the Romans to come to Judea and take away “our” Gentiles gets more that a little foolish.

John 11:49,50 Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.

Caiaphas did not know that this word ethnos would be translated as “Gentile” and “heathen” and note he used “nation” in the singular. Jesus did die for the sheep that the Father had given Him and only that many. He gave Himself a ransom “for many”; but not every race on earth. It is explained that the Law and Covenants given to the seed of Israel only were not given to other races. We will see more of what “many” means later in this paper.

Acts 10:22 Cornelius … of good report among all the nation of the Jews ¼

“Nation” is ethnos which is often translated as “Gentiles”, so could we possibly have “Gentiles of the Jews”, in the popular conception?

Acts 24:17 ¼ I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings.

Here Paul would be saying that he brought alms to his “Gentiles” in Jerusalem. Paul was an Israelite of the Tribe of Benjamin.

We just have to admit that there is no such word in all of Scripture which matches up with the common acceptance of the word “Gentile”. We can now see that goi[Heb] and ethnos [Greek] can mean both Israelites and non-Israelites.

Some teachers who admit to goi and ethnos being used of Israel declare that in the singular they refer to Israel and in the plural they refer to all the non-Israel nations. Galilee of the Gentiles in Matthew 4:15 is said to refer to “Gentiles” because it is the plural. When we make a comparison with Acts 1:11, “ye men of Galilee”, and Acts 2:7, “are not all that speak Galileans?”, it has to be admitted that the disciples were Israelites even if they were from Galilee, and so the expression, “Galilee of the Gentiles” is about Israelites living in Galilee. But it is not about Israelites living in Judea.

POPULAR THEOLOGY ABOUT “GENTILES” … IS IT RIGHT?

We have already seen on the origin of the word “Gentile”. There appears to be no evidence that the Apostles could properly distinguish between Israelites and non-Israelites in the nations, to which they went. Hence the message had to be taken to the nations in order for the message to reach “all men” of the descendants of the outcast Israelites. These men had the capacity to believe God and so could accept the ‘good news’ and become reinstated as God’s people. But the Roman error was picked up and it has come to prevail. Of course, the originator, the arch-cult-type, the Roman Catholic Church keeps on its unchanging false doctrine and false identification. But she is the one with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication and by whom they have been deceived through her sorceries [Rev 17:2 and Rev 18:23]. It was Rome who originated the error in doctrine about the “Gentiles”.

But we are told to come out of her my people [Rev 18:4]. God’s chosen people Israel are warned to come out of all of Rome’s doctrines, including Rome’s universalism! Multitudes today are going Rome’s way. But the great whore will be cast down; God has so decreed, and none need be partakers of her plagues. Who rejoices when Babylon is cast down? Is it not the holy [set-apart] apostles and prophets? [Rev 18:20]. One has to come out to be set-apart! The Faithful and True will come to judge and make war on that whore Rome [Rev 19:11]. The “wife” must get ready. It is the saints [Israel by Bible definition - see Psalm 148:1] who wear the white linen [Rev 19:8]. The voice from out of the Throne addresses His servants. They are the ones who have the right to enter the city through those twelve gates. Would there be much point in mentioning this if every race went through those gates?

Rev 21:12 And a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes the children of Israel.

Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

A comment here might well be helpful because Rev. 21:12 is confirmed in the Book of Zachariah where we find Israelites only within the New Jerusalem, with the other races outside the City of God. This being so shows that there is no scope for the popular “grafting in” and “adoption” doctrines. “The Twelve Tribes” is rather definitive and cannot possibly be moulded into the popular concept of the “Church”. To do that it would be necessary for a switch in identity to be made, but this cannot be done because we are told, “The promises made to the fathers (of Israel) are fulfilled in us their children (offspring)”-(Acts 13:32).

Who works the abomination in doctrine? Is it not the mother of harlots and abominations? Who spreads the doctrine of universalism? Who originated it? The meaning of Catholicism is universalism! Search the Scriptures and see which race is the only race written in the Book of Life, and when this was done!THE KINSMAN-REDEEMER

JESUS IS THE REDEEMER OF KINSMEN! If anyone believes the “go ye into all the world” and “Jesus died to save the world” doctrine in the way Rome (and most churches) interprets the world, then that person cannot believe that Jesus is our [that is, Israel’s] Kinsman-Redeemer. At the Second Advent Jesus will ignore those who are not His kinsmen.

TO WHOM DID THE APOSTLE PAUL WRITE?

In the second chapter of the author’s book, The Exclusive Nature of Israel in the New Testament, many New Testament Scriptures were quoted to show that the Apostle Paul wrote to Israelites and that he could not have been writing to anyone else.

Gal 2:7 “The gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter”.

Rom 11:13 “For I speak unto you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles”.

These verses are commonly used to support the “Jews and Gentiles” doctrine in the popular concept. In this view, the “uncircumcision” are the supposed “Gentiles” and the “circumcision” are supposed to be “The Jews”. Whatever would a circumcised “Gentile” be?

It is important to remember that the word translated as “Gentiles” in these verses is “ethnos” in Romans and “hellen” in Galatians. “Ethnos” refers to Israelites by the same term that applied to them in the Old Testament.Hellen” is discussed in the author’s paper “Galatians and Israel Exclusive”. Everyone who has been taught that the Gentiles are always non-Israel does experience difficulty in “unlearning”. This is understandable, because this doctrine is what theology has taught; this is written into translations in a way that makes unlearning difficult.

Now we can look at some other Scriptures from the New Testament that show Israel as being the only people being addressed.

Acts 10:36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching (proclaiming) peace by Jesus Christ.

Acts 10:43 To Him give all the prophets witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.

Acts 13:23 Of this man’s seed hath God, according to his promise raised up unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus.

Acts 13:32,33 How the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children ¼

Here we see direct Scriptures that are particular and exclusive. We also have a whosoever to which all the prophets of Israel give witness. Now, in the Old Testament books, to what “whosoever” does the Redeemer of Israel come? Is it whosoever of Israel as the prophets say, or is it the “whosoever” of every race as translators think it should say? A positive decision has to be made! The word “whosoever” is an objective pronoun that gives a specific meaning to a noun or subject. Thus it means, “whosoever of Israel”. For this reason, “whosoever” cannot mean “anyone of all races” when Israel is the context.

Someone might be thinking, Yes, but there are still two parties. This problem completely disappears when we take note of:

Matt 4:12 Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee [from Judea].

Acts 9:31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judea and Galilee …

The highlighted words show clearly that the two territories are treated differently. There was a clear barrier between the two. But both were Israelites of differing Houses.

Matt 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the Kingdom …

Matt 4:15,16 The land of Zabulon and the land of Nepthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles, the people which sat in darkness saw great light

The latter verse identifies these Israelites in Galilee and calls them “Gentiles”! It is historical fact that Israel separated into two Kingdoms and became known in prophecy as:

The House of Israel [10 tribes]……also known as Ephraim and “the uncircumcision”.

The House of Judah [2 tribes]……..also known as Judah and “the circumcision”.

Subsequently, both Kingdoms went into captivity in Assyria or Babylon. Following the captivities, all of the 12 tribes (except for a small remnant) went North and were dispersed among the nations. These became known as the Dispersion or Uncircumcision. A small remnant of the Babylonian captivity of the Southern Kingdom returned to Palestine and formed the Judean nation. The ruling classes of the Judean nation were dominated by Edomites (Jews), and their subversion of the Scriptures, the Traditions of the Elders, became the religion of the land. The Judean nation practised circumcision and hence in the Scriptures, are referred to as the Circumcision. Consequently, the New Testament refers to two groups – the Uncircumcision (the Israelites outside the Judean nation) and the Circumcision (the Israelites inside the Judean nation).

The other uncircumcised races are not included in the uncircumcision, because the sum of the two groups addressed is “all Israel” in Romans 9.

But this is ignored by Churches that claim the “The Jews” means Israelites and that “Gentiles” means everyone else.JESUS’ MINISTRY WAS NOT PRIMARILY TO THE JEWS OR IN JUDEA

Most people would question this statement without even thinking about it! But let us look at this matter more closely. In the gospels, Jesus makes a clear distinction between Galilee and Judea, the latter being the territory of “The Jews” = The Judeans or Jewry.

John 7:1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.

John 11:53,54 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death. Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews; but went thence unto a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim.

Matt 19:1. And it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan.,

Matt 4:13 And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum …

In the Thompson Chain Reference Bible, the footprints of Jesus are presented graphically on Pages 274 and 275 showing that Galilee was the major area of Jesus’ ministry.

Most Christians seem to think that Jesus dwelt among “The Jews” in Jerusalem, but this is not so. Christians seem to think that Jerusalem was the centre-point of Jesus’ teaching ministry. Jesus went to Jerusalem at particular times for particular purposes. His disciples did not appreciate these times about going up to Jerusalem, as Jesus once told them, “Your time is always now, but My time is not yet” [John 7:6]. Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament times exactly regarding the Sabbaths and the feasts of Israel. Jesus said He knew the exact day of His crucifixion at Jerusalem [Matt 26:2]. He went to Jerusalem on exactly the right day [Nisan 10th] to be chosen by the Israelite people among the population as their King, and He was delivered to become the all-sufficient sacrifice for the redemptionof His people. Jerusalem was the centre-point where Jesus would fulfil His mission and His Father’s Will to be the Passover Lamb for Israel. The institution of the Passover Lamb was only to Israel.

Across the border from Judea, mention is made of Ephraimites and Galileans [Benjamites]. Jesus was safe amongst the Israelites in Galilee whereas He was not safe amongst the Judeans. This fulfilled the prophecy made by Moses:

Deut 33:12 And of Benjamin he said, the beloved of the Lord shall dwell safely by him; and the Lord shall cover him all the day long, and he shall dwell between his shoulders.

We have seen from Matthew 4:15,16 above that these Israelites in Galilee are called “Gentiles”. It was Galilee from whence Jesus picked out eleven of His disciples. Judas, the Judean, was the one who betrayed Jesus! Eleven of the disciples were not of “The Jews” and were not of Judah either.

When Jesus ascended, the witnesses are described as Men of Galilee in Acts 1:11 and Acts 2:7. In Acts 2:22 those addressed were Men of Israel, but not “Jews”. But whilst addressing the Men of Israel, the disciples soon came up against “The Jews” in the national leadership. The more we look into this matter, the more impossible it becomes to say The Jews and the Men of Israel refer to the same people.

Today most denominations are “Christian Zionists” who insist that “The Jews” and “Israel” are one and the same! We read that some of the priesthood believed in Jesus; all were not Edomites or other proselytes. Nicodemus was a “ruler of the Jews” and so was among the leaders. But his counsel was somewhat different as an Israelite non-Edomite! Jesus was speaking primarily of the leadership in general when referring to “The Jews”. Jesus described these leaders as “hirelings”,and not” the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not”. Each such person in the religious leadership was “climbing up some other way” and each was a thief and robber [John 10:1]. In Verse 5 Jesus calls them strangers and they are identifiable because of the what they were doing as making them different.

COMMENT

God says that Israel would always be a nation. A nation has government such as a King, the laws of the King, a territory, and a subject people. The word ethnoscould not apply to a multi-racial church. Prophecy gives such positive identification of Israel. Israel is a separate people of a common racial origin. They would remain a nation [or nations] as long as the sun and the moon are shining [Jer 31:36].

The Hebrew and the Greek words which are sometimes translated “Gentile” have both pagan and Israelite connotations. The words goi and ethnos are used of any group of a common racial origin. The idea that the word refers only to non-Israel people comes from the translators, who took their lead from the Latin Vulgate whose interpretation of “Gentile” was one who was not of Rome. This can never mean “not a Jew” in the sense it is given today, because Judaism is multiracial! There are other words that apply to heathen and barbarians and Paul could have used these to describe non-Israelites if that had been his mind. But he did not! What the word “Gentile” has come to mean is not the original meaning and therefore not the true meaning.

Part two

It is necessary to point out:

1. If “The Gentiles” does not mean what we have been taught, then the word “Church” may not mean what tradition teaches either.

2. If we want to declare that “The Gentiles” are non-Israel, then why does God say something different and still isolate Israel and Judah from the other races?

3. If any want to say that Israel is now “The Church”, called out of every race, then they have a problem understanding the difference between race and nationality. These are not identical. Israel was scattered among the nations, and is regathered out of [not of] them. This means that they are separated from other races.

The Apostle Paul concludes his argument in the Book of Romans by saying:

Rom 11:26 And so shall all Israel be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away all ungodliness from Jacob.

It is not said that the Deliverer will turn away ungodliness from others as well as from Jacob or that other than all Israel will be saved. It is “all Israel” that shall be saved. We cannot somehow change all races into “Jacob”.

The parties that make up “all Israel” are still the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Thus says the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets! Thus says the New Testament also! Therefore, the two groups are not “Jews and non-Jews”, or “Jews and Gentiles” in the popular concept.

EXAMINATION OF SOME VERSES COMMONLY USED TO SUPPORT TRADITION.

There are many indoctrinated people who will not listen to any exposition about “Gentiles”, such as that above, and who rely upon certain passages that are supposed to “prove” their position. This paper would not be complete without a look at some of these.

Most of these claims are based upon the word, “Gentiles”, and usually exponents think that they have such heavy-weight ammunition that any recourse to comparing Scripture with Scripture is unnecessary. That is, they have the traditional meaning of the word “Gentiles” so fixed in their minds that they will not consider any alternatives or make any examination.

Let us look at some of these claims from actual email correspondence received. Some of the answers are written in a personal manner for this reason.

QUESTION: “The Prophet Amos, he says directly, “And all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the Lord who does this thing.“  What clearer confirmation do you need that God has elected some from all the nations and that they will be gathered in along with all those of Israel who are true Israel as Paul teaches in Romans chapter nine?”

ANSWER: Who is always “called by my name” through Scripture?  Look at over one hundred references! Who is this in the context of Isaiah 43:7? “Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him“.   Does not Jesus call his sheep by name?  Who are always described as the “sheep”?  Is it not Israelites? Goats are not called by name, are they?

QUESTION: Does not this Scripture shows that all Christians of all races are as one because of their belief? “Now may the God of patience and comfort grant you to be like-minded toward one another, according to Christ Jesus,  that you may be one”.

ANSWER: Who does God say He is Father to?  Where is any statement that God is the Father of all races? Who does “our” refer to?  Jer. 31:9, “for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn“. Who are the firstborn sons?

QUESTION: Does not this Scripture tell us that God is merciful to everyone? “Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received us, to the glory of God. Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers, and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy’.

ANSWER:   Where are, “The promises made to the fathers (of Israel)” ever said to be made to others? The “Gentiles” (also given as “nations” and “peoples”) are those referred to in Heb. 8:12 and 10:17, “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more”.  The total context here is Israel.

QUESTION: “For this reason I will confess to you among the Gentiles, And sing to Your name. He delivereth me from mine enemies: yea, thou liftest me up above those that rise up against me: thou hast delivered me from the violent man. Therefore will I give thanks unto thee, O LORD, among the heathen, and sing praises unto thy name. Great deliverance giveth he to his king; and sheweth mercy to his anointed, to David, and to his seed for evermore”.- [Psalm 18:48-50].

ANSWER: Whichever way you want to use the word “Heathen” or “Gentiles”, it does not change the context from “to David and his seed for evermore“.  How does anyone manage to convert David’s seed into non-Israelites?

QUESTION: Do not these verses say there are two lots of people, Deut. 32:43, “And again he says: “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people!”  And again: “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles! Laud Him, all you peoples!”  [Psalm 117:1 and verse two says peoples in my view].

ANSWER:  You create your own problem in that you have not recognized that “with” is an added word supplied by the translators to support their view.  At least the KJV and the NASB puts “with” in italics to show it is an added word. “Heathen”, “Gentiles” or “Nations”, (whichever translation you like), has the gloss of, “a number of people accustomed to live together…a people…a nation“.  Take out the “with” and you have, “Rejoice o nation, His people“. No, even Strong says, “people, tribe, nation”.  Even in your version there is no “and” to determine two peoples.  If they were different the grammar would tell us.

QUESTION: And again, Isaiah says: “There shall be a root of Jesse; And He who shall rise to reign over the Gentiles, In Him the Gentiles shall hope.” [Is. 11:10].  Does this not say that Jesus will reign over all races?

ANSWER: The New Testament confirms the Old Testament as to who Jesus will reign over.

Luke 1:32-33, “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end”.

No one can convert “the throne of his father David” or “the House of Jacob” to mean all races, or even a “spiritual” kingdom.

One does not have to be a genius to find out that the first “Gentiles” is not the same word and meaning as the second “Gentiles” in the Greek.  The first word is 5971 “’am” that Strong gives as, “persons, members of one’s people, compatriots, country-men”, and also “kinsman, kindred”. The second word “Gentiles” is 1471 “gowry” that is sometimes used of Israel.  Have you yet taken the trouble to pick up a concordance to find that this word is used of Israel (or are you scared to do this?).  At least the KJV is honest enough to give “people” and “gentiles” to show there are two differing words in this one verse that are given one translation.

QUESTION: What about these verses”? “Nevertheless, brethren, I have written more boldly to you on some points, as reminding you, because of the grace given to me by God, that I might be a minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.  Therefore I have reason to glory in Christ Jesus in the things which pertain to God. For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ has not accomplished through me, in word and deed, to make the Gentiles obedient–  in mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. And so I have made it my aim to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build on another man’s foundation, but as it is written: “To whom He was not announced, they shall see; And those who have not heard shall understand.”

ANSWER: Matt 10:6, “But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, and Matt. 15:24, “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel” answers this “clearly”…(a word you like using). You are again relying on the word “Gentiles” which is used of Israel too.  You just will to not examine this matter.   You will see more about the identity of, “and those who have not heard” below.  You should look at all the “not heard” through prophecy.

In this you are following traditions…you will see why I can say this below. It is traditions that render the Word of God to be of “none effect”. You know Mark 13,“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered“. Of course that last part is a quote from the end of Isaiah chapter 52 just before the gospel is presented so strongly in chapter 53.  It is preceded by, “So shall He sprinkle many nations“, and the next question looks at this word “many”.

QUESTION Now let me ask you one of those tough “language” questions about this verse:  Why did the Holy Spirit say “many nations” instead of “both nations” if in fact there are only two nations or peoples involved in salvation?

ANSWER: At least you do not say, “sprinkle many Gentiles” as might have been expected!  “Many” = rab is not an all-inclusive word. It is not the all-inclusive word, as you would like it to be.  The gloss in the Septuagint is, “a number of people accustomed to live together- a nation“.  Twelve tribes are “many”!  The “many” used here is not the cardinal number so there is no question about “both”.  Consider other places where “many” is used so you can compare Scripture with Scripture, such as Luke 2:34, “And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel”. “Many” in  whom?

Do not dodge the “many” in Gen. 17:4, “As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee”. You will find plural kings of Israel elsewhere to confirm this. In the following verse to that above you can see whom these “many” are.  “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee“.  I cannot see anywhere out of more than 500 places where ‘many” is used as you want to claim.  Thus the odds are sure stacked against you, are they not?

STATEMENT QUESTION: “THE BOOK OF HEBREWS IS WRITTEN TO “JEWISH CHRISTIANS“.

ANSWER: This traditional idea infers that it does not concern any outside of the “Jews” in the “Jews and Gentiles” doctrinal belief. If this was so, why should “non-Jews’ quote it? But this is a book that defines the two parties concerned as being “The House of Israel and the House of Judah”, where these are the “Gentiles” and “Jews” as defined by Scripture, but not defined by tradition. This book defines who only the New Covenant is made with:

Heb. 8:8-10 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Further to this, tradition does not use the word “Jews” in the same manner and meaning as Jesus does in John chapter eight.

STATEMENT QUESTION: THE BOOKS OF ROMANS AND CORINTHIANS ARE WRITTEN TO “GENTILES”.

ANSWER: How you reason is that Peter had difficulty in presenting the Gospel to Cornelius because one was a “Jew” whereas the Centurion was a “Gentile”, in your view. What you miss is that the House of Israel and the House of Judah had always had enmity between them, and you do not admit that the “middle wall of partition” that is what is broken down by the Gospel is between these two particular parties.

Isaiah 11:12-13, “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim”.

This of course also states exactly who are gathered to God, as do as most of the prophets who state they are only Israelites from the two Houses. Further to this, the Book of Corinthians tells us how the Corinthians could only be Israelites.

1 Cor. 10:1-5 “Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness”.

Cornelius is used by many as a supposed example of a so-called “Gentile” non-Israelite being saved, but the place of birth, or citizenship tells us nothing about race. Neither does the word “Italian”.  The Roman army engaged or conscripted people of many races.  Some declare that the Roman armies in Palestine were mainly British and German Saxons. But Scripture can determine this man’s race, even if he is not described as a “Jew” [or "Judean" as it is here].

In the AV of Acts 10:28, Cornelius is described as being of another nation but, the Greek text uses the word allophulos which is a compound of allos [another of the same kind], and phulos [a kindred tribe (phule)].  He was not “another” of a different kind…why ever ignore these language differences?  Cornelius was a devout man, we are told, and he feared [the] God, therefore he was one who could believe.  According to Vine, devout means careful as to the presence and claims of God.  So Cornelius knew the Old Testament claims of God upon Israel.  We do not find devout being used of people other than Israelites.  Also, he feared “God” [Acts 10:2] and he prayed to [the] God and was heard by [the] God.  “God” here is ho theos, the term used to denote the one true God.  So, Cornelius was not a Roman polytheist!  He was an Israelite! When we read, “And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses“.  The Law of Moses concerned Israel, and so Acts 13:39 is likewise concerned with Israelites. And, “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” is not about the redemption of any but Israelites.

STATEMENT QUESTION: “PETER WROTE TO THE “JEWS“.

ANSWER: Peter addresses his book to “strangers scattered” just the same as James does and describes them as being “the twelve tribes”.  The word “scattered” = diaspora in both books and Strong gives this as, “Israelites dispersed among foreign nations”. So this is just yet another case of “Gentiles” being Israelites.   When we look at all the prophecy about the “scattering” and “gathering”, we have to reconsider.  The word “strangers” is not a way out either.  There are five major words in both Hebrew and Greek all with differing meanings, and some are Israelites.

The people being written to are described in, “Ye are a chosen (elect) generation“?  Strong gives “generation” as meaning, “Offspring, family, stock, race, nation”.-i.e. nationality or descent from a particular people”. Thayer’s Lexicon confirms this with, “An aggregate of many individuals of the same nature, kind, sort, species”. Thus the basis of election is race.

“Strangers and Pilgrims” in Greek matches perfectly with the Hebrew in regard to Israelites  (ger -torshab).

Peter was writing to people who had a king, and therefore to a nation.  Do we really not see, “Honour the king” in 1 Peter 2:13 when we read this? Does any interpretation allow for a singular king over all the “Gentiles”?  Israel was promised a king over them somewhere even when scattered, and that this would continue so long as the sun and moon are still functioning.

Peter takes us back to Hosea in 1 Peter 2:9, “Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy“, where he is talking about fulfilled prophecy made to Israel.  So how could these “Gentiles” in the Book of Peter be non-Israelites?  In the accusative, “Love the brotherhood” = adelphotes, this has to do with a common womb.  Does the use of “us” in this book of Peter refer to those diaspora being addressed, or to others? It is only to “us” of the “diaspora”.

Even Strongs 1484 gives ethnos (translated as “Gentiles”) as “a multitude of individuals of the same nature or genus“, so “Gentiles” may be Israelite or non-Israelite…that is, it means essentially, “any group of a common origin”.  The context decides.  Mr. Strong confirms that it is used of animals too, but we cannot think of Peter as addressing animals, can we?   And none can come back to say that “born again” in, “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever” is the same as “born again” in John 3, even if many churches say so. People do not become “a people” this way.

STATEMENT: THE STORY OF RAHAB AND RUTH TELLS US ANYONE OF ANY RACE IS JUSTIFIED BY FAITH.

ANSWER: This is sometimes used in connection with Rahab, to say that as a non-Israelite, she was justified by her faith. A full determination about Rahab and Ruth as being Israelites is too lengthy to be considered here, but three points will be made:

Argument is made that these women were non-Israelite, simply upon the grounds that that they were not living in Israelite territory. That is not proof at all. As for Ruth being a Moabitess, we can find three places in Scripture where Israel had eliminated the inhabitants of a part of Moab, “until there was none left”. This is the Israelite-occupied territory in Moab where Ruth had gone. There were no Moabites by race living there.

Argument is also made with Gabriel’s revelation to Zacharias in Luke 1:17, “And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years. And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings”.

3. God would not operate against His Own Laws regarding racial intermarriage.

It does not seem to matter to the exponents of this claim that they are extending the boundaries of the Gospel, and that in the “Hall of Faith” in Hebrews that Rahab is listed in a list that is made up of Israelites only, as well as Adamic stock that predates Israel.

STATEMENT. “IN THE BOOK OF LIFE” ARE FOUND MEN AND WOMEN, FREEMEN, SLAVES, YOUNG, OLD AND PEOPLE FROM ALL NATIONS“.

ANSWER: This view is based upon the traditional use of the word “Gentilies”.  When God said to Abraham, “I will make a great nation of you“, since the word translated here as “nation” is exactly the same as that translated as “Gentile”, so was not God then saying to Abraham, “I will make a great Gentile of you“?  Likewise, Rebecca had two Gentiles in her womb.  The mentions of the “Book of Life” in The Revelation such as, “And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”, tells us something about the time when the names are written into this book. We are also told who can be removed from this book.

Where the “nations” or “all nations” is written in the Hebrew or Greek, the inclusion of the article (not shown in most versions) determines that the

subject people are the Israelites.

In quoting, “In “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus“, it is common to make, “Christ Jesus” mean “Jesus Christ”.  These two phrases do not mean the same.  Grammar tells us “Christ Jesus” means “an anointed people belonging to Jesus”, whereas Jesus Christ means “Jesus the anointed one“.

Your statement makes an absolute denial that, “He came unto His own” as in John 1. This shows those Jesus came to were His already as “His own”. This confirms verses like, Matthew 1:21, “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins”. That Israelites are so spoken of as being “His own” before Jesus came is spoken against today. “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against“-(Luke 2:34). “Many in Israel” is not “many in all races

STATEMENT: THE BOOK OF REVELATIONS TELLS US THE PEOPLE IN HEAVEN ARE FROM EVERY “NATION, AND KINDRED, AND TONGUE, EVERY NATION, AND KINDRED, AND PEOPLE.

ANSWER: Israel was scattered amongst many nations in punishment for breaking the covenant God had made with them. Prophecy tells us about the regathering of the House of Israel and the House of Judah from amongst the people they were scattered. In the Greek we find the word ‘”ek” is there that means “out from amongst”, and not “of”.

QUESTION: Does not Isaiah 11:10, “And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious” tell us that others besides Israelites will gathered to Jesus?

ANSWER: No it does not. Verse twelve says, “And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth”. These are “the nations” of this context.

QUESTION: Does not Isaiah 41:1-2 say, “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street” say that the elect nation shall bring in the Gentiles too?

ANSWER: “Elect” as in “mine elect is a singular adjective. Your view is based upon your misunderstanding of what “Gentiles” means, and that this can vary according to context. The context is found confirmed in the first verse of the next chapter, “But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine“. The context is Israelite only.

“GENTILES” MAY MEAN NON-ISRAELITES.

In these Isaiah passages, please remember that here, as in other places, the word “Gentiles” may refer to Non-Israelites as well, e.g Isaiah 60:16. We can also see this in Gen. 10:5 and Judges 4, 2+13+16.

We find passages like Isaiah 61:9, “And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the LORD hath blessed” where we can see how we have “Gentiles” and “the people” as differing words within one verse, where “people” = ‘am to which Strongs gives the meaning, “persons, members of one’s people, compatriots, country-men“.

Ezekiel 4:13, “And the LORD said, Even thus shall the children of Israel eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles, whither I will drive them” is another illustration.

Matthew 20;19, “And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again“, is a New Testament illustration.

As always, these words must be kept in their context. Otherwise total confusion will reign.

CONCLUSIONThis paper says that the so-called “Gentiles” being addressed in many places cannot possibly be other than Israelites. In general, they represent the House of Israel as opposed to the Judean nation. But the word may refer to non-Israelites as well. The Bible is a book about the whole nation of Israel and the covenants and promises made to that nation, either as a whole nation or to individual parts of it. The other races are mentioned in the Bible only as they affect Israel. The term “Greeks” is examined in another paper.

The popular use of “Gentiles” as always being non-Israelites, is wrong!


gilgal located between Bethel and Ai

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

gilgal

Gilgal




Until this year, no one knew where the real Gilgal was located. Tradition held that it was northeast of Jericho and on today’s mixed-up maps, that’s where you will find it. Gilgal is not the only error. On those same confused maps, the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are located at the south end of the Dead Sea.
All of these locations are traditions that have been sanctified by time. Who put Sodom and Gomorrah at the south end of the sea, and who put Gilgal northeast of Jericho? These errors must be corrected. Therein lies the problem, because to correct such errors one must first understand that they are errors and that they stem not from facts, but from tradition.
The locations just mentioned were NOT established by Israeli cartographers or Torah/Bible scholars. Rather, they were established by Byzantine monks sometime between 625 CE. And 638 CE, who had a habit (no pun intended) of locating holy places in areas that were not so “remote.” Once a place has been established by tradition and its location has been incorporated into various books and maps, the information becomes a “fact” in the mind of the misinformed that is very difficult to challenge.
How do we correctly establish the real places that are mentioned in ancient texts, especially after such traditions have become accepted? To pinpoint the actual location of any given site it is important to recognize that such locations are nothing more than geographic points on a map. If you need to establish the true position of some long-lost ancient city, then its coordinates must be plotted using specific, accurate references to known geographic ground references (control points) or other absolute points of reference. These in turn must be derived from legitimate textual sources that are at least contemporary with respect to the city that is being researched.. Using even the most basic logic, these control points can be applied to the geography and the geology in order to ascertain with reasonable degrees of certainty the actual, or at least the approximate, locations of these areas. A physical examination can be, and in some cases has been used to confirm what should have been obvious all along.
Lot’s Position Between Bethel and Ai
An important control point is Mount Ba’al Hatzor, 3336 feet above sea level. Geographically, it is located between Bethel and Ai. The place of the altar of Abram was on top of Mount Ba’al Hatzor. In Genesis 13 Abram gave Lot a choice of going to the left hand (north), or to the right hand (south). Lot chose neither. From that site upon Mount Ba’al Hatzor, Lot could see the north end of the Vale of Siddim and the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, 35 kilometers (22 miles) to the southeast. Lot gazed down at the kikar (circle) or the plain of the Jordan, only a mile below. Having journeyed east from Ba’al Hatzor, he cast his tent toward Sodom. Lot could see Sodom and Gomorrah from Ba’al Hatzor. Today, one can see Ba’al Hatzor from the “north” end of the Dead Sea. However, neither can the south end of the Dead Sea can be seen from Ba’al Hatzor nor Ba’al Hatzor be seen from the south end. How then could the monks place Sodom and Gomorrah incorrectly at the south end of the Dead Sea?
The Vale of Siddim
The canyon and the area to the south of Sodom and Gomorrah would of course eventually fill with water and become what is today called the Dead Sea. At the time it was referred to as the “Vale of Siddim” and rather than being filled with water, the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, verse 10, indicates that this small canyon was full of slime pits. Perhaps these slime pits were the source of the asphalt which floated on the surface and caused the Greeks to call it Asphalus Sea.
Genesis 14:2 adds that: “…Five kings made war… All these were joined together in the Veil of Siddim which is the salt sea.” Did these five kings make war under water? Of course not! They joined together in the canyon called the “Veil of Siddim,” before it filled with water and became the salt (or Dead) sea. More importantly, in terms of our analysis of ground control points, it becomes a geological point of reference. It does so by virtue of the fact that the Dead Sea is very deep at the north end where there is a deep underwater canyon and extremely shallow at the south end. It logically follows that the Veil of Siddim was at the North end, and thus, so were Sodom and Gomorrah. Moreover, when combined with the first point of reference the correct map coordinates become that much more certain.
The Kikar
The two previously mentioned perspectives of Sodom and Gomorrah also establish a description of the Kikar Jordan. A kikar is a circular geographical feature — the word itself means a circle like a traffic circle or disk. Geographically, a circular basin or mesa can be referred to as a kikar. The phrase “The Plains of Jordan” is actually “Kikar Jordan” in Hebrew. It was, and still is a circular basin west of the Jordan River that makes a circular curve eastward a few kilometers north of the Dead Sea. The circular bend curves back to the west just before the River Jordan empties into the sea, the result being an almost perfect circular basin.
The Mountain of Lot
This circle just mentioned is itself contained within a series of concentric circles that increase in size and ground elevation as they expand outward. The outermost circle is a large flat basin that is approximately as wide as the Dead Sea itself. When the angels of HaShem led Lot and his family out of Sodom by the hand (at the north end of the sea) they was warned not stop in this kikar, or the circle, but to “flee unto the mountain.” However, in Genesis 19:19, Lot pleaded that he would not have to climb that mountain. Instead, he asked if he could take refuge in a certain city to the north of the kikar. That city was called “Tzo’ar” and was also referred to (among the five cities of the plains) as “Bela.”
From the texts, the geography of the area, and the existing archaeological evidence of the area in the form of tels or mounds, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that what is traditionally referred to and shown on today’s maps as Tel Gilgal is actually the city of Tzo’ar on the north perimeter of the circle over which Lot fled.
The Unusual Lack of Vegetation
What about biological evidence? When HaShem destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19:24-25, it says that he destroyed all the vegetation in the kikar and that even the earth was destroyed. That specific area, within the circle that is to the immediate north of the Dead Sea is to this day totally barren and desolate. There simply is no vegetation there! Moreover, the soil analysis performed by Ya ‘acov Arkin confirms that this particular soil is unique. It is not salty enough to prevent vegetation, but there is something about the soil that prevents germination!
No Circle or Tel at the South End of the Sea
At the south end of the sea there is no circular kikar, nor is there any tel that could possibly be identified as Tzo’ar as there is at the north end of the sea. Furthermore, there is no evidence of any trade route (ancient road) or city having existed at the south end of the sea. At the north, we find an ancient cobblestone road (as there must be per the biblical texts). At the south end there is only the flat valley at the base of the mountain formation.
The Topography of the Jordan River
Another point of reference can be derived from Joshua 4:19, which states that “…the people [of Israel] came up out of Jordan on the tenth day of the first month and encamped at Gilgal on the east border of Jericho.” The topography of that area indicates that the crossing was at, or near, or just south of what is today called Wadi Kelt (Ma’ale Adummim). How do we know?
In that same chapter Joshua is directed to take 12 stones from the riverbed (one for each tribe) and to replace them with 12 other stones. The text of Joshua 4:3 and following says: “… And they took the 12 stones which they took out of the Jordan and Joshua set them up at Gilgal.”
The only place where stones are present on the bottom of the Jordan is the portion that is just north of the Dead Sea. Why? Because rivers or wadis intersect with the river at or below this point. During the rainy season stones and other rubble are washed down from the mountains. The part of the river that is north of Wadi Kelt is nothing more than a mud bog — totally devoid of stones because there are no wadis flowing into the Jordan River for several kilometers above that area.
Physiological Evidence?
There is even a physiological point of reference! The next day (after setting the stones) Joshua circumcised all the men who were born in the wilderness who had not yet been circumcised. That means that on the 11th, 12th and 13th day of the month most of the men of Israel would have been “just slightly” incapacitated. On the 14th day of the month they celebrated Passover at Gilgal. If they were unable to travel, then how did they get there in time for Passover? It would have been impossible for them to travel the 18 miles from what is today the Adam Bridge down to Gilgal in their incapacitated condition, unless of course, their wives offered to give them piggy back rides…Oops! That wouldn’t work either! If they were already south of the Wadi Kelt then Gilgal would have been no farther than one hour by foot.
The Banks of the Jordan
Is there any additional geological proof? The entire 18 miles from the Adam Bridge to the intersection of the Jordan River with the Wadi Kelt is marked by a steep embankment on either or both sides, making it impossible for 5-6 million people with livestock to cross anywhere between these two points. This forbidding terrain makes it impossible for Joshua to have led the nation across at the Adam location as some traditions hold. The only practical crossing point south of the Adam Bridge would have been near or below the Wadi Kelt, just north of the Dead Sea where there are no steep banks on either side of the river; where we coincidentally find the mysterious one cubit high walls twenty-two cubits wide in the center of the circular basin.
A Large Cemetery
Joshua commanded the children of Reuven, Gad and 1/2 of the tribe of to arm themselves and form an advance guard to destroy the seven Cannanite armies that had mustered their forces at the place of the crossing. In Joshua chapter 4, verses 13-14, it says that “…about 40,000 [men] prepared for war [and] passed over before HaShem to do battle in the kikar Jericho (Plains of Jericho). On that day the L-rd magnified Joshua in the sight of all Israel; and they feared him as they feared Moses, all the days of his life.”
Until recently there was no hard evidence to suggest that a battle occurred in this area. However, during the last 10 days of our first month in Israel (March 1994), our first efforts were devoted to the area east of Jericho and just to the south of the Wadi Kelt. We found, stretched across the entire front of the kikar Jericho, a massive cemetery with more than 200,000 graves. The cemetery spreads through the entire area from the Jordan River all the way across the kikar to the south of the Greek Orthodox Monastery of Jeshorymos or Deir Hajla and continues west to the wadi near the Jerusalem-Jericho Road. The size of the cemetery would seem to verify that some sort of titanic battle took place at this spot. The Arabs know the massive graves are there and call it Graves of the Jews.
With the exception of the battle between the seven Cannanite nations and the three tribes mentioned, there is no other reference to a battle in this area. Having reasonably established the age of the graves, logic would seem to support the presumption that this is one more point of reference.
Achan in the Valley of Achor
In Joshua 7, verses 24-26, the Hebrew text says that Joshua and the people of Israel “…brought Achan and his family up from Gilgal to the Valley of Achor.” The Valley of Achor lies between the sea and the mountain cliffs from the spring of Ein Feshka or Ein Tzuqim northward along the sea to Wadi Kelt. This is west and south of Gilgal.
Anyone who has been to this area knows that Jericho is north of Ma’ale Adummim, so it certainly could not be opposite the “Gilgal” that is on today’s maps. The real Gilgal was south of the wadi. In the Hebrew it says: “…and the border went up toward debir from the Valley of Achor, and so northward, turning toward Gilgal which is opposite [or east] of the ascent of Ma’ale Adummim.” If the ascent of the wadi is south of Jericho and Gilgal is opposite this southern point, then it cannot very well be north of Jericho, can it?
How much plainer can it get? The Gilgal on the today’s maps is obviously incorrect.

when a sinner dies

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

Most Christians have been taught to believe that when a sinner dies, the sinner goes straight to Hell. A hot and burning place somewhere inside the pits of the earth; where satan (a red demon with horns, a tail, and pitchfork) delights in giving ETERNAL torture to each victim. But is this a true picture of what GOD’S Word tells us about Hell? NO! Not even close! To begin with, satan is not red, nor does he have horns, nor even a tail. In Ezekiel-28 (in which GOD Refers to Satan by one of his pseudonym’s “The King of Tyre”) GOD tells us that satan was: Eze-28:12- “Perfect in Beauty”, Eze-28:13- “In Eden, the Garden of GOD (where he was called – The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and also the Serpent)”, Eze-28:15- “Perfect in thy Ways”, Eze-28:17- “Lifted up because of thy Beauty”. In other places, we are told that GOD made him “after the full pattern”. To put it another way, “Perfect and Beautiful”. Satan was the Cherub created and anointed by GOD to Cover the Mercy Seat (just as depicted on the Ark of the Covenant). He LOST that job at his fall! (It was satan’s rebellion in the First Earth Age, where he led a third of GOD’S Children astray, in an attempted overthrow to Capture the Mercy Seat [So satan could sit upon it, instead of guarding it] that caused his downfall, and the need for this present age). But, he was created beautiful and perfect, and in appearance, he still remains that way!

So far we have learned that satan is NOT red, has NO Tail, NOR any Horns! As to where he is now? HE WAS  ordered by Christ in Luke-4:8 GET BEHIND ME! He is RESTRAINED BY MICHAEL, until that time, when he, along with the fallen angels (who are now in chains) shall be cast to this earth (Revelation-12:7-9)!

To recap, what do we know so far? That Satan is not an ugly, animal like creature, He is Beautiful in appearance (although WICKED and VERY UGLY on the Inside); and he is NOT in some fiery pit in the earth;

But what about all those places in the Bible where it says “Hell”? First off, 99% of the time when you encounter the word “Hell” in either Testament, it should have been translated “GRAVE”! In the Old Testament, the word is: 7585 “She’owl” (sheh-ole’) the grave. In the New Testament, the word is either: 86 “Hades” (hah’-dace) the Grave – or:1067 “Geenna” (gheh’-en-nah) the Valley of Hinnom. What was the Valley of Hinnom? In Old Testament Days, it was where the Fires for the worship of Moloch were burned, and through which the Children of Moloch worshippers were passed. In New Testament times, the Moloch worship had ceased, but the fires still burned; because now it had become the Garbage Dump for the city of Jerusalem. This is where they dumped all their garbage, including dead animal carcasses. This word was used to describe the “rotting of flesh that takes place” when a body begins to decompose. What better example could there be than a garbage dump filled with rotting animal carcasses? Yet again, nothing more than a description of the “Grave”. When your physical body dies, it goes to the grave, to return to the dust it came from, NEVER TO BE USED AGAIN!!

So, if all flesh goes to the Grave, never to be any more; what about all Souls? First, look to Psalms-31:5 “Into thine hand I commit my Spirit: Thou hast redeemed me, O LORD GOD of Truth”. Next, look to Ecclesiastes-12:7 “Then shall the dust (Physical Body) return to the Earth as it was: and the SPIRIT SHALL RETURN UNTO GOD WHO GAVE IT”. Now turn to Acts-7:5 “And they stoned Stephen, who called upon GOD, and saying, ‘yahwehshua RECEIVE MY SPIRIT’”. Lastly, Paul tells us in 2Corinthians-5:8 “to be absent from the Body is to be present with the Lord”.

But let’s look to Our GREATEST TEACHER, CHRIST Himself. In Luke-16:19-31, we are told what happens to everyone who dies. While ALL go to Heaven, there is a GULF, a line, on which those who die in CHRIST go to GOD’S SIDE, and those who die in sin go to the other side, where they can see GOD afar off, but can not approach him. What torture alone that in itself must be! To be able to see GOD, but to be kept far away from him! It is likened to having an unquenchable thirst! (BTW: The word “Hell” was ADDED to Luke 16:23, it DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE ORIGINAL SCRIPTURE!)

And yet, our GOD is Totally FAIR! Luke-23:46 “And when yahwehshua had cried with a loud voice, he said, ‘FATHER, into thine hands I commend my Spirit’: and having said this,

he gave up the ghost”. So Christ’s Spirit returned to Heaven. But, while Christ’s Body Lay in the Tomb, yahwehshua was Busy Preaching the Gospel to all those on the other side of the Gulf. Everyone from before Adam’s time, to the Time of the Crucifixion; all who had not had the chance to hear the Gospel, and be saved (See:1Peter 3:19 and 1Peter4:6). The word rendered “Preached” here in 1Peter is not the usual Greek word for Preach -“Evangelizo”, but the emphatic word “Kerusso”, which means to “Proclaim as a Herald”. Thus, to all those who had returned to God before Christ’s coming, yahwehshua Heralded His Glorious Victory over Death (Spiritual Death)!

  • Are we alone? Are there sinister plots by alien beings to control the world? Will there be divine intervention soon?
  • The greatest hoax in the world unveiled.  The Jews never owned birthright privileges. David wasn’t a jew.  Christ (Yahweh-shua) was from the tribe of Joseph. Confronting the myth that Judah was the lion that overcame.
  • Is the Name that contains salvation hidden from the world at large?
  • How the serpent got into the house of Israel.
  • Did ancient gods once walk among men?
  • Exploring the mystery of the 1000 year reign.
  • Who were/are the 144,000?
  • Will Atlantis re-appear in the future?
  • Looking behind the myth of the Jewish sabbath.
  • Exploring the twelve constellations.
  • Is water baptism essential?
  • Melchizedek Salt Covenant: Truth or Witchcraft?
  • The true biblical calendar and how to use it.
  • Are you in covenant with the Creator?
  • Born to die on the second Passover.
  • Should we swear by His Name?
  • Jacob’s pillar
  • War in heaven
  • Was Judas the only snake?
  • What’s really behind the pyramids.
  • Oneness; The gateway to the Eternal.
  • Trailing the serpent
  • Watchers: Guardians of the Universe
  • Reincarnation: Fact or Fiction?
  • Why did the scepter depart?
  • Is there forgiveness for everyone?
  • True reasons for not being a Christian.
  • Fallen angels: Where are they?
  • Is the earth hollow?
  • Is our government hiding the truth?
  • Showdown at Shiloh
  • Where do YHVH’s angels reside?
  • Galactic Federation: Who’s in control?
  • Bringers of the Dawn: Doorways to eternity.
  • How to build an ancient altar.

And many more exciting topics to be explored in biblical context on “The Shepherd’s Call. Cassettes, VHS, and CD’s will be available for donation…Call, write, or email Pastor Buddy.

Need more proof? Go to Revelation 20. The Great White Throne Judgment for those who failed to overcome, from the beginning of this age, right up through satan’s tribulation, does NOT OCCUR until AFTER the 1000 Years of the Millennium So, if all those who failed or fail to overcome, are not even Judged until AFTER the Millennium, how can they be sent to “Hell”, to be tortured forever when they die? Obviously they CAN’T!

Last, but not least, what does happen to those who still fail to overcome, after all are Finally Judged? Does GOD send them to a fiery pit, to be tortured forever? Do you Really think a LOVING GOD, such as our FATHER, could enjoy eternity knowing some of HIS CHILDREN are suffering an ENDLESS Torture? Could you, no matter what your own children have done, Torture them, for even a minute? Then how could you EVER imagine GOD doing such a thing? I know, you are going to say, Revelation 20:10 tells us that “they shall be tormented, day and night, for ever and ever”. This is nothing more than a BAD TRANSLATION of a figure of speech. Go to Psalms-37:20 “But the wicked shall PERISH, and the Enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of the lambs: They Shall CONSUME; into SMOKE SHALL THEY CONSUME AWAY”. Next, to Psalms-37:38 “But the Transgressors SHALL BE DESTROYED TOGETHER: the END of the wicked shall be cast off”! Finally, Look to Ezekiel 28:19 “…And NEVER SHALT THOU BE ANY MORE”. There are more places where this is described. ALL who go into the “Lake of Fire” shall PERISH; CONSUME away into smoke; NEVER TO BE ANY MORE! There is NO Everlasting torture!

Does this change anything? NO! Do you want to LIVE for ETERNITY with GOD? OR CEASE TO EXIST? The end for those who fail to overcome is still JUST AS TERRIFYING!!!! Erased from Existence, for all Eternity!!!! To be cont…………

  • Are we alone? Are there sinister plots by alien beings to control the world? Will there be divine intervention soon?
  • The greatest hoax in the world unveiled.  The Jews never owned birthright privileges. David wasn’t a jew.  Christ (Yahweh-shua) was from the tribe of Joseph. Confronting the myth that Judah was the lion that overcame.
  • Is the Name that contains salvation hidden from the world at large?
  • How the serpent got into the house of Israel.
  • Did ancient gods once walk among men?
  • Exploring the mystery of the 1000 year reign.
  • Who were/are the 144,000?
  • Will Atlantis re-appear in the future?
  • Looking behind the myth of the Jewish sabbath.
  • Exploring the twelve constellations.
  • Is water baptism essential?
  • Melchizedek Salt Covenant: Truth or Witchcraft?
  • The true biblical calendar and how to use it.
  • Are you in covenant with the Creator?
  • Born to die on the second Passover.
  • Should we swear by His Name?
  • Jacob’s pillar
  • War in heaven
  • Was Judas the only snake?
  • What’s really behind the pyramids.
  • Oneness; The gateway to the Eternal.
  • Trailing the serpent
  • Watchers: Guardians of the Universe
  • Reincarnation: Fact or Fiction?
  • Why did the scepter depart?
  • Is there forgiveness for everyone?
  • True reasons for not being a Christian.
  • Fallen angels: Where are they?
  • Is the earth hollow?
  • Is our government hiding the truth?
  • Showdown at Shiloh
  • Where do YHVH’s angels reside?
  • Galactic Federation: Who’s in control?
  • Bringers of the Dawn: Doorways to eternity.
  • How to build an ancient altar.

And many more exciting topics to be explored in biblical context on “The Shepherd’s Call. Cassettes, VHS, and CD’s will be available for donation…Call, write, or email Pastor Buddy.


America

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

to america

How the Clovis People Came to North America

The Beringian Bridge theory holds that large bands of Proto-Mongoloids (or those whom the politically correct romanticize as “Native Americans”) migrated over a land bridge connecting the two continents twelve to fourteen thousand years ago.  The Kennewick Man, the above-mentioned sandals, and other objects (or tools) — all unrelated to Indian findings — suggest that “Native Americans” were not the first or only immigrants.  It is quite possible, even probable, that in North America Solutrean-descended Proto-Caucasoids from the east (e.g., from the peoples responsible for Marmes Rockshelter, Cactus Hill, and, later, Clovis itself) came into contact with Pacific-Rim Proto-Caucasoids from the west (Kennewick Man, Stick Man, Spirit Cave, etc.).  Such contacts could well have contributed to the Clovis culture.  At a professional conference at the end of October 1999, two prominent archeologists, Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley, suggested that the Solutrean people crossed the Atlantic from what is now northern Spain and southern France about 18,000 years ago and settled in North America, establishing what is now called the “Clovis” culture.  This construction of the evidence is strongly supported by projectile points and other “diachronic” correspondences between the two cultures.  We know that humans had been sailing around the Pacific for thousands of years prior to the appearance of the Clovis culture, so it is no great stretch of the imagination to suppose that the Solutreans used skin boats to cross the much smaller Atlantic in perhaps as little as three weeks.  The fact that much of the same technology appears in both Solutrea and Clovis – and nowhere else – strongly suggests that we are looking at two branches of the same people:  a Caucasoid-like people.

Another discovery in Central Asia also shows some Clovis burial traits.  This eighteen-thousand-year-old grave, the burial site of two children near Lake Baikal in Siberia on what could have been a route to North America, is very similar to what appears to be the grave of two cremated children found in a Montana excavation;  both interments also had evidence of mammoth bones surrounding the bodies (a cult practice also found among the Clovis people).13

Evolutionary Branching

Years of unrelenting media and political pressure from the U.S. government, Indians and self-hating White academics to construct a “multi-racial” Kennewick Man have begun to affect even Dr. Jim Chatters.  He has reacted like the countless honest but gun-shy Christian biblical researchers who disbelieve in the resurrection of Christ.  When asked whether they believe in that dogma or not, they quickly change the topic to the “real” meaning of Jesus (which somehow always turns out to be a politically correct obfuscation).  Something similar is happening in this case.  From Dr. Chatters’ book, it is evident that he desperately wants to avoid an onslaught by the politically correct establishment.  Married as he is to an Indian woman and being attacked by the intensely racist Indian tribes of eastern Washington State, he bends over backwards trying to “neutralize” the racial specificity of Kennewick Man.  He insists on the obvious:  that it is impossible to tell skin color from ancient bones (although the probability is extremely high that Kennewick Man did indeed have white skin).  He states that Kennewick Man is an ancestor “of all of us,” thereby sidestepping the issue completely.  In contradiction to his own findings about the bones, he has even gone to the extreme of inventing a new face for Kennewick Man with an “Indian” nose in order to please the media and the propaganda masters.

Despite such obscurantist contortions, it is ridiculous to view the branch represented by Kennewick Man as somehow belonging to American Indians or as not being Caucasoid-like.  And it is impossible for Kennewick Man to have been an “ancestor of all of us,” since his people, and very possibly he himself, were exterminated by the Indians.  (Of course, facts have never been important to the anti-White racial miscegenationists dominating modern American culture;  only propaganda matters.)

The Extinction of the Paleoamericans
and the U.S. War against Truth

By the time Europenas arrived, there were no Proto-Caucasoids or Proto-Negroids left in the Americas, except perhaps for a few small, mixed populations at the hemispheric extremities or a dying Proto-Negroid remnant on the barren cul-de-sac of Baja California.  Other than these sparse leftovers, only Proto-Mongoloids were around, savagely warring against one another.  What happened, then, to the Paleoamericans, north and south?

These questions have spawned much controversy, mainly because it may impact “Native American” rights and, above all, government money from non-”Native American” taxpayers.  The “Native (?) Americans” argue that the Kennewick man and other skeletons should be buried under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990.  But with the new evidence, it is now clear that the Kennewick Man cannot belong to any existing tribe, and scientists should be allowed to study the skeleton under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (“NAGPRA”) of 1979.  Scientists and “Native American” tribes are continuing their battle in court, but regardless of the legal outcome (which depends on politics, not truth) we can start rethinking and rewriting ancient North American history as to who the first settlers on the continent were and what happened to some of them.

North American Indians believe in storytelling as not only a traditional but an accurate method of transmitting their history.  Armand Minthorn, a mendacious tribal leader for the Umatillas tribe, stated that “from our oral histories we know that we have been a part of this land since the beginning of time … Our elders have told us that Indian people did not always look the way we look today … We already know our history.  It is passed on to us through our elders and through our religious practices.”14 Given this interpretation of knowledge and truth, it is no wonder that the cultures of Mr. Minthorn’s ancestors and of other Native Americans remain at such a pitiably low level even after having been exposed to White civilization for centuries.

In contrast, according to the logic and scientific findings of the White man, the oral transmission of history can be distorted and much of it forgotten if it is not written.  (This is so regardless of the obvious fears Indians have about their mythology being labeled as fantasy and about the possibility – some would say probability – of their ancestors having committed genocide against Whites.)  But for honest Whites, it is truth that matters;  It may be “immoral” to some Amerinds and White genosuicidists to study the bones of the dead.  But the same “Native American” people who have called this “immoral” for religious or other reasons, also put cedar chips and leaves into the wooden box which held the Kennewick Man’s remains;  they thereby deliberately introduced matter which could damage the ancient relics.  They also put other bones into the Kennewick Man’s box to make others believe that this discovery was a hoax.15 Not only this, but several of the bones in the care of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Batelle Institute, Building S-5 (“Sigma Five”) in Richland, Washington, mysteriously disappeared.  Naturally, the Corps blamed it on Dr. Chatters, in spite of the fact that all the evidence clearly indicates that the bones’ disappearance was due to the anti-White attitude of the Corps in letting the Indians physically handle and steal the bones.  (The Corps did not, of course, show this same deference to the Whites of the Asatru religion, who believe the Kennewick Man to have been an early Caucasoid).  Such acts of vandalism are finally, one hopes, being prevented and proper methods of storing the bones used.  As far as Indians’ assertions about (White) scientists’ “immorality,” are concerned, it should be pointed out that the scientific study of these antique bones to advance science is the most moral use that could be made of them.

Under the orders of U.S. Magistrate John Jelderks in Portland, on Friday, October 30, 1998, the Kennewick Man’s bones were finally removed from the jurisdiction of the anti-White U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and transferred to the Burke Museum in Seattle.  (This was done even though a Burke curator had sent the concerned scientists an offensive e-mail “that was replete with insult, misinformation and accusation,” according to the scientists.)  Located on the campus of the ultra-liberal and extremely anti-White University of Washington, the Burke Museum is nonetheless a major national resource for information on the natural and cultural history of the Pacific Northwest.

Finally the scientists got a limited chance to study the remains.  Dr. Jane Richards concluded that the Kennewick Man appears to have the same skull structure found in the remains of Marmes Man (found at the Marmes cave site on the Snake River in Washington state).  If this is borne out by forensic pathologists, then a pre-Indian migration of non-Mongoloid peoples can be demonstrated.  This would certainly not answer all the questions, but it would be a start and maybe an impetus to archaeologists to continue the much needed study and excavations in both eastern Washington state and eastern Oregon (providing financial blocks to applications for rescue archaeology are removed).

The truth-hating mass media claimed that the Burke investigators had found the Kennewick Man to be “Asian,” thereby suggesting to the uninformed that he was Mongoloid rather than Caucasoid.  After all, the people (and specifically Whites) have to be protected from the truth.  Nonetheless, it did slip out that Kennewick Man was – and is – totally unrelated to any modern American Indian type.  So much for the American Indian Movement’s mythology about the ancestors of the Indians springing up out of the ground like mushrooms and the Kennewick Man being one of them.  Of course, the subspecies of White neurotics known euphemistically as “liberals” is riven by cognitive dissonance over these findings.  Such a thing cannot, in the dominant anti-White view they espouse, be true.  It will have to be suppressed.  Unfortunately, the liberals and their many corporate and government supporters may have the power to do this, since they control such organizations as the Army Corps of Engineers and, apparently, the Burke Museum in Seattle.

Government Corruption of Truth

At the beginning of December 1999, the Associated Press reported that the federal government and the Burke Museum were confessing to yet another delay in the release of investigatory results about the Kennewick Man.  This time it was a delay in releasing dating-test results on the specious ground that the bones didn’t have enough protein for good testing.  In response, a Portland lawyer, Alan Schneider, representing eight anthropologists suing the government over the remains, pointed out that the government’s agents should have done chemical analyses to determine which fragments were best for testing.  The anthropologists also charged that the federal hirees took as much as 100 times as much bone as they need for testing.  In other words, we can be sure the government has done its best to bias the results in favor of its pre-drawn conclusions.  It is difficult to guess exactly what tack the government was trying to take here.  Possibly they were trying to taint the bones in some way which would make it impossible to determine anything at all, so they could then give the “benefit of the doubt” to the Proto-Mongoloids.  More likely, “our” government might also have been attempting to drag out and play down the whole issue of the Kennewick Man in the hope that Whites would forget all about this momentous discovery and the bones could be quietly buried with animal remains on some tribal reservation in Washington State.  Your tax dollars at work.

In the second week of January, 2000, the results of yet more radiocarbon testing were finally allowed to seep out to the newspapers, TV and radio.  The tests indicated an age of about 9,200 years before the present.  In other words, no real difference from what had originally been determined three years previously.  Or rather, the difference was in the government’s obscuring of the truth through delays.  The regime’s lawyers then proceeded to argue that the skeleton should be betrayed to the Indians because it belonged “to a culture that predated the arrival of Columbus.”  In others words, since the perverse Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (“NAGPRA”) of 1990 claims that any remains dating to before Columbus’ discovery of the New World are “Indian,” the evidence that non-Indians inhabited the continent before 1492 must be destroyed.

So there you have it.  The twisted logic of the regime now enabled its psychobabbling functionaries to take the bones of, say, ancient Vikings found on Long Island and give them “back” to Redskins on the absurd basis that the Vikings were in North America before Columbus and therefore “must” be Indians.  After this perversion of justice the financially weak Asatru Folk Assembly withdrew from the litigation, recognizing that the power of governmentally enforced lie can defeat all truth.  The scientists continued to fight doggedly on.  In early January, 2001, they claimed that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated the National Historic Preservation Act by plowing over the burial site where the 9,300-year-old skeleton had been found.  In response, Corps officials lied that they had simply been “trying to keep looters away” from the site when they covered it with 500 tons of rocks and soil in 1998.  The scientists pointed out that the Corps violated laws governing preservation of historical artifacts and risked ruining the original burial site.  Of course, since the anti-White U.S. Government has all the money and power in the world, it didn’t take much insight to see what the outcome is going to be.

The scientists’ persistence is all the more admirable in the face of the grotesque fraud perpetrated on Monday, September 25, 2000 by Bruce Babbit, the Secretary of the U.S. Interior Department.  This spin artist meowed that “Although ambiguities in the data made this a close call, I was persuaded by the geographic data and oral histories of the five tribes that collectively assert they are descendants of people who have been in the region of the Upper Columbia Plateau for a very long time,” according to the Associated Press.  And with that pretext, he decided that Kennewick Man was to be given to five American Indian tribes who claim him as an ancestor.  Luckily for the scientists, however, the haughty Babbit would not determine the fate of the skeleton;  instead, the scientists persisted in prosecuting their lawsuit and, since the corrupt Clinton administration finally ended, increased their chances of winning it.  (Of course, by that time the government may have ensured that there will be nothing left to study.)

On January 20, 2001, William Jefferson Clinton and his lackeys left office under much shame and disgrace (vandalizing much of the office equipment in the White House as they left), and the scientists were able to pursue their case without quite as much governmental harassment and obstruction as thitherto.  On April 19, 2001 the Associated Press reported that they had filed documents in federal court showing that the Clinton regime, seeking to avoid a “messy” debate over just who the first human inhabitants of North America really were, had inexcusably and improperly allowed contacts between White House staff and members of a coalition of five American Indian tribes seeking to bury the skeleton.  Further, the federal officials “coached the coalition on how to plead its case.”  These documents make even more manifest the criminality of the genosuicidal Left masterminded by the fatherless Clinton.

In the face of these political attempts to suppress truth, science marched on.  On Tuesday, July 31, 2001, the news media carried a report by Guy Gugliotta of the Washington Post, “Evidence suggests earlier migration to America,” with the subtitle, “STUDY:  A more genetically diverse population is found,” about the results of a new study on the early peopling of the Americas.  It said the following:

Ancient peoples only loosely related to modern Asians crossed the Arctic land bridge to settle America some 15,000 years ago, according to a study offering new evidence that the Western Hemisphere hosted a more genetically diverse population at a much earlier time than previously thought.
The early immigrants most closely resembled the prehistoric Jomon people of Japan and their closest modern descendants, the Ainu, from the Japanese island of Hokkaido, the study said.  Both the Jomon and Ainu have skull and facial characteristics more genetically similar to those of Europeans than to mainland Asians.
The immigrants settled throughout the hemisphere, and were in place when a second migration – from mainland Asia – came across the Bering Strait beginning 5,000 years ago and swept southward as far as modern-day Arizona and New Mexico, the study said.  The second migration is the genetic origin of today’s Eskimos, Aleuts and the Navajo of the U.S. southwest.  The study in today’s edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences adds new evidence to help settle one of anthropology’s most contentious debates:  Who were the first Americans?  And when did they come?
“When this has been done before, it’s been done from one point of view,” said University of Michigan physical anthropologist C. Loring Brace, who led the team of researchers from the United States, China and Mongolia that wrote the new report.  “We try to put together more dimensions.”
For decades, anthropologists’ dogma held that the Americas were populated by a single migration from Asia around 11,200 years ago - the supposed age of the earliest of the elegantly crafted, grooved arrowheads first found in the 1930s at Clovis, N.M.
By the end of the 1990s, however, the weight of evidence had pushed the date of the first arrivals back several thousand years.  But as the migration timetable slipped, additional questions and controversies have arisen.  The 1996 discovery in Kennewick of the nearly complete skeleton of a 9,300-year-old man with “apparently Caucasoid” features stimulated interest in the possibility of two or more migrations - including a possible influx from Europe.
The new study attempted to answer this question by comparing 21 different skull and facial characteristics from more than 10,000 ancient and modern populations in both the Western Hemisphere and the old World.
The findings provide strong new evidence supporting earlier work suggesting that ancient Americans, like Kennewick Man, were descended from the Jomon, who walked from Japan to the Asian mainland and eventually to the Western Hemisphere on land bridges as the Earth began to warm up about 15,000 years ago at the end of the last Ice Age.

Kennewick Man, in short, is not an Amerind, but a representative of the eastern branch of the early White or Proto-Caucasoid race.

Then, on February 4, 2004, a miracle:  it was reported by the Associated Press that “[t]he 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld a decision last August by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Jelderks in Portland that the remains, which Northwest Indian tribes consider sacred, can be studied. …

“The three-judge panel found that the remains do not fall under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and can be studied under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act.

“The decision was written by Judge Ronald M. Gould. …

“The ruling said the remains date to a time before any recorded history and that that makes it impossible to establish any relationshipwith existing Indians.”

Thus, through great effort and expense, White science has won a partial victory over anti-White irrationality and guilt-mongering by Amerinds.  For the time being, at least, non-White suppression of the truth has been restrained.  With the genosuicidal lunatics of the Clinton presidency out of power, science has regained a modicum of freedom.

This brings us to a final word about the federal government itself.  In the last decade or so, business and financial writers have talked a great deal about the “culture” of business organizations and how to change it.  This topic should also be applied today to the “culture” of the American government.  As is the case also with the major religions, the central psychodynamic of this organization is never mentioned in polite company.  That psychodynamic is the insensate drive to push the White race to suicide through racial miscegenation while the U.S.-based oligarchy attains socio-economic domination of the entire globe.  All kinds of irrelevant peripheral matters are raised to block any discussion thereof.  And vituperation - the old ad hominem logical error - is the normal response to those who object to racial suicide.  Since the unprecedented rise of the global economy masks the biological (to say nothing of the moral) destruction of the Caucasoid peoples, the majority of Whites is easily persuaded to go quietly into the eternal night.  The inner circles of American power are keenly conscious of this reality.  For they are the forces most eagerly seeking the Brave New World Order of mulattoism.  Their strongest ally is the sick religion:  Christianity.  This creed, in all its denominations, claims that all Whites are “guilty” by virtue of their white skins.  Non-Whites (the darker the better) must be “understood” if they act like animals.  This, then, is the all-pervasive, government-led irrationality which seeks to turn the Proto-Caucasoid skeleton called the Kennewick Man over to Proto-Mongoloids.

Possible Causes of the Disappearance
of the Paleoamericans

Thus all the evidence supports the thesis that Kennewick Man, Stick Man and other Paleoamericans were descended from the same eastern Proto-Caucasoid branch which gave rise to the indigenous Ainu of Japan.  The Cascade spearpoint in Kennewick’s hip, his broken, half-healed ribs and an old skull wound strongly suggest that he led a very violent life.  Evidence of severe wounds on other Paleoamerican skeletons indicate the same.  Dr. Chatters, discussing the disappearance of them all, suggests that Paleoamerican women did not bear enough children (their births being allegedly too widely spaced) and died too frequently in childbirth to save the race from extinction, and that many of the wounds came about from battles between the men over the dwindling supply of women.

This hypothesis, while agreeable to the politically correct, conveniently ignores several obvious facts.  To begin with, the Paleoamericans had survived just find for at least ten thousand years before the arrival of the Amerinds, despite the high childbirth mortality found in all pre-modern peoples.  Secondly, the timing of the disappearance of the Paleoamericans and the appearance of the Amerinds is simply too simultaneous to be dismissed as coincidental.  And thirdly, the “disappeared” peoples included not just the cultures of the west, but also the Solutrean-descended ones of the east, of North America, and the Proto-Negroid peoples of South America to boot.


Early man’s hunt to extinction of large mammals

As the Paleoamericans ran out of large game in North America, the pressure to survive forced them to look to other strategies to cover their needs, one of them being territorial defense and offense.  This suggests three possibilities as to why the these peoples vanished as mysteriously as they appeared:  the first, which is the least likely, is that they starved with the inability to adjust to new methods of hunting; the second is a war with neighboring Indian tribes in which they were annihilated, which is probably the most common theory based on the historically high frequency of genocide;16 finally, the third possibility has them assimilating with coexisting North American Indian Tribes.

The possibility that the Caucasoids were starved out of existence is not really supported.  There are and were plenty of food resources in the Pacific Northwest and in all of North America as well.  Since the scientific testing already done on the Kennewick man shows he had a high marine diet (possibly salmon), together with the lush vegetation, buffaloes, caribou, elk, and deer, it seems most improbable that his people could starve.

But the competition for food and land that arose with neighboring non-Caucasoids could have ignited hostilities that lasted several hundred years.  As the extinction of big game forced all early Americans to develop new methods of hunting and gathering, conflicts over territory must have arisen between the Proto-Caucasoids and the invaders.  As is usual in history, rising tensions between peoples led to wars.  It is quite possible that the ever larger number of Indian tribes, often at war even with one another, more readily attacked the Proto-Caucasoids because they were easily identified as an enemy by their physical and racial differences.  In addition, the Proto-Mongoloids were almost certainly of higher intelligence than the Proto-Caucasoids and Proto-Negroids, and thus were able to outwit them (See J. Philippe Rushton’s RACE, EVOLUTION AND BEHAVIOR,” mentioned above).  So it came about that the Red Man exterminated the Paleoamerican Whites and Blacks utterly.

To combat the serious research in recent years by various scientists now documenting the genetically based, great behavioral differences between races, liberal anti-White academics are now taking a new tack.  There is, they assert, no such thing as race.  They claim that the momentous racial differences in such areas as intelligence, brainwave frequency, mental endurance, law-abidingness, ability to defer gratification, and many other “mental” or even “spiritual” traits have sprung up in the last few thousand years of prehistory and cannot be considered “racial” differences.  Therefore, on this view, behold!:  there are no races (except for purposes of affirmative action) at all.  (In fact, there are so few difference between us and the other great apes, why not give them welfare and equal rights also?)

This, of course, is little more than defining the issue of biological differences out of existence.  A neat trick on the part of the academics.  They get to have their cake and eat it, too.  Racial differences are explained away as “cultural.”  Whites are defined as merely having (or being) cultures of evil, while non-Whites and mulattoes are romanticized as “victims” of the monstrous Whites.  This interpretation has of course found a great deal of support among the race-suicidal components of the White and Jewish population, which are concentrated in the media and academe.  Redefinition of the facts allows them to obscure reality and justify their war on evolution.

As far as Indian “culture” is concerned, we may look at the earliest forms of civilization (city-systems) in the Americas - those of the Incas, Mayas and Aztecs - for an example of the institutionalized violence and elaborate forms of human sacrifice already in the New World long before the Europeans arrived.  The Aztecs, whose ancestors originally came from what is now the U.S. southwest (their language is related to that of the Navajos, and their own myths tell of their migration from the north), were savage warriors who wiped out many lesser tribes, sacrificing and eating many thousands of people at a time.  The violent measures that were used by them did not just happen.  Their cruel methods were taught, advanced and promoted through an elaborately constructed mythology - an idea system innate to pre-Columbian Amerind culture everywhere.  We need look no further than the U.S. Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 (quoted at the beginning of this essay) for testimony to the grotesque savagery of the Amerinds in their native state.  The hideous deaths inflicted by Indians on early French Jesuit missionaries in Canada give evidence of the same thing.  (Examples are:  John de Brébeuf, tortured to death by the Iroquois in 1649;  Gabriel Lalemant, tortured for seventeen hours and martyred with John de Brébeuf;  Isaac Jogues, tortured by Mohawks [some fingers bitten off], tomahawked and scalped by Iroquois Indians in 1646;  Noël Chabanel, martyred in 1649;  Charles Garnier, martyred in 1649;  Anthony Daniel, martyred in 1648.)

Thirdly, we come to assimilation.  This theory has its pros and cons.  For assimilation, one can look to Indian oral history.  Members of the American Indian Movement allege that their ancestors looked physically much different than they look today (even though they physically resemble the Mongoloid peoples of northeast Asia and carry mostly the same genes).  Assimilation would change their physical appearance and support their theory.  Presumably assimilation would also account for the decline of technology following the disappearance of the Paleoamerican Proto-Caucasoids.  Added to this is the fanatically held U.S. melting-pot ideology which holds that assimilation and the termination of evolution are inevitable, just and wonderful for everybody.  Alas, there is still no evidence that Indian tribes generally (outside of the hemispheric extremities), before the “melting pot” situation of modern America, had anything but Proto-Mongoloid genes.  So if there was any Proto-Caucasoid admixture, it was quite small.

We are left, so it seems, with the scenario of genocidal wars.  This was the primary cause of the disappearance of the Paleoamericans which anthropologists were at a loss to explain until the end of the twentieth century.  But with the incredible discovery of the Kennewick Man, history on the North American continent can now be rethought and rewritten.


Skull cast and restored face of Kennewick Man




Dr. James Chatters



APPENDICES

(Return to Text)

Appendix A
Paranormal Experiences
of Dr. James Chatters
in Connection with Kennewick Man

Although anything called “paranormal” has been anathema to the official scientific establishment in modern times, Dr. Chatters has had some experiences involving the Kennewick Man which can only be described as uncanny.To begin with, it must be remarked that, among scientists, forensic specialists and others who work with the bones of the dead, it is not at all unusual to get a “feel” for the personality of the former owner of those bones.  Those who experience this phenomenon are quite aware of the fact that they are encountering the spiritual essence or memories of another person.  So it was with Dr. Chatters.  He came to “know” the Kennewick Man as a human being, not just as a pile of bones.  This knowledge is normally sensed through the slow-brainwave faculty of memory, which captures much more than merely personal experiences.  That is to say, our memory not only takes in information from our daily life experiences, but also from the “mental” infrastructure of existence, which remembers all events.  Memories also embed themselves in particular in the physical environment of an event, and skeletal bones retain the memories of their former owners.  (Cf. Ásatrú and the Paranormal)

One day when Dr. Chatters was handling the Kennewick Man’s skull, he was looking at it from the rear.  Now it so happens that the back of that skull is missing, so that when you view it from behind, you can see through the skull and the eye sockets to the other side.  As he was doing this, he suddenly found himself looking at the room with the Kennewick Man’s own eyes! He had become momentarily “identified” with the Kennewick Man.

Afterwards, when he would drive along the highways through the semi-arid landscape of Eastern Washington in his car, he often found himself inexplicably feeling a mysterious attraction to that landscape, as though he needed to be out there doing something.  Just as the Kennewick Man had done so many thousands of years before.

When the politicized Army Corps of Engineers demanded possession of the bones, it was a sad day for Dr. Chatters.  However, when he learned that the Indians were demanding to bury the bones with their own kind, he felt something far worse:  sheer, inexplicable panic.  This feeling of panic was not something that came from Dr. Chatters himself.  It flooded him from a dimension beyond our world.  He felt the terror of the Kennewick Man himself faced with the prospect of being confined with his ancient mortal enemies, the Indians.  Irrational?  Yes.  Like the irrational terror felt when suddenly faced by a murderer aiming a lethal weapon at you.

Finally, Dr. Chatters admits to having had other paranormal experiences related to Kennewick Man.  He will not say what these experiences are, so that others can only guess.  One guess is that he has experienced actual apparitions of this ancient representative of the Caucasoid race, epiphanies which made clear to him that the truth about the early peopling of the Americas must be made known, and that the liberaloid suppression of truth in favor of some romantic notion about Redskin “noble savages” must be ended.  This is the true reason why Dr. Chatters has pursued the subject of Paleoamericans with such dedication:  he has been gripped by the saga and the adventure and the mystical depths of these Ancient Encounters.



Return to Text

Appendix B
The sequence of Ice Age events
for the last 130,000 years, in summary form

(Phases about as warm as, or warmer than,
the present are written in bold.)


Years Ago Type of Climate
150,000 cold, dry full glacial world
around 130,000 rapid warming initiates the Eemian interglacial (Stage 5e)
130,000-110,000 global climates generally warmer and moister than present, but with progressive cooling to temperatures more similar to present.
(except for possible global cold, dry event at 121,000 y.a.)
?110,000 a strong cooling marks the end of the Eemian interglacial (Stage 5e).
105,000-95,000 climate warms slightly but still cooler and drier than present; strong fluctuations.
95,000 – 93,000 another cooler phase similar to that at 110,000 y.a.
93,000 – 75,000 a milder phase, resembling that at 105,000-95,000 y.a.
75,000 – 60,000 full glacial world, cold and dry (the ‘Lower Pleniglacial’ or Stage 4)
60,000 – 25,000 ‘middling phase’ of highly unstable but generally cooler and drier-than-present conditions (Stage 3)
25,000 – 15,000 full glacial world, cold and dry; Stage 2 (includes the ‘Last Glacial Maximum’)
(This period includes two ‘coldest phases’ – Heinrich Events – at around 23,000-21,000 y.a. and at 17,000-14,500 y.a.)
14,500 rapid warming and moistening of climates in some areas. Rapid deglaciation begins.
13,500 nearly all areas with climates at least as warm and moist as today’s
12,800 (+/- 200 years) rapid onset of cool, dry Younger Dryas in many areas
11,500 y.a. (+/- 200 years) Younger Dryas ends suddenly, back to warmth and moist climates (Holocene, or Stage 1)
9,000 – 8,200 climates warmer and often moister than today’s
about 8,200 sudden cool and dry phase in many areas
8,000-4,500 climates somewhat warmer and moister than today’s
Since 4,500 climates fairly similar to the present
(except; about 2600 y.a. – relatively wet/cold event (of unknown duration) in many areas)



Footnotes

é
1 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man” The New Yorker.  June 16,1997 pg. 72 [Return to text]

é
2 Gramly, Richard Michael.  The Richey Clovis Cache: The Earliest Americans Along the Columbia River.  pg. 5 [Return to text]

é
3 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man,” The New Yorker.  June 16, 1997 pg. 73; note his diet of marine food which I will emulate in my conclusion as a possibility of a competition for food/push factor with the Paleo-Indian. [Return to text]

é
4 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man,” The New Yorker.  June 16, 1997 pg. 73. [Return to text]

é
5 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man,” The New Yorker.  June 16, 1997 pg. 75. [Return to text]

é
6 Gramly, Richard Michael.  The Richey Clovis Cache: Earliest Americans Along the Columbia River.  pg. 5 [Return to text]

é
7 White, Randall.  Dark Caves, Bright Visions: Life in Ice Age Europe.  fig. 29,30.  Photo copy of the Solutrean tools used to hunt large game. [Return to text]

é
8 Gramly, Richard Michael.  The Richey Clovis Cache: Earliest Americans Along the Columbia River.  Top A, and top A & B Photo copy of the Clovis tools used to hunt large game. [Return to text]

é
9 Hill, Richard.  “Gift preserves a site that rewrote history” The Oregonian, Jan. 18, 1998 [Return to text]

é
10 Hill, Richard.  “Gift preserves a site that rewrote history,” The Oregonian, Jan. 18, 1998. [Return to text]

é
11 Ibid. [Return to text]

é
12 In my speculative conclusion I will relate to this as evidence of possible war between the Clovis people and other tribes that coexisted. [Return to text]

é
13 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man.” The New Yorker, June 16, 1997 pg. 78 [Return to text]

é
14 Preston, Douglas.  “The Lost Man.” The New Yorker, June 16,1997 pg. 74 [Return to text]

é
15 Geranious, Nicholas K..  “Just Who’s Looking after Kennewick Man?” The Tacoma News Tribune, Sept. 1,1997 sec. B3 [Return to text]

é
16 Even today we see this.  Various “modern” African nations keep exterminating various peoples with whom the dominant tribes in them are at odds.  African Muslims are notorious for committing genocide against Christians in addition to enslaving them.  Also there is the recent Bosnian conflict with its ethnic cleansing.  [Return to text]

»»>>Ý<<««


– Þeedrich (reachable at [email protected])
<!–SCRIPT language=JavaScript> Last modified Wed., 2004 Mar 10 @ 0:34

Mazzaroth

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

mazzaroth


- Chapter Four
By Jim A. Cornwell, Copyright © 1995, all rights reservedAnother view of the Heavens – Zodiac Age and the Ten SefirothEmphasis Mine: Another view of the Heavens is the following:Table of the Six Days of Creation and the 4th through the 9th Sefiroth Ephesians 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 4:10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Greek katoteros, kat-o’-ter’-OS; comp. From Gr. Kato, kat’-o, downwards, beneath, bottom, down, under, thus meaning inferior (locally, of Hades): — lower. Also as seen in Chapter Six under John 8:23, “And he (Jesus) said unto them, You are from beneath (below); I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.”

Table of the Six Days of Creation and the 10th Sefiroth The clarification of the earthly states as the lower parts of the earth is still up for research. Is there any connection to these names and the Zodiacal Ages?So lets look at the diagrams of these heavens.Images of the Seven Hells, Earths, Sefiroth and Araboth To return to the Names of God regarding the four worlds.
The Sefiroth is the bridge connecting the finite universe with the infinite God. The Sefiroth of Construction Heaven will be also seen as in the Ten Curtains of the Tabernacle equating to the Ten Firmaments or Sefiroth, and seven of these ten are the seven created heavens (the “third heaven” is mentioned in 2 Cor. 12:2) leaving three Kether-Hokhmah-Binah which are in the Heaven of Heavens with theMetatron-Shekhinah-Avir, with the center containing the One. The Heaven of Heavens is also called Araboth, translated as ‘clouds’, derived from the root A R B, which means something mixed.     Remember that in Enoch’s translation to the tenth Heaven which was called Aravoth, which is where Enoch recognized the constellation whence came our first ancestors, the star Altair (in Aquila). Aquila is the eagle constellation located northwest of Capricornus, which is the starting point of this book. In Araboth the countenance of the “Lord” (Holy One) was seated on a lofty throne and angels (Cherubim and Seraphim) were constantly approaching Him to receive orders. Some state that Enoch became Metatron at this point. As we have seen this place is called the “heaven of heavens” in Deuteronomy 10:14; 1 Kings 8:27; Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 148:4, and the “highest heavens” in the NIV.
Now to refer to the symbolism of the sevens, notice that if one totals up the four aspects of the sevens, respecting the fact that there are only six in Araboth. The result would be represented by 7 hells, plus 7 earths, plus 7 created heavens, and 6 celestial principles which totals to 27. The Aleph or One in the center would represent all twenty seven, all are one. As we have seen the numerical value of the name of God (YHVH) would equal 27, it is of great significance. Since the macrocosmic Finite Universe is 10 to the 27th power of the size of man, and also to be noted is that the opposite end of the spectrum is the unknown Unified Field Entity is 10 to the power of negative 18th in the microcosmic view from man. This is symbolic of the Point within a circle, which contains all that is therein.

YAH [(Jah Heb. Yah, is a contraction of Jahweh, found in the poetry of Psalms 68:4; 118:14 (RSV mg)] is also the name for the return to the beginning in significance to the dragon and the serpent. The beginning is the supernal point, hidden in thought and it makes the end of matter, which beyond there is no end, but the Absolute. At its point of departure it is unknown, neither of the way of its going out from nor the way of its re-entry can be defined.

  • In Psalms 68:4 “Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens (Araboth) by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.”
  • In Ecclesiastes 12:1 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;
    12:2 While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened, nor the clouds return after the rain:
  • Ecclesiastes 12:6 Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern. 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. 12:8 Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all is vanity. 12:11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd. 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 12:14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Pythagorean tetractysThe correspondence between the Shem ha-meforash and the Tetragrammaton (IHVH) is revealed when we apply another rule of gematria to the four-letter word.Images of the Pythagorean Tetractys The seven dots of the tetractys (the Elohim) form the star of David, the seventh day is in the center. (Note: that the seven dots are contained within the three dots the triad of God.)From page 189 chapter eleven ‘The Tree Alphabet (2)’ Robert Graves “The White GoddessSweet cauldron of the Five Trees.It is likely that Gwion, poet of Kadeir Taliesin (‘The Chair of Taliesin’), was also aware of the value given to the number Five by Pythagoreans and their successors. The Pythagoreans swore their oaths on the ‘holy tetractys,’ a figure consisting of ten dots arranged in a pyramid.

The top dot represented position; the two dots below, extension; the three dots below those, surface; the four dots at the bottom, three-dimensional space. The pyramid, the most ancient emblem of the Triple Goddess, was philosophically interpreted as Beginning, Prime and End; and the central dot of this figure makes a five with each of the four dots of the sides. Five represented the color and variety which nature gives to three-dimensional space, and which are apprehended by the five senses, technically called ‘the wood’—a quincunx, (an arrangement of five objects with one at each corner of a rectangle or square and one at the center [Latin quincunx, quincunc-, five twelfths : quinque, five]), of five trees; this colored various world was held to be formed by five elements — earth, air, fire, water and the quintessence or soul; and these elements in turn corresponded with the seasons. Symbolic values were also given to the numerals from 6 to 10, which was the number of perfection. The tetractys could be interpreted in many other ways: for instance, as the three points of the triangle enclosing a hexagon of dots–six being the number of life–with a central dot increasing this to seven, technically known as ‘Athene,’ the number of intelligence, health and light.”


The tradition of ‘what is above, is also below’ is reflected in Solomon’s Seal, and recalls the covenant. The Revelation symbolically represents the Mark of the Beast as 666. The number 6 in the Bible stands for humanity, and 666 is man’s imitation of the triunity of God. The worship of the 666 triunity is separation from the triune of God. God’s triune is represented by the number 333, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, meaning it is ‘thrice holy’ with a triple transcendent triunity. If we place a three on each triune of the upward pointing triangle and then place a six on each triune of the downward pointing triangle, we can then add up the total of all six triunes which gives us the sum of 27. This number is in correspondence with the numerical value of YHVH, or 10 + 5 + 6 + 5 = 26 plus the Aleph or One = 27. Another interesting point is that there are 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet plus the final five which have no numerical value would make a total of 27 archetypal letters (Three are Mothers; Seven are Doubles; Twelve are Simples; and Five are Finals).

Numerical values associated with the Six Pointed Star Plato used mathematical symbolism to express in Greek style the kinship between his tradition and that of the Hebrew. In Timaeus, he explains how the eternal God fashioned the world with spirit and matter bound together.First of all, he took away on part of the whole [ 1 ], and then he separated a second part which was double the first [ 2 ], and then he took away a third part which was half as much again as the second and three times as much as the first [ 3 ], and then he took a fourth part which was twice as the second [ 4 ], and a fifth part which was three times the third [ 9 ], and a sixth part which was eight times the first[ 8 ], and a seventh part which was twenty-seven times the first [ 27 ].”

Notice it was done in seven parts or octaves, the seven phases of clarification of the elements which inaugurate a cycle of perfect balance between spirit and matter, giving it an active and receptive double form.

Note that the figures between brackets, form the series: 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 8, 27 and the 9 appears before the 8.

These figures are the first two geometrical progressions: 1, 2, 4, 8 …. and 1, 3, 9, 27 …. and both are interwoven.

By placing Plato’s numbers on the above Solomon’s Seal it takes on coherence, with the upward pointing triangle becoming 1, 3, 9 and the downward pointing triangle having 2, 4, 8; the sum of 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 8 is 27. Hebrew exegetes point out that the 1 is ineffable for men and knowable only to the Elohim, the sacred name, superhuman knowledge, thus 2 marks the beginning of human initiation.

The Hebrew numerical system has a base of 10, the base of the triangle of matter has 8 and 2 equaling 10. Ancient astrology, has always based its number system with a base of 12. The base of the triangle of spirit is a 9 and a 3 equaling 12. The total of these two bases 10 and 12 equals 22. Twenty-two is symbolic of the twenty-two different colors of light which correspond to the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet, having indefinite numbers of combinations according to the movement of the spirit.

Everything is linked with another down to the very lowest link of the chain and the true essence of God, is above as well as below, in the heavens and on earth, and nothing exists outside Him. In Isaiah 55:9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

As to the Signs of the End after the tribulation of those days seen in Matthew 24:30 “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” 24:31 “And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (Mark 13:27 “from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven,” i.e., or simply the seven hells, seven earths, and seven heavens).”

The view is quite simple imagine the One, surrounded by four archangels, who guard over the spiritual forces flowing from the four letters YHVH, which stand watch over the four cardinal points from the (spiritual) center of the six directions of space (six-pointed star) with each of the other three looking over the other two. If we superimpose the seven hells, seven earths, seven created heavens onto one center point, that of Araboth, the Heaven of Heavens, we get a view of the three six-pointed stars spinning on one axle, as if we were looking at wheels upon wheels.

Image of the Cosmology of the Six Pointed StarFor each six-pointed star there is 60 degrees between its points, if we overlay two stars in offset as above it is 30 degrees and correlates to the twelve ages of the Zodiac. Two stars are placed inside these two, with one inside the other, and we possibly see the 24 thrones of the elders or angels and the four living beings in the center with the One noted in Revelation 4:2-11.

  • Isaiah 14:12 “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!” 14:13 “For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:” 14:14 “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.” 14:15 “Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.”
  • Revelation 12:3 “… appeared another wonder in heaven; and … a great red dragon (Devil or Satan), having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.”
  • Rev. 12:4-6 “… his tail drew the third part of the stars (angels) of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman (Israel)…” which continues through verse 6 about the birth of her man child to rule all nations and was “caught up unto God, and to his throne,” at which point the woman fled into the wilderness (the world) for 1260 symbolic days or years.
  • Rev. 12:7-8 “…there was war in heaven: Michael (the archangel) and his angels fought against the dragon ..” and his angels, who in verse 8, lost the war and also “… their place … in heaven.”
  • Rev. 12:9-17 for deceiving the whole world “… the great dragon .. that old serpent … called the Devil, and Satan, ” was thrown out onto the earth, with his angels, and they have been there ever since. Woe to the earth since the devil came down with great wrath and persecuting the things and seed of God knowing that he has but a short time till his end.

This section continues with the next section entitled “The clouds of darkness.”


Go back to Home PageReturn to the Table of Contents – Chapter Four or
go to the next subject The clouds of darkness

Seeds

Created by pastorbuddy on 3/10/2009

seeds

a

SEEDS, NATURAL AND SPIRITUAL By: Arnold Kennedy.

To many people, the subject of Abraham’s seed is somewhat of an enigma. The purpose of this paper is to clarify thinking about:

What is the seed of Abraham – is it genetic only?

What is “offspring” – what is the meaning of the expression offspring of David?

What is the difference between “seed”, “offspring”, “children”, “fruit”, etc.?

Why it is necessary to divide between these things that are different?

THE DIFFERENT WORDS FOR “SEED”

In most common translations the Hebrew and Greek words pertaining to this subject are often badly translated, and the various translations are inconsistent. So, for a start let us look at all the words in Strong’s concordance and Thayer’s Lexicon for “seed”, “offspring”, “fruit”, “generation”, etc.

OLD TESTAMENT:

Strong H2233 zera or zerah Seed; fig. fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity – carnally, child, fruitful, seed – time, sowing time.

Strong H6631 tse’etsa Offspring, issue, that is, produce, children, – that which cometh forth [out].

NEW TESTAMENT:

Strong G1074 genea From a presumed der. of 1085. A generation, by impl. an age [the period or the persons]: age generation, nation, time. Fathered, birth, nativity; that which has been begotten, men of the same stock, a family. The several ranks of natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy. Metaph. a race of men very like each other in endowments, pursuits, character – esp. in a bad sense, a perverse race. The whole multitude of men living at the same time. An age (that is, the time ordinarily occupied be each successive generation), a space of 30 - 33 years.

Strong G1078 genesis From the same as G1074; nativity, fig. nature, generation, nature[ - ral]. Source, origin – a book of one’s lineage, that is, in which his ancestry or progeny are enumerated. Used of birth, nativity. Of that which follows origin, viz. existence, life – the wheel of life (Jas 3:6), other explain it, the wheel of human origin which as soon as men are born begins to run, that is, its course of life.

Strong G1081 gennema From 1080: offspring, by anal. produce [lit or fig.] fruit, generation. That which has been born or begotten – the offspring or progeny of men or animals; the fruits of the earth, the produce of agriculture.

Strong G1085 genos From G1096; kin [abstr. or con., lit. or fig., indiv. or coll.]: born, country[man], diversity, generation, kin, kindred, nation, offspring, stock. Race – offspring; family; stock, race; nation that is, nationality or descent from a particular people. The aggregate of many individuals of the same nature, kind, sort.

Strong G4687 speiro To sow, scatter, seed.

Strong G4690 sperma Seed; that from which a plant germinates, the seed that is, the grain or kernel which contains within itself the germ of the future plants. metaph. a seed that is, residue, or a few survivors reserved as the germ of a new race (just as seed is kept from the harvest for the sowing). The semen virile; the product of this semen, seed, children, offspring, progeny; family, race, posterity. Whatever possesses vital force or life giving power; of divine energy of the Holy Spirit operating within the soul by which we are regenerated

Strong G4703 sporas From G4687; a sowing; a scattering [of seed], that is, [concr.] seed [as sown].

It can be seen that there are a number of words in the original languages which need to be rightly divided.

SEED IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

The word zera is used of the genetic seed of both men and plants. In Genesis 1, these seeds always produce after their own miyn(kind or species). In Genesis 1:11 in the expression whose seed is in itself, we see a principle. There is a later principle established that mixed seeds should not be sown together. Sentimental Christians might like to think that all seeds of men are the same as far as God is concerned, but separation is shown very early in the Bible pages. It is God who separates the seeds of mankind. It is for us to believe God.

In the early part of the Old Testament, we have a story about the one special seed of Israel that was commanded by God to utterly destroy certain other seeds [races]. This shows that there was a difference between the two groups. According to the common teaching, this separation is not supposed to continue into the New Testament, so we will have a look and see if it does. Within the Law, the Psalms and the Prophets there is no pattern of prophecy forecasting any change by God to this position; therefore any change in teaching must be questioned from the full foundation of the Law and the Prophets.

THE TWO SEEDS IN GENESIS 3:15.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, between thy seed [zera] and her seed [zera]; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Both seeds are the same word zera so we must accept the genetic context. Notice there is no enmity between the seeds at the time of speaking, because the seeds to be affected did not exist at that point in time. We have been taught that God is not like that; that He does not put enmity between differing seeds, but, in fact, God is still sovereign. If God wants to separate seeds, that is His business. If God wants to put enmity between seeds, that too is His business. Yet, the hypothesis of the Church of Everyone/World Church is that God made all races and seeds of men to be one, and that they should be mixed together. To use the expression that they might be one of John 17:21 as justification is to take the expression out of the context of those that thou hast given me of verse 9. God made no such extension – so where does that leave the World Church?

In the passage from Genesis above, there are stated to be two seeds. The seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent need to be identified before we can have any understanding of the issues. The seed of the woman refers to the Adamic line, and the remainder of the Bible deals only with the history of the Adamic line and its refinement to the seed of Jacob only. Somewhere along the line we have to come to a conclusion as to whether the difference between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent is a matter of:

Belief

A genetic difference

A combination of these

What happened in Eden? Satan beguiled Eve by clearly misusing and misapplying God’s words. Eve was remiss by failing to quote God’s words precisely – she altered God’s words and hence was led into a trap. Adam, on the other hand, simply disobeyed. He saw Eve eating and without fancy discussion, went ahead and disobeyed God’s commandment. The capacity or facility to disregard God was now manifest in the physical make-up of Adam’s line. The Bible account of what happened to these people, down to Noah, shows us how they generally followed the ways of natural man (those of Genesis 1).

In Abram and Sarai, God wrought a major change in the Adamic line. The spirit that had been breathed into Adam was dissipated to such a low level, that something needed to change if this human line of spirit-carrying people were to continue into the future. When Isaac was conceived, God changed Abram’s name to Abraham and Sarai’s name to Sarah. This commemorated the fixing of the spirit in Abraham and Sarah so that everyone conceived of their line received the same amount of spirit as Isaac.

Esau also received the same amount of spirit as Isaac and Jacob. But whereas Isaac and Jacob chose to believe God, Esau rejected God by rejecting his birthright. He compounded the matter by marrying into the families that God had rejected and declared as not suitable for marriage with Israel. This was no mere prohibition but enshrined in the Law – much to the astonishment of modern Christians. To act contrary to this Law is the wilful pursuit of those who live like the natural man of Genesis 1. It was the giving over of himself to Satan’s ways that made him and his progeny the seed of Satan as surely as if Satan had been their physical father. The whole of Esau’s line is devoted to the destruction of Israel – as is Satan. This is the enmity foretold by God in Gen 3:15. Hence Esau’s line is the seed of the serpent through acts of disbelief and it is a genetic line because it applies to all who are descended from that line.

ABRAHAM’S SEED IS GENETIC

Let us look closer at the promises made to Abraham. These promises are also made to Abraham’s zera through Isaac. It is here suggested that the readers go to the trouble to pick up a Strong’s concordance, page 896-7 and look through the multitude of references which use zera [Strong’s ref 2233]. Every Old Testament reference to the seed of men, as a line, is to genetic seeds.There are no exceptions! Therefore it cannot refer to any spiritual seed in this context.

Lev 15:17 And every garment, and every skin, whereon is the Seed of copulation

Now, how would one get some spiritual seed on his skin and garments? This seed is zera! “Copulation” is just copulation. So, couldzera here be spiritualised to be a spiritual seed? Remember that zera is also used for animals. Abraham’s seed is always a genetic seed. Please do not pass on reading until you have satisfied yourself that this is so. To go through Young’s or Strong’s concordance references is better than extracting verses for you! Then you will be able to see the total area covered.

If God chooses to make promises to those of one particular seed or race, that is His prerogative. That God does do this is found to be so from the beginning to the end of the Bible. Dare we question the purposes of God any longer? For the Lord of Hosts hath purposed, who shall disannul it [Is 14:27]. When it comes to the race of Israel, God says, “That the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth”- [Romans 9:11].

SEED AND OFFSPRING

In the prophetical Scriptures in particular, the words shown above as “seed” and “offspring” are often linked together. For example, speaking of Israel, God says:

Isaiah 61:9 And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles [nations], and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the Lord has blessed.

This seed which the Lord has blessed is spoken of as being the planting of the Lord [v3]. In this section of Scripture, strangers [zar] and aliens [nekar] are to serve as servants, vine-dressers, and plough-men to God’s seed. The relationship is that of servant-hood to those with the garments of salvation.

Isaiah 44:3 For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.

In verse one of this chapter my people, my chosen are expressed as being Israel and/or Jacob. Their King is described in verse six as the king of Israel. This prophecy cannot be extended to all races. There are no Scriptures like this for other than Israel. The offspring of Israel are different and separate from that of all other races or people.

Isaiah 65:23 ¼ for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.

This chapter is about an “elect” [v22], and a singular “nation” [v1]. Their situation is Jerusalem which is reserved for a “seed”. The time is the time of the new heavens and a new earth [v17]. Anyone will look in vain for a prophetical stream which regathers all the seeds of men to either the Jerusalem that now is, or to the New Jerusalem.

Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed [zera] after thee in their generations [posterity] for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed [zera]after thee.

Throughout the Old Testament the seed of Abraham is through the seed of copulation, through the son of promise, Isaac. Isaac’s birth was a physical event, not a mystical, spiritual church-conceived experience. The birth of Isaac was supernatural, but God had told Abraham that Sarah would bear him the child - unto thee [v21]. The covenant was made to him and his zera. Israel came from Abraham’s loins [Heb 7:5].

Try as we like, we cannot stretch the promise to include any other seed, or even to encompass any other of Abraham’s seed. We cannot honestly say that all of mankind came through Abraham’s loins! If any want to say God’s people now a spiritual seed from every race, where would Abraham’s loins come into it?

SEED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

In the New Testament we find the same picture as is presented in the Old Testament.

Luke 1:54,55 He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spake toour fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

Some might like to suggest from what they teach that the subject is not Israel and the seed of Abraham. They teach that all the New Testament is now about “The Church”. This is not true, because what they mean by “The Church” is what the Greek text says! The passage above says nothing about a multi-racial church. The people who are the subject of the passage are Israel as the seed [zera] of Abraham [Note the "our Fathers"].

Luke 1:68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people.

There is no mention of other peoples. There never is!

Luke 1:73 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant, the oath which he sware to our father Abraham, that we … to give the knowledge of salvation unto His people.

Our fathers” is another way of expressing the line by descent of His people. Now we are back to the covenant in Genesis 17:7. This is a generation of Abraham’s physical seed to whom fulfilment is made. The promise was made to Abraham’s zera [in Hebrew] and it is being fulfilled in Abraham’s sperma [in Greek].

“SPERMA” (AV: “seed”)

This word is used 37 times in the New Testament in a familial sense – referring to things that are homogenous in a genetic sense. The word used in Luke 1:44-55 in discussing Abraham’s seed (sperma). So, let us look at some more verses in which sperma occurs so we can have certainty about this matter.

Mark 12:22 The seven had her, and left no seed.

Luke 20:28 And raise up seed unto his brother.

“Sperma” does not sound like a spiritual seed, does it? It is physical! And it is physical seed in the following verses:

Acts 3:25,26 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed [sperma] shall all the kindreds [the same kin] of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Acts 7:5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed [sperma] after him, when as yet he had no child.

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be heir to the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed [sperma], through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be to all the seed [sperma]; not only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all [separated ones (Israelites) as identified in Rom 1:7].

The pronoun us is the children of Abraham to whom the original covenant was made. The promise is not made at any stage to other than all the seed, namely to those of whom Abraham is the father. This could not be clearer.

Rom 4:18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

The context here is the original covenant to Abraham and his seed.

Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.