Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
April 23, 2014, 06:35:30 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Was Jesus Jewish? - Debate Between OneMoreRep & Wiggs.  (Read 3044 times)
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: May 21, 2013, 09:57:08 AM »

it seems like a dangerous game to have an argument with you, since you've become a mod.  fuck around and hit the wrong key, and a getbig member ends up in purgatory.

Absolutely not.

Ask UkJeff or anyone else whom I've had a debate with, whether or not I have erased their material or sent them anywhere.

Whom have I sent to Time Out? What material have I erased from any poster in direct debate with me?

I like Wiggs. I was the main guy that cheered and made a "Welcome back Wiggs" thread when he returned to GetBig. I also have no qualms in a friendly debate.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Stephano
Getbig II
**
Posts: 112


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 21, 2013, 09:58:23 AM »

OMR owning Wiggs into oblivion in this thread.
Report to moderator   Logged
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 21, 2013, 10:01:33 AM »

Yawn....You've read my terms and until you abide by them, (which are very reasonable) this conversation between you and I is over. You post no argument to my quotes and facts because there is no logical argument to be made.


You lose, I win.

You don't want any part of this argument trust me. Which is why chose the route you did to avoid it and end it. Tootles  Kiss


Exactly.

YOU made statements, which YOU claimed were facts. When asked to show proof of YOUR FACTS, you come short. The burden of proof falls on the person making the claims (That's the established rule of debate used in academic settings as well as a court of law).

I asked you to prove two of your supposed facts, "Claiming the Talmud badmouthed Mary and Jesus" and that "Jesus was NOT Jewish".

You can't do either and instead want me to created an argument for you.

Why don't we allow for the GetBig collective to read this thread and decide who made more sense in the exchange?

If I am ever wrong, I have no qualms in stating so. I am not proud in that sense, nor do I claim to know everything. On the contrary, I know what I know and I also know what I don't know. What I am always willing to do is learn new things regarding things which are foreign to me.

What I do know is that what you stated regarding the Talmud's badmouthing of Mary and Jesus is NOT correct. I asked you to show proof of that, because in all my years as a youth studying the Talmud, I never read that or heard mention of that, but I am willing to translate whatever section you speak of from Hebrew to English, if you can find it.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Griffith
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1692


....


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2013, 10:02:56 AM »

The Hebrews in the time of the Romans under King Herod had caucasian features, look at the image of King Herod on the coins, looks no different from a Greek or anyone from that region.

According to the Ancient Egyptians there were four races.

The only blacks were from further down south....in Africa. But race is determined by skull type, so even many groups of north african 'blacks' are Caucasian as are people from northern India, Iran etc.

If the Hebrews were 'black' as Wiggs claims, the Romans would have noted this as well as all the statues, coins and artwork etc.
They would have looked the same or similar as the Syrians and the rest of the people surrounding the Mediterranean in the Middle East. And Carthage, Rome's one time enemies, according to the images on the coins and there busts, they were caucasian and not 'black' either as they were from North Africa.

According to the Ancient Egyptians there were four races:
The guy on the left is a 'Libyan' (white) and the one second from the right is a 'Syrian'/Middle Easterner.....the only black here is from more inland in Africa, 'Nubia' and certainly not the Middle East or even North Africa.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Gates
Report to moderator   Logged
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2013, 10:07:21 AM »

Exactly.

YOU made statements, which YOU claimed were facts. When asked to show proof of YOUR FACTS, you come short. The burden of proof falls on the person making the claims (That's the established rule of debate used in academic settings as well as a court of law).

I asked you to prove two of your supposed facts, "Claiming the Talmud badmouthed Mary and Jesus" and that "Jesus was NOT Jewish".

You can't do either and instead want me to created an argument for you.

Why don't we allow for the GetBig collective to read this thread and decide who made more sense in the exchange?

If I am ever wrong, I have no qualms in stating so. I am not proud in that sense, nor do I claim to know everything. On the contrary, I know what I know and I also know what I don't know. What I am always willing to do is learn new things regarding things which are foreign to me.

What I do know is that what you stated regarding the Talmud's badmouthing of Mary and Jesus is NOT correct. I asked you to show proof of that, because in all my years as a youth studying the Talmud, I never read that or heard mention of that, but I am willing to translate whatever section you speak of from Hebrew to English, if you can find it.

"1"

The facts didn't come short. You failed to respond to THE FACTS. Every single one. End of story.
Report to moderator   Logged

7
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: May 21, 2013, 10:09:40 AM »

The facts didn't come short. You failed to respond to THE FACTS. Every single one. End of story.

You made statements, which you claimed were facts. YOU must show proof to justify your supposed facts.

Since your facts have no verifiable evidence behind them, they are no longer facts, but instead lies.

You have yet to provide us with any facts supporting your claims regarding the Talmud badmouthing Mary and Jesus. You have yet to provide us with any facts supporting your claims regarding Jesus NOT being Jewish.

Since you simply made claims that you'd like to pass for as facts, you have no ground to stand on.

That is the end of the story.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: May 21, 2013, 10:14:38 AM »

You made statements, which you claimed were facts. YOU must show proof to justify your supposed facts.

Since your facts have no verifiable evidence behind them, they are no longer facts, but instead lies.

That is the end of the story.

"1"

Ha ha ha ha!  Right....I won't hold my breath on you disputing what your people wrote.  Love how you get into the semantics vs. addressing the facts. That tells alot. If they're lies, provide the truths to those lies. Your people wrote it.
Report to moderator   Logged

7
Griffith
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1692


....


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: May 21, 2013, 10:16:00 AM »

The Ancient Egyptians don't agree with you Wiggs...
Report to moderator   Logged
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 21, 2013, 10:18:03 AM »

Ha ha ha ha!  Right....I won't hold my breath on you disputing what your people wrote.  Love how you get into the semantics vs. addressing the facts. That tells alot. If they're lies, provide the truths to those lies. Your people wrote it.

Show me where in the Talmud are both Mary and Jesus badmouthed and I will gladly dispute it. I have spent many years of my youth studying both the Torah and Talmud and have never read that information, but will gladly look into it.

Show me your facts supporting that Jesus was not Jewish and I will put together something as well.

YOU made the claims. YOU said your claims were facts. The burden of proof falls on you to prove that your claims are indeed facts and then it is up to ME to dispute your evidence.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
JOHN MATRIX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11600


the house is dividing once again


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 21, 2013, 10:25:05 AM »

Most actors may not be but most of the producers/real decision makers in hollywood def are jews. A lot of them use fake names. The jewish influence on our society, government, even local communities is vastly greater than most people realize.
Report to moderator   Logged
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 21, 2013, 10:29:53 AM »

Most actors may not be but most of the producers/real decision makers in hollywood def are jews.

That's absolutely correct.

The jewish influence on our society, government, even local communities is vastly greater than most people realize.

That's absolutely correct.

The point I made earlier was that even though, as you stated above, many of the high-ranking Hollywood directors are Jewish, the actors that get opportunities on the big screen are not necessarily Jewish. The Big names in Hollywood (actors wise) are not Jewish.

So, while many Jews do have positions of power in the entertainment industry, that has not stopped or influenced the ability for various celebrities (actors or otherwise) to make it onto the big screen. On the contrary, those vary names I mentioned are a great example of how you can be of any denomination and still make it in Hollywood.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: May 21, 2013, 10:29:59 AM »

Repeating what you've said isn't going to make me change my mind.

You know what to do if you want your questions answered. Answer mine. Jesus was not a Jew. The term "Jew" is a new term relative to the Bible. A Jew is not a Hebrew Israelite. In addition, A "Jew" is not Semitic. Arabs are Semitic, Black Hebrews are Semitic. Sons of Shem. Not converts from Europe.

Enough of your repetitious nonsense.


* checkmate3.jpg (363.42 KB, 1382x922 - viewed 309 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged

7
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: May 21, 2013, 10:32:45 AM »

Repeating what you've said isn't going to make me change my mind.

You know what to do if you want your questions answered. Answer mine. Jesus was not a Jew. The term "Jew" is a new term relative to the Bible. A Jew is not a Hebrew Israelite. In addition, A "Jew" is not Semitic. Arabs are Semitic, Black Hebrews are Semitic. Sons of Shem. Not converts from Europe.

Enough of your repetitious nonsense.

It doesn't bother me if you don't change your mind. You have the freedom to believe what you want to believe. That is perfectly fine.

You have YET to post proof for your claims regarding the Talmud badmouthing Mary and Jesus or regarding Jesus being Jewish.

Until you actually show proof of your claims to verify them as facts, you've found yourself in your own stalemate.

I don't have to sit here and argue false claims. Once you post verifiable facts regarding the points of contention I have, then we can have a discussion. Anything else, is just you reeling me into a cut-and-paste war.

Thanks Wiggs, for the argument about potentially having an argument.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Griffith
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1692


....


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: May 21, 2013, 10:37:16 AM »

Repeating what you've said isn't going to make me change my mind.

You know what to do if you want your questions answered. Answer mine. Jesus was not a Jew. The term "Jew" is a new term relative to the Bible. A Jew is not a Hebrew Israelite. In addition, A "Jew" is not Semitic. Arabs are Semitic, Black Hebrews are Semitic. Sons of Shem. Not converts from Europe.

Enough of your repetitious nonsense.

The Hebrews in the time of the Romans and the Ancient Egyptians were not black as indicated above.
Report to moderator   Logged
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 21, 2013, 10:46:33 AM »

It doesn't bother me if you don't change your mind. You have the freedom to believe what you want to believe. That is perfectly fine.

You have YET to post proof for your claims regarding the Talmud badmouthing Mary and Jesus or regarding Jesus being Jewish.

Until you actually show proof of your claims to verify them as facts, you've found yourself in your own stalemate.

Thanks Wiggs, for the argument about potentially having an argument.

"1"

No I haven't, because I never began address that point as I was trying to address other points. Unfortunately because you refused to address those other points, we never got to that one.

The pieces were put on the chessboard,  I made a move and you decided you didn't like my move, the chessboard or the pieces on the chessboard and forfeited the game and walked away.

Thanks anyway because in essence, you proved my point. This isn't some "Jew" hating idea. This is fact and while not known by many just 20 years ago, it's known by many more, and more are hip to the truth about who you people are, where you come from and what your history is...The "Jew" side that is.

You may have the last word. 'Cause I'm done.
Report to moderator   Logged

7
Griffith
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1692


....


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: May 21, 2013, 10:53:36 AM »

Wiggs trying to make a big deal about whether modern Jews have a bit more European or Semitic blood.

After thousands of years, no races or groups of people are still 100% the same as they once were, there has been mass migrations, invasions, slavery, destruction of groups, mixing etc.
Report to moderator   Logged
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #41 on: May 21, 2013, 10:55:44 AM »

No I haven't, because I never began address that point as I was trying to address other points. Unfortunately because you refused to address those other points, we never got to that one.

You said you wanted to address individual points one at a time. Well, I sought out to debate those key points in the order which you mentioned them.

Go back to this post:

Your Talmud says alot of wretched shit about Mary, Jesus and people your people call gentiles (although it is you people that are also gentiles or Goyim . So spare me on the Jews don't hate Jesus spiel. Jesus wasn't Jewish. Jesus was a Hebrew Israelite. And you people have no ties to Hebrew Israelites of the Bible. You're converts. These are all facts that can't be disputed.

Notice how these are the points you claimed as facts:

FIRST CLAIM MADE:

Your Talmud says alot of wretched shit about Mary, Jesus

I asked you to prove it and you haven't.

SECOND CLAIM MADE:

Jesus wasn't Jewish.

I asked you to prove it and you haven't.

I didn't ask to debate your recurrent idea regarding the Jews not being Hebrew Israelites. You decided to bring your age-old argument (the argument about Jews not being Hebrew Israelites) into this thread, when you realized that you do not have proof regarding the Talmud badmouthing Mary and Jesus OR that Jesus wasn't Jewish..

That (the argument about Jews not being Hebrew Israelites) was not part of the points of contention that I referred to in my posts. I have made that unarguably clear at this point, but you will continue to harp on this regardless of what is said.

You've made your claims and are not capable of presenting verifiable proof in order to validate these claims as facts.

Because of which, you have lost your argument and instead are now grasping at straws in order to save face.

Just debate the facts I have contention with as stated earlier, The badmouthing of Mary and Jesus in the Talmud and proof that Jesus wasn't Jewish.

Oh and...

You may have the last word. 'Cause I'm done.

Thank you!

"1"

P.S. Remember, the burden of proof always falls on the person who makes the claims. If you state something is a fact, it is your responsibility to provide verifiable proof in order to justify it as a fact. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Griffith
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1692


....


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 21, 2013, 11:03:37 AM »

Wiggs, please enlighten us how Jesus was not a Hebrew Israelite from Judea?
Report to moderator   Logged
BikiniSlut
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5034


I'm dating and love Uncle Junior! Xoxoxo


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: May 21, 2013, 11:07:12 AM »

"BadBoy" Danza is quickly becoming the next AnabolicHalo.
Report to moderator   Logged
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: May 21, 2013, 11:08:12 AM »

Wiggs, please enlighten us how Jesus was not a Hebrew Israelite from Judea?

This is something I found on a website a while back.  Remember, that since I am Jewish, it is not my responsibility to prove Wiggs' theory that Jesus was not Jewish.

My source for this piece is: http://jesusisajew.org/Jesus_is_a_Jew.php

Jesus was Born a Jew

Jesus is a real, historical person, born in the Land of Israel, during the Roman occupation, in approximately the year 3 BCE. However, at the time His name was actually pronounced, "Yeshua," and that is the name used in this article.

That Yeshua was born Jewish is one of the least contested truths of the Bible. The very first verse of the New Covenant reads: The book of the genealogy of Messiah Yeshua ("Jesus Christ"), the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matt. 1:1). Who were Abraham and David?

Abraham was the first Hebrew. God changed his name from Abram (Gen. 17:5). In Gen. 14:13 he is called Abram the Hebrew. So we can see that Yeshua (Jesus) is descended from "Abram the Hebrew."  Even to this day, Jews are also called "Hebrews", and the language of the Jews is "Hebrew."

Abraham and his descendants were given the unconditional covenant of the Promised Land (Gen. 17:Cool and the covenant of circumcision (Gen. 17:10). Abraham is the father of the Jews (Acts 3:12-25). Isaac was his son and Jacob was his grandson (Matt. 1:2). Thus, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are known as the Patriarchs, the fathers of the Jews.

Jacob's name was changed by God to "Israel" (Gen. 35:10-12) and he had twelve sons (Gen. 35:23-26) from whom come the Twelve Tribes of Israel. All of their descendants are known collectively throughout the Bible as the Children of Israel (Ex. 1:6-7).

One of those twelve sons was Judah (Gen. 35:23, Matt. 1:2) and it is from his name that we get the word 'Jew'. Although Yehudah (Judah) was only one of the twelve, by 700 BCE, because of the course of Israel's history, the word Yehudee (Jew) came to mean any person descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Jer. 34:9). So, for instance, Saul haShaliach (the Apostle Paul) was of the tribe of Benjamin (Romans 11:1) yet he self-identified as a Jew (Acts 22:3).

Nevertheless, according to the Bible, the Messiah must be descended from the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10) as King David was (1Sam. 17:12, 1Ch. 28:4) and descended from King David himself (2Sam. 7:12-13, Isa. 9:6-7, Jer. 23:5-6). That is why the Messiah is called Son of David (Matt. 21:9).

Yeshua (Jesus) is from the Tribe of Judah (Heb. 7:14). His earthly father was descended from David (Matt. 1:6-16) and His mother was as well (Luke 1:27, 32-34, 3:23-31).

In addition, Yeshua was born King of the Jews (Matt. 2:2). The King of the Jews must Himself be Jewish (Deut. 17:15). His aunt Elizabeth was Jewish (a descendant of Aaron, Moses' brother) and His uncle Zacharia was a Jewish priest (Luke 1:5, 36). Yeshua was circumcised according to Jewish law (Luke 2:21, Lev. 12:2-3), and redeemed according to Jewish law (Luke 2:22-23, Num. 18:15). His mother atoned according to Jewish law (Luke 2:24, Lev. 12:6-8). He is called The Consolation of Israel (Luke 2:25) and The Glory of Thy People Israel (Luke 2:32). Jesus was born a Jew.


Jesus lived as a Jew

Although He was born in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:1, Micah 5:2), Yeshua was raised in Nazareth (Luke 2:39-40). Both were Jewish towns at the time, according to archeologists and historians. Bethlehem is just south of Jerusalem while Nazareth is north, in the Galilee section. Both of Yeshua's parents were from Nazareth (Luke 1:26-27, 2:4, 39) and they returned there with the Child when they had done everything according to the Law of the Lord that His birth required (Luke 2:39). His aunt and uncle were also Torah observant Jews (Luke 1:6) so we can see that probably the whole family took their faith very seriously.

Yeshua's parents made the 140 mile (225 m.) round trip to Jerusalem every Passover (Luke 2:41) in observance of Deut. 16:16. It was at the age of twelve that Yeshua stayed behind an extra three days to learn from the Temple teachers (Luke 2:46). Although He already understood the Torah well (Luke 2:47), His attitude of listening and questioning indicates love of the Hebrew scripture and respect for the teachers. He also respected the Temple itself, calling it His Father's (Luke 2:49). Near the end of His life, He praised a widow for giving all she had to the Temple (Luke 21:1-4).

In adult life, His disciples were Jews (John 1:47, Matt. 20:25-26) and they called Him 'Rabbi' (John 4:31). Mary called Him 'Rabboni' (John 20:16). They sought Him because they believed the Torah and the Prophets (John 1:45).

A Pharisee who had not yet come to faith in Him also addressed Yeshua as 'Rabbi' (John 3:2), as did a crowd of people (John 6:25). A Samaritan woman easily recognized He was a Jew (John 4:9).

Yeshua's disciples spoke Hebrew (John 1:38, 41) and so did He, as well as Chaldean, a closely-related language brought back by the Jews from their captivity in Babylon (Matt. 27:46). In the sermon on the mount He affirmed the authority of the Torah and the Prophets (Matt. 5:17) even in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 5:19-20). He regularly attended synagogue (Luke 4:16) and His teaching was respected by the other congregants (Luke 4:15). He taught in the Jewish Temple (Luke 21:37) and if He were not a Jew, His going into that part of the Temple would not have been allowed (Acts 21:28-30).

Although He differed with some of His contemporaries on how to keep the commandments (Matt. 12:12), He did not disagree on whether to keep them, saying such things as,"if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments," (Matt. 19:17). When He healed someone of leprosy, he instructed him to,"show yourself to the priest and present the offering that Moses commanded..." (Matt. 8:4, Lev. 14).

Yeshua not only taught others how to live a Jewish life, He lived it Himself. The outward signs of this were such things as wearing tzitzit (tassles) on His clothing (Luke 8:43, Matt. 14:36, Strong's # 2899) to serve as a reminder of the commandments (Num. 15:37-39). He observed Passover (John 2:13) and went up to Jerusalem (Deut. 16:16). He observed Succot (John 7:2, 10) and went up to Jerusalem (John 7:14). He also observed Hanukah (John 10:22) and probably Rosh haShanah (John 5:1), going up to Jerusalem on both those occasions as well, even though it isn't commanded in the Torah.

The inward sign of His Judaism was a circumcised heart (Deut. 10:16, 30:6).

When faced with temptation, Yeshua answered from the Hebrew Scripture (Matt. 4:2-10, Deut. 8:3, 6:16, 6:13). When teaching, He taught from the Hebrew Scripture (Matt. 22:42-45). When admonishing, He quoted from the Hebrew Scripture (Mk. 7:6-13).

Yeshua self-identified as a Jew (John 4:22) and as King of the Jews (Mk. 15:2). From His birth to His last Passover seder (Luke 22:14-15), Jesus lived as a Jew.

Jesus died a Jew

When Yeshua was taken prisoner by a Roman captain, his cohort, and some Jewish officials (John 18:12), He was delivered into the custody of the Jewish priests, elders, and scribes (Mk. 14:53). The Roman soldiers would not have placed Him under Jewish jurisdiction if He were not Jewish.

Later, Yeshua was brought before the Sanhedrin, the Jewish council (Luke 22:66). He was charged with an offense against Jewish Law (Matt. 26:65-66, Lev. 24:13-14, John 19:7). Pilate, head of the Roman occupation, also recognized Jewish jurisdiction over Yeshua (John 18:31). This was because Yeshua was a Jew (John 18:35).

He unequivocally identified Himself as the Messiah (Mk. 14:61-62) and as we have seen above, the Messiah must be Jewish. He said He is the King of the Jews (Matt. 27:11) and, as we have also seen above, the King of the Jews must Himself be Jewish. The Jewish crowd also called Him 'King of the Jews' (Mk. 15:12). He was mocked, spat on and beaten by the Roman soldiers as 'King of the Jews' (Mk. 15:16-20) and when they crucified Him, their charge was 'King of the Jews' (Matt. 27:37).

The place of judgment had a Hebrew place-name (John 19:13) and the place of crucifixion had a Hebrew place-name (Mk. 15:22).

Joseph of Arimethea, who took custody of Yeshua's body, was Jewish (Luke 23:50-52) and he laid the body in his own new tomb (Matt. 27:59-60). Therefore, Yeshua was buried in a Jewish cemetery. He was also buried according to Jewish custom of the time (John 19:40). Without doubt, Jesus died a Jew.

Jesus was resurrected a Jew

Yeshua the risen Jew told his Jewish disciples to go out and teach all the Gentiles (Matt. 28:19, Strong's # 1484).

Then, after eating, talking and walking with His disciples, Yeshua, "lifted up His hands and blessed them" (Luke 24:50). What blessing is spoken with lifted hands? The Aaronic Benediction (Num. 6:24-26) is given in Synagogues and in Churches even to our day, and in the Synagogues it is still given as it was more than a thousand years before the resurrected Jew Jesus gave it: with lifted hands. In fact, another name for the Aaronic Benediction is "The Lifting up of Hands." (see Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ. Ch.XVII. A. Edersheim. Eerdmans pub.)

Rav Sha'ul (the apostle Paul) tells us that while he was on the road to Damascus Yeshua spoke to him from heaven in Hebrew (Acts 26:14). Sha'ul, a Jew who was born a Roman citizen (Acts 22:27-28), was fluent in Greek (Acts 21:37) and possibly many other languages, but Yeshua spoke to him in Hebrew, the language of the Jews.

Sha'ul did not become a believer until well after Yeshua's death and resurrection, yet an important part of his message is that Yeshua is a descendant of the Jewish king David (2Tim. 2:Cool.

Many years after His resurrection, Yeshua testified that He is the root and offspring of king David (Rev. 22:16), and in a time yet future, two of His titles will be Lion of the tribe of Judah, and Root of David (Rev. 5:5).

In Matt. 24:20 He told us to pray concerning the coming tribulation, that we would not have to flee on the Sabbath. And in Matt. 26:27-29 Yeshua told the disciples that He will celebrate the Passover seder anew with us in His Father's kingdom.

The standard He will use at the judgement is the Law God gave the Jews. To those who do not do the will of God, He will say, "Depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness" (Matt. 7:22-23, Strong's # 458, 459).

In (Heb. 13:Cool we are told Yeshua the Messiah is the same yesterday, today and forever. So, if He ever was a Jew He was resurrected a Jew, and He is one to this day.

He was born a Jew, He lived a Jew, He died a Jew, and He was resurrected a Jew. He is alive and Jewish now, and forevermore the same.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I read through that entire piece and found it to be pretty interesting. Maybe some of our religious gurus on the site can chime in on their opinion regarding Jesus being Jewish or not.

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Mitch
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1125



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2013, 11:12:47 AM »

TL;DR.LOL

Report to moderator   Logged
Conker
Getbig III
***
Posts: 663



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: May 21, 2013, 11:33:48 AM »

i always thought it was common knowledge that jesus was a jew but the jews hated him and disowned him because they thought he was an imposter and making a mockery of their religion. they are still apparently waiting for their messiah to come. dude was forever giving his sh 1t away for free, couldn't have really been jewish.



Report to moderator   Logged
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: May 21, 2013, 11:35:06 AM »


LOLOLOLOL...Why is his real name, i.e. his Hebrew name "Yahoshua" and not Jesus? The one people call "Jesus" was indeed Hebrew and was indeed an Israelite. I've never disputed that. But he was not a Jew or Jewish. You people...aka Khazars are Jew and Jewish. You have no link to Biblical Hebrews. Hebrew is the language of Hebrews/Israelites. Yiddish is the language of Jews. The letter "J" isn't in the Hebrew alphabet and it wasn't in the English alphabet until the 14th or 15th Century. This term "Jew" was created by your people.

As I've stated many times before A Jew is not a Hebrew. A Jew is a Khazar.  If you looks at Hebrew versions (as in the language) of the Old Testament as in your so called Torah, JEW is not used.

The Etymology of the Word "Jew"

In his classic Facts are Facts, Jewish historian, researcher and scholar Benjamin Freedman writes:

Jesus is referred as a so-called "Jew" for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century. Jesus is first referred to as a so-called "Jew" in the revised 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English. The history of the origin of the word "Jew" in the English language leaves no doubt that the 18th century "Jew" is the 18th century contracted and corrupted English word for the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in St. Jerome's Vulgate Edition. Of that there is no longer doubt.

The available original manuscripts from the 4th century to the 18th century accurately trace the origin and give the complete history of the word "Jew" in the English language. In these manuscripts are to be found all the many earlier English equivalents extending through the 14 centuries from the 4th to the 18th century. From the Latin "Iudaeus" to the English "Jew" these English forms included successively: "Gyu," "Giu," "Iu," "Iuu," "Iuw," "Ieuu," "Ieuy," "Iwe," "Iow," "Iewe," "Ieue," "Iue," "Ive," "Iew," and then finally the 18th century, "Jew." The many earlier English equivalents for "Jews" through the 14 centuries are "Giwis," "Giws," "Gyues," "Gywes," "Giwes," "Geus," "Iuys," "Iows," "Iouis," "Iews," and then also finally in the 18th century, "Jews."

With the rapidly expanding use in England in the 18th century for the first time in history of the greatly improved printing presses, unlimited quantities of the New Testament were printed. These revised 18th century editions of the earlier 14th century first translations into the English language were then widely distributed throughout England and the English speaking world among families who had never possessed a copy of the New Testament in any language. In these 18th century editions with revisions the word "Jew" appeared for the first time in any English translations. The word "Jew" as it was used in the 18th century editions has since continued in use in all the editions of the New Testament in the English language. The use of the word "Jew" was thus stabilized. . .

The best known 18th century editions of the New Testament in English are the Rheims (Douai) Edition and the King James Authorized Edition. The Rheims (Douai) translation of the New Testament into English was first printed in 1582 but the word "Jew" did not appear in it.

The King James Authorized translation of the New Testament into English was begun in 1604 and first published in 1611. The word "Jew" did not appear in it either. The word "Jew" appeared in both these well known editions in their 18th century revised versions for the first times.

Countless copies of the revised 18th century editions of the Rheims (Douai) and the King James translations of the New Testament into English were distributed to the clergy and the laity throughout the English speaking world. They did not know the history of the origin of the English word "Jew" nor did they care. They accepted the English word "Jew" as the only and as the accepted form of the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios." How could they be expected to have known otherwise? The answer is they could not and they did not. It was a new English word to them.

When one studies Latin he is taught that the letter "I" in Latin when used as the first letter in a word is pronounced like the letter "Y" in English when it is the first letter in the words like "yes," "youth" and "yacht." The "I" in "Iudaeus" is pronounced like the "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht" in English. In all the 4th century to 18th century forms for the 18th century "Jew" the letter "I" was pronounced like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht." The same is true of the "Gi" or the "Gy" where it was used in the place of the letter "I."

The present pronunciation of the word "Jew" in modern English is a development of recent times. In the English language today the "J" in Jew" is pronounced like the "J" in the English "justice," "jolly," and "jump." This is the case only since the 18th century. Prior to the 18th century the "J" in "Jew" was pronounced exactly like the "Y" in the English "yes," "youth," and "yacht." Until the 18th century and perhaps even later than the 18th century the word "Jew" in English was pronounced like the English "you" or "hew," and the word "Jews" like "youse" or "hews." The present pronunciation of "Jew" in English is a new pronunciation acquired after the 18th century.

The German language still retains the Latin original pronunciation. The German "Jude" is the German equivalent of the English "Jew." The "J" in the German "Jude" is pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht." The German "J" is the equivalent of the Latin "I" and both are pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht." The German "Jude" is virtually the first syllable of the Latin "Iudaeus" and is pronounced exactly like it. The German "Jude" is the German contraction and corruption of the Latin "Iudaeus" just as the English "Jew" is the contraction and corruption of the Latin "Iudaeus." The German "J" is always pronounced like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht" when it is the first letter of a word. The pronunciation of the "J" in German "Jude" is not an exception to the pronunciation of the "J" in German. . .

The translation into English of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, from the Greek in which it was originally written reads "Do not inscribe 'the monarch of the Judeans' but that He Himself said 'I am monarch.'" In the original Greek manuscript the Greek "basileus" appears for "monarch" in the English and the Greek "Ioudaios" appears for "Judeans" in the English. "Ioudaia" in Greek is "Judea" in English. "Ioudaios" in Greek is "Judeans" in English. There is no reason for any confusion.

If the generally accepted understanding today of the English "Jew" and "Judean" conveyed the identical implications, inferences and innuendoes as both rightly should, it would make no difference which of these two words was used when referring to Jesus in the New Testament or elsewhere. But the implications, inferences, and innuendoes today conveyed by these two words are as different as black is from white. The word "Jew" today is never regarded as a synonym for "Judean" nor is "Judean" regarded as a synonym for "Jew."

When the word "Jew" was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was "Judean." However during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the English speaking peoples of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew." It is a misrepresentation. . .

There is not a person in the whole English-speaking world today who regards a "Jew" as a "Judean" in the literal sense of the Word. That was the correct and only meaning of the word in the 18th century . . . (Facts Are Facts, by Benjamin H. Freedman, p. 15-21).

The meaning of the word "Jew" in our Bible is not the same as the colloquial idiom.

In the Bible the word "Jew" means a resident of the land of Judaea regardless of their tribe, race or religion just as an Australian or Englishman may in fact be a Chinese, Negro or an Eskimo, or perhaps a member of the tribe of Judah (Judahite). According to the Greek Lexicon in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance:

Jew: Greek word #2453 Ioudaios (ee-oo-dah'-yos); from #2448 (in the sense of #2455 as a country); Judaean, i.e. belonging to Jehudah ["Judah" in Hebrew language of Old Testament]: KJV Jew (-ess), of Judaea.

Greek word #2448 Iouda (ee-oo-dah'); of Hebrew origin [Hebrew word #3063 or perhaps #3194]; Judah (i.e. Jehudah or Juttah), a part of (or place in) Palestine: KJV Judah.

Greek word #2455 Ioudas (ee-oo-das'); of Hebrew origin [Hebrew #3063]; Judas (i.e. Jehudah), the name of ten Israelites; also of the posterity of one of them and its region: KJV Juda (-h, -s); Jude.

Genesis 49:10 prophesied, "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be."

Judah was the largest and the most influential of the twelve tribes with the governing right. Jacob prophesied it would maintain its pre-eminence until Shiloh, or Messiah, came. He would then take headship and receive the allegiance of true spiritual Israel as Isaiah 9:6-7 foretold. Matthew 1 and Luke 3 trace Jesus' human lineage to David, Judah, Jacob and Abraham. Jesus took the sceptre from Judah and we who receive Him as Messiah give Him our allegiance.

In the days of His flesh few of the citizens of Judea were Judahites. Some belonged to one of the other tribes of Israel, and many were descendants of Esau (Edomites) who had assimilated and become co-religionists with the Judahites and remnants of the other tribes in the hybrid religion of Pharisaism developed during the captivity in Babylon. This is the religion of the Talmud is called Judaism today; it was condemned by Jesus since it is the antithesis of the Mosaic Law and the prophets and makes the Word of God of no effect (Matthew 15:1-9).

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

According to Strong's Greek Lexicon, the English word "Jewry" in this verse was translated from the Greek word #2449 Ioudaia {ee-oo-dah'-yah} feminine for the land of Judea. Modern translations no longer use the word "Jewry" but the correct translation, "Judea," as in the New American Standard Bible: "And after these things Jesus was walking in Galilee; for He was unwilling to walk in Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill Him." The New International Version uses the same word. However, these translations continue to improperly use the word "Jews" in the same verse. A consistent translation would read: ". . . He was unwilling to walk in Judea, because the Judeans were seeking to kill Him."

Today most people think of Jews as the people of Israel, but that is not correct. An Israelite was one who had descended from Jacob. In Jesus' time individual Jews may or may not have descended from Jacob, but they all recognized Pharisaism and not the Law of Moses. A Jew is properly a Judean.

The point is that one who is called a "Jew" in the Bible is not necessarily a chosen man of God, a follower of Moses and the prophets, a member of the tribe of Judah, an Israelite, or even a Semite, but one who is a resident of Judea. A Judean. But a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the new word "Jew" which is not the understanding intended by the Scripture of truth. Those who call themselves Jews today falsely imply they are somehow descendants of the tribes of Israel and chosen of God. Yet few of them are Jews as they are not "Judeans," or residents of Judea.

So if modern day so-called Jews are not the Jews of the Bible, who are they? When asked, "Who is Israel? - Who is a Jew?" the Israeli Government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) unhesitatingly answered:

"The term Israelite is purely Biblical. An Israeli is a citizen of Israel, regardless of religion. A Jew is a person anywhere in the world born to a Jewish mother, or converted to Judaism, who is thus identified as a member of the Jewish people and religion" (Information Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem; February, 1998).

The Jewish Almanac concurs: "Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a "Jew." Or to call a contemporary Jew [an] "Israelite," or a "Hebrew." The first Hebrews were not have been Jews at all, and contemporary Palestinians, by their own definition of the term "Palestinian," have to include Jews among their own people" (The Jewish Almanac, October, 1980, page 3, Bantam Books, Inc).

The Online Etymology Dictionary describes the etymology of the word 'jew,' but perhaps because its editor is not a Bible student it exhibits an ignorance of the meaning of the original Greek word Ioudaios derived from the Aramaic jehudhai which did not refer to members of the tribe of Judah but to Judeans, the residents of the Babylonian province of Judea. The spelling of our present-day English word Jew is a transliteration of an abbreviation or slang word coined by their Babylonian conquerors for Judeans without reference to the race or religion of the captives. The editor has inadvertently discriminated the Semitic tribesmen of the sons of Israel from the diverse mass of races and religions then resident in Judea by applying the incorrect colloquial idiom, not having recognized the true and Biblical meaning of the original words.


The Introduction of the Word "Jew" into God's Holy Bible

In 1604, James VI, King of Scotland from his youth, became King James I of England, the first ruler of Britain and Ireland. Because of the growing animosity of James toward the Puritans, a leading Puritan spokesman, Dr. John Reynolds, proposed that a new English Bible be issued in honour of the new King. King James saw an opportunity to bring about a unity with the church service in Presbyterian Scotland and Episcopal England. Completed and published in 1611, the new Bible became known as the "Authorized Version" because its making was authorized by King James. It became the "Official Bible of England" and the only Bible of the English church. There have been many revisions of the King James Bible, 1615, 1629, 1638, 1762 and 1769.

The most important changes occurred in the eighteenth century. In 1762 Dr. Thomas Paris published an extensive revision at Cambridge. In 1769 Dr. Benjamin Blayney, after about four years of work, brought out another at Oxford. The latter work included much modernization of spelling, punctuation, and expression. These changes were due to printing errors and spelling changes in many words. This update represents the exact words in the 1611 Bible first edition, only the spelling is changed. This 1769 update is the basis of the King James Bible of our time and use; the Apocrypha was officially removed in 1885.

Any so-called "1611" King James Version you buy today at the local Christian Bookstore is absolutely NOT the 1611. . . it is the 1769 revision, even though it admits that nowhere, and may even deceivingly say "1611" in the frontpiece to promote sales . . . it is just not true. The spellings have been revised and some words changed in almost every printing done since 1769, and fourteen entire books plus extra prefatory features have been removed from almost every printing done since 1885!

If you really love the King James Version the way to own a true, unaltered, unedited, unabridged, original 1611 version as authorized by King James, is to spend US$125,000 to US$400,000 and purchase a genuine original, US$250 for an exact photographic facsimile edition, or US$1,995 for The Deluxe Full-Size Limited Edition 1611 King James Bible Facsimile.

The early editions of the Authorized Version contained the Apocrypha, not because the translators believed - they listed seven reasons why the apocryphal books were to be categorically rejected as part of the Inspired canon - but because the king asked that it be included. So, instead of scattering the Apocryphal books all through the Old Testament as in the Rheims-Douai and other Roman Catholic Bibles, they placed all of the Apocryphal books by themselves between the Testaments.

There is not now nor was there ever an equivalent letter "j" in the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Nor is there any Hebrew letter that carries even an approximate sound of the consonant letter "j." Neither is there a letter 'j' in the Greek alphabet. As regards proof of the letter 'J' not being in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek alphabets, James Strong's Exhaustive Concordance has the Hebrew and Greek alphabet preceding each respective dictionary therein. Also, there are various grammars, etc., which show the alphabet of these languages, and there is no letter equivalent to "J" in either Hebrew or Greek even today. "J," the tenth letter and seventh consonant in the English alphabet, is the latest addition to English script and has been inserted in the alphabet after "I," from which it was developed. Petrus Ramus (1515-1572) is credited as the first to distinguish I and J as representing separate sounds. Not until the middle of the 17th century did the use of "j" as an initial become universal in English books.

Jerome translated the Bible into Latin in the fourth century. John 19:19 refers to the inscription Pilate posted over Jesus' cross. In our modern English Bibles we read, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews," translated from the Greek "Ieous Nazoraios Basilius Ioudaios" but the Latin Vulgate reads, "Iesus Nazerenus Rex Iudaeorum." This is usually abbreviated INRI as on all statues and imagery because there was no J.

Contrary to what most people believe Shakespeare never saw the word "Jew" nor did he ever use the word "Jew" in any of his works, the common general belief to the contrary notwithstanding. In his "Merchant of Venice," V, III, I, 61, first published in about 1600, Shakespeare wrote as follows "what is the reason? I am a Iewe; hath not a Iewe eyes?"

In Samuel Johnson's English Dictionary of 1755 and 1756 words beginning with "I" and the new letter "J" are interspersed. There is no listing for the word "Jew" in either his 1755 or 1756 editions although "To Judaize" is defined as "To conform to the manner of the Jews" in both.

The corrected re-issue of the 1933 edition of The Oxford English Dictionary lists the first published usage of the word "Jew" in:

Sheridan's 1775 play, "The Rivals," Act II, Scene I, "She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew."

1653 Greaves' "Seraglio," 150. "In the King's Seraglio, the sultanas are permitted to employ divers Jewes-women about their ordinary occasions". And,

1700 Bishop Patrick's Commentary on Deuteronomy 28:37, "Better we cannot express the most cut-throat dealing, than thus, you use me like a Jew".

The earliest version of the New Testament in English from the Latin Vulgate Edition is the Wiclif, or Wickliff Edition published in 1380. In the Wiclif Edition Jesus is there mentioned as One of the "iewes." That was the 14th century English version of the Latin "Iudaeus" and was pronounced "hew-weeze," in the plural, and "iewe" pronounced "hew-wee" in the singular.

The 1841 English Hexapla contains six English translations of the New Testament arranged side by side for easy comparison and reference. The six English translations are: The Wycliffe version of 1380 (the first English Scripture, hand-copied prior to Gutenberg's invention of the printing press in 1455), The Tyndale version of 1534-1536 (the first English printed Scripture), and Cranmer's Great Bible of 1539 (the first Authorized English Bible). Continuing across each right-hand page is: The Geneva "1557" translation actually completed in 1560, (the English Bible of the Protestant Reformation), The Rheims 1582 (the first Roman Catholic English version), and the 1611 King James First Edition.

In the 1380 Wiclif Edition in English the Gospel by John XIX.19, reads "ihesus of Nazareth kyng of the iewes." Prior to the 14th century the English language adopted the Anglo-Saxon "kyng" together with many other Anglo-Saxon words in place of the Latin "rex" and the Greek "basileus." The Anglo-Saxon also meant "tribal leader."

In the Tyndale Edition of the New Testament in English published in 1525 Jesus was likewise described as One of the "Iewes."

In the Coverdale Edition published in 1535 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes." Also in the Coverdale Edition the Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads "Iesus of Nazareth, kynge of the Iewes."

In the Cranmer Edition published in 1539 Jesus was again described as One of the "Iewes."

In the Geneva Edition published in 1540-1557 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes."

In the Rheims Edition published in 1582 Jesus was described as One of the "Ievves."

In the King James Edition published in 1611, also known as the Authorized Version, Jesus was described again as one of the "Iewes." The forms of the Latin "Iudaeus" were used which were current at the time these translations were made.

The word "Jew" does not appear in any of these Bibles. Jesus is referred to as a so-called "Jew" (which He was not) for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English. The first Bibles in which the word "Jew" first appears are:

1729 Daniel Mace New Testament is the first Scripture to contain the word "Jew", here in Romans 2:13 - 3:21.

1750 Douai newly revised and corrected by Richard Challoner according to the Clementin edition of the Scriptures, The Holy Bible translated from the Latin Vulgate, first published by the English College at Doway, Anno 1609.

1752 Douai newly revised and corrected by Richard Challoner according to the Clementin edition of The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Translated out of the Latin Vulgate, first published by the English College of Rhemes, Anno 1582

1755 Wesley, New Testament with Explanatory Notes by John Wesley

1769 Benjamin Blayney modernised the spelling, punctuation, and expression of the 1611 edition of the Authorised or King James Bible.

1770 Worsley New Testament or New Covenant of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ translated from the Greek with notes by John Worsley.

The fascinating story of how we got the Bible in its present form actually starts thousands of years ago, as briefly outlined in this Timeline of Bible Translation History. As a background study, we recommend that you first review the discussion of the Pre-Reformation History of the Bible from 1400BC to AD1400, which covers the transmission of the Scripture through the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, and the 1,000 years of the Dark & Middle Ages when the Word was imprisoned in Latin. The starting point in this discussion of Bible history, however, is the advent of the Scripture in the English language with the "Morning Star of the Reformation," John Wycliffe.


Report to moderator   Logged

7
Wiggs
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 30673


Child of Y'srael


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2013, 11:35:41 AM »

What is a Jew?

Speaking to His elect Church Jesus said, "I know your affliction and your poverty, but you have heavenly riches, and I know the blasphemy of them who say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan . . . Take note, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, but are impostors who lie, to come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you"  (Revelation 2:9; 3:9).

Speaking to the so-called Jews who were of the sect of the Pharisees (or Judaism) Jesus said, "You serpents, offspring of vipers, how can you escape being sentenced to hell fire? Therefore take notice, I will send you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify; and some of whom you will flog in your synagogues, and persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the righteous blood that has been shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zachariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I assure you, all these things shall come upon this race" (Matthew 23:33-36).

Jesus identified these so-called Jews as the descendants of Cain.

Speaking to Cain God said, "What have you done? the voice of your brother's blood cries to Me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened her mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand" (Genesis 4:10-11).

Speaking to Christ's end-time Bride regarding the Words of Jesus, the prophet William Branham said, "Here is a verse that will bear considerable thought, not only because it is most peculiar in its contents, but also it is virtually repeated in an age that is over a thousand years later. . . To begin with, the word, Jews, does not describe the religion of the Jewish people. It refers only to the people of Judah and has the same precise meaning if I were to say I am Irish born. These people were saying that they were actually Jews, real Jews by birth. They were liars. They were not Jews by birth and they weren't Jews by religion."

(The word Jew was coined by Nebuchadnezzar's troops as an abbreviation of the word "Judean." A Jew or Judean is one who is a resident of Judea regardless of his religion, race, or nationality. Every resident of Palestine is a "Jew" whereas the so-called Jews living abroad are not Jews at all, neither by residence, nor by birth, nor by religion. This is confirmed by the Bible in the Old and New Testaments, Jewish historians such as Josephus, Professor of Medieval Jewish History at Tel Aviv University, A. N. Poliak in his book Khazaria (1944, 1951); American historian Professor Dunlop of Columbia University in his article on the Khazars in the Encyclopaedia Judaica (1971); Noam Chomsky in his book, Fateful Triangle, Arthur Koestler in his masterpiece, The Thirteenth Tribe ; Professor Heinrich H. Graetz in his History of the Jews, p. 141 (1891-98); Soviet archaeologist M. I. Artamonov in Istoria Khazar, Benjamin Freedman in Facts are Facts, Chief Rabbi of the United States, the late Steven S. Wise, the Message of William Branham the Prophet of Malachi 4:5-6 and Revelation 10:7, every Jewish and all Gentile encyclopaedias affirm that barely any so-called Jew is an Israelite let alone Semitic. Note also that Judaism is Pharisaism based on the Talmud, which is the antithesis of pre-exilic Yahweh Torah or Yahwism, the Law and the Prophets, and accursed of God in Matthew 15:1-9, and Moses in Deuteronomy 5:22; 12:32).

"If all this is true, what were they? They were a deceived people who were already part of the church. They belonged to the false vine."

(Brother Branham is explaining how the Roman Catholic church, which organized at the Hegelian dialectic of the First Nicea Council in AD325, had its beginnings as the First Church of Rome founded in AD36 by the apostles Junias and Andronicus (Romans 16:7). This church apostatised when the elders, who had emigrated from Judea to escape the persecution of the Jews (Acts 8:1), were subsequently expelled from Rome by Emperor Claudius along with all Judeans (Acts 18:2). It was thirteen years before the Judeans could return, and when the Christian elders returned they found the First Church of Rome would not repent).

"They were not of the true church, but of the false church because God said "they were the synagogue of Satan." Now the word for synagogue is not the same word we use for church. In the Bible, church means, "the called out ones," or the "summoned ones." The Psalmist said of these elect people, "Blessed is the man whom THOU CHOOSEST, and CAUSEST to approach unto Thee, that he may dwell in Thy courts"  (Psalms 65:4). But the meaning of synagogue is "assembly or gathering." This can be good or bad, but in this case it is bad, for these are they whose assembling is not of God but of their own selves. Isaiah said of them, "Behold, they shall surely gather together, but NOT BY ME: whosoever shall gather together against Thee shall fall for Thy sake" (Isaiah 54:15). And since these were surely against the true vine, God will one day deal with them in destruction."

"Now why do we have a people mixed in the framework of the church and calling themselves Jews? The reason is this: Since they were liars they could make any claim they wished. They could say what they wanted as though it were a fact and then stick to it. And in this case they could be lying with a very powerful thought in mind. Was it not so that the early church was almost if not entirely composed of Jews, making them the original members of His body? The twelve apostles were Jews, and the later apostles were either Jews or proselytes. Thus for men to swear they were Jews would give them a pre-eminence and a claim to originality. Tell a lie. Stick to it. Never mind fact or history. Just say it and keep saying it to the people, and soon the people will receive it."

"Now did you catch something there? Isn't that the same spirit right in the church today? Isn't there a group that claims that they are the original and true church and that salvation is found only in her? Don't they claim that they have the keys of the kingdom which they received from Peter? Don't they claim that Peter was their first pope, and that he resided in Rome when there is ABSOLUTELY NO HISTORICAL FACT FOR IT? And even her most educated and knowing adherents believe her lies. Satan's synagogue! And if Satan be her father, and he the father of lies, then it is not strange that those in his synagogue are liars also."

"Consider the thought of blasphemy. These of Satan's synagogue were not blaspheming God in this instance (though that goes without saying) but they were blaspheming the true Church. Certainly. As Cain persecuted and killed Abel because he (Cain) was of that wicked one, and as the dead formal Judaic followers (Jesus said they were of their father, the devil) tried to destroy the Christians in the first few years of the first age, now this same group (the false vine) is even more strongly attempting to destroy the true believer in the second age. That antichrist spirit is growing."

"The group that inched its way ever so slowly into the church by its DEEDS (Nicolaitanism) no longer fears exposure but is openly organized in a group of its own assembling and is coming against the true Church in undisguised hostility."

"Now when I say this was an organized antichrist church I am giving you the truth from authenticated history. The first church founded in Rome (we will trace its history in the Pergamean Age) had already turned the truth of God into a lie by introducing a pagan religion with Christian names and meaning. By the second age it was so pagan (though claiming to be the true church) that Polycarp came about 1,500 miles at a very old age to plead with them to turn back. They would not do it. They had a solid hierarchy and a solid organization, and a complete departure from the Word. This then, is Satan's synagogue, full of blasphemy, in which were already the seeds of the doctrine of Nicolaitanism, and which would shortly be the actual seat or power of Satanic religion. And this is exactly right for Revelation 2:9b does NOT say these people are OF Satan's synagogue but it says they ARE SATAN'S SYNAGOGUE" (An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, p. 119:4 - 121:3).

Revelation 3:9, "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you."

Brother Branham continues: "The natural types the Spiritual. This verse deals with the Jews who have always called themselves the children of God to the exclusion of everyone else. They sought their righteousness after the Law and failed miserably, for by the Law can no flesh be justified. By the Law can no man be made holy. Holiness is of the Lord. I Corinthians 1:30, "But of HIM are you in Christ Jesus, Who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." II Corinthians 5:21b, "That we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." It was Christ or perish, and they perished for they refused Him."

"In the Sardis Church Age Martin Luther restored the revelation that justification is by faith and not works, but the Lutherans organized and joined with the state and again we see the synagogue of Satan manifested in denominationalism. As the Jews took refuge in the synagogue form of worship, so in the Philadelphian Age men were taking refuge in the church. It is not joining a church that counts. The life is not in the church. The life is in Christ. "This is the record that God has given us eternal Life and this Life is in His Son. He that has the Son has Life, and he who has not the Son has not Life." Man is made holy by the Spirit. It is the Spirit of Holiness that raised Jesus from the dead that in-dwells us and makes us holy with His holiness."

Brother Branham went on to explain, "This problem of the false Jew or false believers was already in existence in the second age. These who falsely called themselves Jews appeared right after the first outpouring of the first age, and now they appear again in the second age after the reformation. This is hardly an accident. Indeed, it is not an accident. It is a principle of Satan. That principle is to organize and claim originality and therefore be entitled to special rights and privileges. Let me show you. Back there in the Smyrnaean Age these people lied and said they were actually Jews (or believers) when they definitely were not. They were of the synagogue of Satan. They were Satan's organized crowd, for it was in that age we saw the start of men in the ministry taking an unwarranted leadership over their ministering brethren. (Bishops set up in districts, over elders). The next thing we saw was that in the third age there was definitely a place called "Satan's seat." That age gave us church and state marriage. With the power of the state behind her the church was literally physically invincible."

"But God broke that hold in spite of the power of the state and the reformation brought great light. But what happened? The Lutherans organized and joined with the state and again we see the synagogue of Satan manifested in this sixth age. Now of course this synagogue group wouldn't say they are of Satan. No sir. They say they are of God. But they lie. For he that is a true Jew (that is what they claimed to be) is one who is a Jew inwardly - in the Spirit. (He who is born of the Spirit that was in Jesus Christ, the King of Judah, is a Judahite - not a Jew or Judean, for the Life is in the blood and we are the blood of Christ by the baptism with the Holy Spirit - Ed). So then if they are false Jews it means that they are as Jude 19 says, "having NOT the Spirit." Children of God are born of the Spirit. These have not the Spirit and therefore they are NOT children of God no matter how fervently they protest and to what lengths they go to try to prove that they are. They are DEAD. They are children of organization, and the true fruits are missing. They are built upon their own creeds, dogmas and doctrines and the truth is not in them for they have taken their own counsels above the Word of God."

"Let me show you what I have been trying to teach all along about the two vines which come from two different spirits. Take the example of Jesus and Judas this time. Jesus was the Son of God. Judas was the son of perdition. God entered into Jesus. Satan entered into Judas. Jesus had a full Holy Ghost ministry for "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: Who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with Him" (Acts 10:38). It says "For he (Judas) was numbered with us, and had obtained PART of this ministry" (Acts 1:17). Matthew 10:1, "And when He had called unto Him His twelve disciples, He gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease."

"That spirit that was in Judas went right along through the ministry of Jesus. Then they both came to the cross. Jesus was hanged upon the cross, gladly giving His Life for sinners and commended His Spirit to God. His Spirit went to God and then was poured out into the church at Pentecost. Judas hanged himself and his spirit went back to Satan, but after Pentecost that same spirit that was in Judas came back to the false vine that grows right along with the true vine. But notice, Judas' spirit never got to Pentecost. It never went up to receive the Holy Spirit. It could not. But what did that Judas spirit go for? It went for the bag of gold. How it loved money. It still loves money. If it goes about in the Name of Jesus doing mighty things and holding great meetings, it still makes more of money and buildings, and education and everything with a material concept. Just watch that spirit that is upon them and don't be fooled. Judas went about as one of the twelve and he did miracles, too. But he did NOT have the Spirit of God as his own. He did have a ministry. He never got to Pentecost as he was not true seed. He was not a true child of God. No sir. And it is that way right now in the synagogue of Satan. Don't be fooled. You won't be fooled if you are of the very elect. Jesus said you wouldn't be fooled."

"Yes, these folks say they are Christians but they aren't."

"I will make them come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee." I Corinthians 6:2, "Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?" Not only will there be twelve apostles on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel but the saints, also, will judge the world. That is when these who claim to belong to God and claim that God loves them will find out exactly who is the child of God and who is loved of the Son. Yes, that day is coming when it will be made manifest. These who are now ruling the world in a measure, and who during the last age will build an image to the beast whereby they will actually rule the world, will one day be humbled when Jesus comes with His saints to judge the world in righteousness. That is exactly what we saw in Matthew 25 when "All" the ones who missed the first resurrection will stand before the Judge and His Bride" (ibid 310:2 - 313:2).


 Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Report to moderator   Logged

7
OneMoreRep
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 8813



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2013, 11:39:14 AM »

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

TL:DR:CUT/PASTE

You may have the last word. 'Cause I'm done.

 Roll Eyes

"1"
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!