If you’re a Christian and you support the modern geopolitical state of Israel, you deny that Christ is the Messiah. It's that simple.

[Rhema]

Is anyone home up in that head of yours? Jesus didnt write anything that we know of today. ALL of scripture was written by men inspired by God to do so.

So your god is not powerful enough to ensure that such inspiration would accurately quote the very words of Jesus?

Here's what I had posted to you.

I'm not the one rejecting the very words of Jesus to embrace opinions from some mere man.

And now you claim that your own inspired Gospels are not the very words of Jesus because (as you wrote) "Jesus didn't write anything."

And you ask me if there's anyone home in MY head? How wonderfully absurd.

But I see that you are too lazy to ensure that the English translation(s) you read are accurate. (Especially with regards to 2 Tim. 3:16), since the accurate translation of πᾶς is "Every" (not "ALL") and the word IS isn't there, and verses 15 and 16 compose one sentence, not to be split apart with a period. But you seem only too happy to quote a mistranslation, as does every one else who desires to hug a magical book given to you by some god.

So be it. You've chosen your own wide path and I'm sure you are quite happy with it.

you must be one of those gospel only people, throw away everything but the words in red,

If you had taken the time to even read a small portion of my posts, you would KNOW that I've been condemned by better people than you of being a Red Letter Christian, and I am quite happy to declare myself to be a disciple of Jesus.

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,​

- Mark 1:14 KJV

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is what Jesus preached, with no one else needing to add a single thing (unless you think Jesus to have been incompetent). Why do you think my posts are replete with quotations from the very words of Jesus? (And yours are not.)

Ex Cathedra,
Rhema

(Now if you feel the need to reply, I shall welcome a PM. But do recall that your "divinely inspired" condemnation of me by PM the last time hadn't gone quite the way you expected. But I shan't entertain any more absurdity in this thread from one who has a lion sprouting feathers as an avatar.)

 

[Rhema]

... should be flagged and kicked.

Ever wanting to be the moderator and control all things... telling others what they should believe. The NPD never changes.

 

[Brad Huber]

So your god is not powerful enough to ensure that such inspiration would accurately quote the very words of Jesus?

Here's what I had posted to you.

And now you claim that your own inspired Gospels are not the very words of Jesus because (as you wrote) "Jesus didn't write anything."

And you ask me if there's anyone home in MY head? How wonderfully absurd.

But I see that you are too lazy to ensure that the English translation(s) you read are accurate. (Especially with regards to 2 Tim. 3:16), since the accurate translation of πᾶς is "Every" (not "ALL") and the word IS isn't there, and verses 15 and 16 compose one sentence, not to be split apart with a period. But you seem only too happy to quote a mistranslation, as does every one else who desires to hug a magical book given to you by some god.

So be it. You've chosen your own wide path and I'm sure you are quite happy with it.


If you had taken the time to even read a small portion of my posts, you would KNOW that I've been condemned by better people than you of being a Red Letter Christian, and I am quite happy to declare myself to be a disciple of Jesus.

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,​

- Mark 1:14 KJV

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is what Jesus preached, with no one else needing to add a single thing (unless you think Jesus to have been incompetent). Why do you think my posts are replete with quotations from the very words of Jesus? (And yours are not.)

Ex Cathedra,
Rhema

(Now if you feel the need to reply, I shall welcome a PM. But do recall that your "divinely inspired" condemnation of me by PM the last time hadn't gone quite the way you expected. But I shan't entertain any more absurdity in this thread from one who has a lion sprouting feathers as an avatar.)

Written just like an AI supported debater. I wonder sometimes how much of what is written in your name is actually done by you. I was pointing out that all scripture came through the Holy Spirit, so that one part is not less trustworthy than another which you seem to hold differently based on your postings. Indeed you have chosen your own path and will continue down it to your own failing. Now what AI supported response will I see to the truth I posted in response to your rubbish. Give up on the AI, its only making you look bad.

 

[th1bill]

And the Arab Hating Jews?

Like the Jew hatng Arabs, they are few but must be dealt with when Yashua returns.

 

[Gothedral]

anti-Christ must repent

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

"According to Jesus, physical descent from Abraham does not guarantee being a “child of God”. Those who reject Jesus are rejecting the very God Abraham believed in, which means they are not spiritually Abraham’s children—instead, they are following the devil's deception."

i was wondering if you would clarify this a little bit. You state that those who reject Jesus are rejecting the very God Abraham believed in. Can you explain to me how that's possible as Jesus had not been revealed yet? ( during the time of Abraham )

Great question — and here’s the answer straight from Jesus and the apostles:
Yes, Jesus hadn’t been revealed by name in Abraham’s time, but the promise of the Messiah absolutely had been.

“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” – John 8:56

Abraham didn’t know every detail, but he trusted the God who would one day fulfill the promise — and that promise was Christ.

Paul explains this directly:

“The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed.’” – Galatians 3:8

That “blessing” wasn’t generic — it was Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:16). So anyone who now knows of Christ and still rejects Him isn’t walking in Abraham’s faith — they’re walking in rebellion.

Jesus Himself said it plainly to the Pharisees:
“If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did... but now you seek to kill Me... You are doing the works your father did.” – John 8:39–41
“You are of your father the devil.” – John 8:44

So to sum it up:

Abraham believed the promise of Christ.

We believe in the person of Christ.

Anyone rejecting Christ today is rejecting the fulfillment of the very promise Abraham believed in.

That’s why Jesus didn’t say, “You’re misguided.”
He said, “You are not Abraham’s children at all.”

 

[Rhema]

Written just like an AI supported debater.

Never used AI. Don't need to. I happen to have an actual brain, and an extensive education. (Do you need my Mensa membership number?) This in itself, either your accusation or the complete inability to tell the difference between AI nonsense and true academic scholarship ("writing" as you put it), is just one more piece of evidence that would disqualify any person to be a judge.

wonder sometimes how much of what is written in your name is actually done by you.

All of it. Including the translations, although my links to the Liddell Scott Lexicon reference the scholarly work written by, well, Liddell and Scott. And citations are always provided when I quote the works of others.

I was pointing out that all scripture came through the Holy Spirit, so that one part is not less trustworthy than another which you seem to hold differently based on your postings.

Who decided what ought to compose your "all" scripture or not? The Apocalypse of John (what you know of as Revelation) was not officially part of the approved canon until the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (A.D. 393). It shouldn't take God nearly 350 years to make up his mind, should it?

And when Paul wrote to Timothy (if indeed Paul was the author) "scripture" meant the Hebrew Bible - what you call the Old Testament. To think otherwise, that Paul included his own epistles as "scripture" without directly saying so, rises to an absurd level of presumption.

Why do you believe that the canon given to you by the Roman Catholic Church is more valid than the canon held by the Church of the East (the church started by the Apostle Thomas in the Parthian Empire)???

Your Faith (your religion) is only 500 years old. Is your god so inept that it took him nearly 1,500 YEARS in order for someone (i.e. Martin Luther) to finally figure out what true saving grace is?

There ARE portions of your own Bible that are less trustworthy than other portions, because your own Bible itself says so.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSVA

Now what AI supported response will I see to the truth I posted in response to your rubbish.

You are a nasty piece of work, Mr. Huber. Just plain nasty. (Can you even be honest with yourself?)

All I'm asking is that you at least try to use your critical thinking skills (limited as they may be) instead of merely lashing out in blind faith because your religious fiction is being challenged. Is it even possible for you to address the content of my posts without resorting to unfounded insults?

But I understand. I quite understand the emotional meltdown that people have when their religious fables are exposed to be fiction. (What I truly don't understand is why one would have feathers sprouting from a lion. Is this like the feathered serpent of the Aztecs? They liked to offer human blood sacrifices to their gods too.)

Rhema

Give up on the AI, its only making you look bad.

Such an accusation is pure cowardice.
But maybe you should start using it.
It might just clean up your own rubbish.

 

[Brad Huber]

Never used AI. Don't need to. I happen to have an actual brain, and an extensive education. (Do you need my Mensa membership number?) This in itself, either your accusation or the complete inability to tell the difference between AI nonsense and true academic scholarship ("writing" as you put it), is just one more piece of evidence that would disqualify any person to be a judge.


All of it. Including the translations, although my links to the Liddell Scott Lexicon reference the scholarly work written by, well, Liddell and Scott. And citations are always provided when I quote the works of others.


Who decided what ought to compose your "all" scripture or not? The Apocalypse of John (what you know of as Revelation) was not officially part of the approved canon until the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (A.D. 393). It shouldn't take God nearly 350 years to make up his mind, should it?

And when Paul wrote to Timothy (if indeed Paul was the author) "scripture" meant the Hebrew Bible - what you call the Old Testament. To think otherwise, that Paul included his own epistles as "scripture" without directly saying so, rises to an absurd level of presumption.

Why do you believe that the canon given to you by the Roman Catholic Church is more valid than the canon held by the Church of the East (the church started by the Apostle Thomas in the Parthian Empire)???

Your Faith (your religion) is only 500 years old. Is your god so inept that it took him nearly 1,500 YEARS in order for someone (i.e. Martin Luther) to finally figure out what true saving grace is?

There ARE portions of your own Bible that are less trustworthy than other portions, because your own Bible itself says so.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the law (TORAH) of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSVA


You are a nasty piece of work, Mr. Huber. Just plain nasty. (Can you even be honest with yourself?)

All I'm asking is that you at least try to use your critical thinking skills (limited as they may be) instead of merely lashing out in blind faith because your religious fiction is being challenged. Is it even possible for you to address the content of my posts without resorting to unfounded insults?

But I understand. I quite understand the emotional meltdown that people have when their religious fables are exposed to be fiction. (What I truly don't understand is why one would have feathers sprouting from a lion. Is this like the feathered serpent of the Aztecs? They liked to offer human blood sacrifices to their gods too.)

Rhema



Such an accusation is pure cowardice.
But maybe you should start using it.
It might just clean up your own rubbish.

I stand by my words. I notice alot off things. I deal with a world that loves to lie and loves to puff themselves up to make themselves seem more important than they are. I see it constantly, and you fall into that pattern all the time, so be aware, I dont fall for BS like so many do. You can write whatever you want here, I just take it all with a grain of salt, because you seem to have little salt left in you. This is not an accusation, its an observation, based on your words here. I dont call you nasty, I dont call you a coward (like you do me), but I do state things that I see, and you cant stand it that I dont either keep quiet or admire you and your supposed great knowledge.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

The name of the son of God as His bride is called Isreal, the born-again bride previously called her Jacob the deceiver

Exodus 4:22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

Not a tribe. Not a DNA test but is a outward testimony as a temporal sign to the world using the temporal historical things seen to give the unseen understanding of faith. And perhaps draw unbelieving mankind to His living word..

It remains an outward testimony until the last day under the Sun called forever, the temporal.

Forever and ever without end, the eternal.

The new name that the father promised to rename the bride (Isaiah 62) as a demonym (residents by location) is Christian literally meaning "residents of the heavenly City prepared for His bride" named after its founder and husband Christ (Zion) The forever and ever without end .

Christian a more befitting name to name the bride of all the nations as families.

A distinction between forever as long as under the Sun and forever and ever, eternal must be made.

Like below

Deuteronomy 23:3 An Ammonite or Moabite (gentile) shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation (all of the temporal earthly generation) shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:(under the Sun)

Ruth a Moabite (gentile) entered forever and ever without end

Exodus 15:18 The Lord shall reign for ever and ever.

You just gave me five paragraphs of poetic allegory, typology, and metaphysical rambling — but not one verse that actually refutes what I wrote.

I asked for Scripture.
You gave me riddles.
I laid out Galatians, Romans, Hebrews, and Ephesians — and instead of engaging those passages, you started parsing the difference between “forever” and “forever and ever” as if that somehow nullifies the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Let’s stay grounded for a moment.

“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” – Galatians 3:29

That doesn’t require a timeline, an allegory, or a riddle.
It’s direct. Final. Covenant-closing.

The Church isn’t “Jacob renamed Israel.”
The Church is the Body of Christ, made up of Jew and Gentile alike, united only through faith — not bloodlines, not metaphors, and not demonyms.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek… you are all one in Christ Jesus.” – Galatians 3:28
“He has made both one.” – Ephesians 2:14
“If anyone does not have the Son, he does not have the Father.” – 1 John 2:23

You quoted Exodus 4:22 — “Israel is my son, my firstborn.”
Great. Now read Matthew 2:15, where Jesus is called “God’s son, called out of Egypt.”
That’s because Jesus is the true Israel — the faithful, sinless, obedient Son that national Israel never could be.

That’s not just theology — that’s New Testament fulfillment.

So again:
Is your theology built on Christ?
Or on metaphors and temple shadows that passed away when the veil tore?

“By calling this covenant ‘new,’ He has made the first one obsolete.” – Hebrews 8:13
“In Him all the promises of God are ‘Yes’ and ‘Amen.’” – 2 Corinthians 1:20

I don’t need a mystical decoder ring to understand the Gospel.
I need the Word — and the Word says the seed is Christ, and those in Him are heirs.

If you can’t refute that directly…
Then all the poetic flourishes in the world won’t change what’s already written:

There is one body, one faith, one baptism, and one covenant — in Jesus Christ alone.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

And what do you know of the Greek language? Be honest. (Can you? I'm not sure you can, now.) How many classes have you taken to learn Greek? (Years?)

I'm not surprised, but I am very disappointed to merely receive a knee jerk rejection to my well written and reasoned analysis that challenges the tradition of your faith, and that indeed you would post a three second brain fart to burp out your pre-programmed indoctrination. (What a waste.)


Please. What nonsense. A first-year Greek student would know that ANTI means opposite or against. I even gave you a link to the Liddell Scott Lexicon for you to read. It's obvious that you didn't even take the time to read it.

But to claim that ANTI means "for" ?? Like with ANTI-Christ ??? You would claim that any first-year Greek student would know that anti-Christ means FOR Christ?

So... have you EVER been a "first-year" Greek student? Again, can you be honest and give a truthful answer?

You rail against those having been indoctrinated by the Scofield Reference Bible, but seem unable to recognize your own indoctrination. Yes, I know it's hard. That's why the Jews ultimately crucified Jesus - because they couldn't accept the New Wine.

Jesus taught against animal sacrifice, as did the prophet Jeremiah:

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

Jesus' rejection of animal sacrifice (as a ransom) is found in all the Gospel texts, especially Mark, where Jesus even forbade the grain offering.

And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.​

- Mark 11:15-16 KJV

But you have made Jesus into a human blood sacrifice to pay for your sins, not knowing what the scriptures say about ransom and sacrifice. How wonderfully pagan. You have turned the Messiah into a pagan blood sacrifice. (I am sure the Romans are well pleased.)

He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.​

- Isaiah 66:3 KJV


No, GOC.

Blood was not in the cup. (Unless you believe in Transubstantiation. Hmmm maybe you do.)

Exactly what was in the cup?
THINK. I beg you.

You know the answer, and you know I know you know the answer, but are too stubborn to admit you are wrong. It's just a shame.


Jesus himself never once said that he was the Passover Lamb. SHOW ME. Or admit that you can't. Again, while you rail against the Scofield Reference Bible for all the doctrines he invented, you still cling to the invented doctrines of your own religious traditions.


The camel being swallowed is the rejection of Jesus' teaching that the FATHER forgives sin when one repents in prayer. The camel being swallowed is where the Messiah is turned into a human blood sacrifice when neither He nor Peter ever taught such a thing.


Accurate translation is not a spin. EIS doesn't mean "for." That's a tradition of your church - (the Church of England if you use the KJV). But please, be my guest - provide me with YOUR translation (I'll help to get you started by providing the link that proves EIS means INTO. You're welcome.):

Mat 26:28 τουτο γαρ εστιν το αιμα μου το της καινης διαθηκης το περι πολλων εκχυνομενον εις (INTO) αφεσιν αμαρτιων

Then ask yourself WHAT? is being poured into....


It's EXACTLY about translation. Translations that change the words to destroy the Gospel of Jesus Christ.


It's about you being indoctrinated into a Roman Blood Cult, where mystical powers are transferred by blood.

Acts 2 - nothing about blood. Acts 13 nothing about blood. Are you now going to claim that these sermons didn't preach the Gospel?


Blind as a Pharisee. Jesus Himself said και γαρ ο υιος του ανθρωπου ουκ ηλθεν διακονηθηναι αλλα διακονησαι και δουναι την ψυχην αυτου λυτρον αντι πολλων

ANTI - RANSOM. The text would need to be written "λυτρον γάρ πολλων" to say what you (and others) claim it says.

Truth be told, you might be worse than Scofield.


Exactly WHERE did Jesus quote Isaiah 53 about Himself? Instead of you blathering, give a scripture verse. Prove yourself. Prove me wrong, because Jesus NEVER once even uttered the word Lamb.


Then show me. Explain explain HOW I am twisting a Greek preposition. (If you can.) I explained my claim to you. But you won't. Because you can't. All you can do is post is an unfounded and unsubstantiated accusation. Disspointing. But I understand why you can't enter into a civil conversation. (You'll lose your religion.)


Nonsense. You have NO CLUE what I want. You can't even read your own holy writings. I doubt you even realize that the Jews crucified Christ. PLEASE, let me know that you know this.


Again, you have no clue what the blood of the covenant is, even after Jesus Himself directly told you what that blood was.

WHAT WAS IN THE CUP, GOC ???? (Did Jesus slit his wrists and pour blood into the cup?)


Whose Gospel?

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,​

- Mark 1:14 KJV

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is EVERYTHING JESUS preached.

Most people heavily indoctrinated into a cult just can't see reason and truth.

I pray you get rescued,
Rhema


You're right. Jesus didn't preach it. And you can't show me where he did. (Not without using a twisted translation.)


Neither do you.

Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,​

- Mark 1:14 KJV

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is what Jesus preached. But that's not what you're preaching. Is it.

You managed to dodge every single verse I cited. You didn’t refute Galatians 3. You ignored Ephesians 2. You skipped Hebrews 8, Romans 9, and Matthew 26. Instead, you spiraled into Gnostic mistrust, semantic games, and a fanatical rejection of Christ’s atoning work on the cross.

1. Greek Prepositions: You Misrepresent 'Anti'
You scoffed when I said “anti” in Mark 10:45 implies substitution.

“You’d say ‘anti-Christ’ means ‘for Christ’?”

That’s called a category error — applying one usage of a preposition rigidly across unrelated phrases. "Anti" has a range of meanings depending on context, and in classical and Koine Greek, it absolutely can mean “in place of” or “on behalf of.”

Don’t take my word for it — take Thayer’s Greek Lexicon:
ἀντὶ: “in place of, instead of, for (as a substitute).”

That’s why Mark 10:45 reads:
“to give His life as a ransom for (ἀντὶ) many.”
And why even your precious Liddell & Scott lists “in return for” and “in place of” among its glosses.

You're playing semantic hopscotch with a word that generations of Greek scholars, including early church fathers and modern lexicons, understood plainly.

2. Matthew 26:28 – You Tried to Erase the Blood
“There was no blood in the cup. Do you believe in Transubstantiation?”

That's not a rebuttal. It’s a distraction.

The cup symbolized the blood of the covenant — the same phrase used in Exodus 24:8. Jesus wasn’t inviting the disciples to drink Merlot — He was establishing the New Covenant in His blood.

“This is my blood of the covenant, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
— Matthew 26:28

You claim “eis” (εἰς) should be “into,” not “for”? Great. Let’s be consistent. In Acts 2:38:

“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ εἰς the forgiveness of your sins…”

Using your logic, we’re not baptized for the forgiveness of sins — just “into” it abstractly? That doesn’t help your case. It proves mine. Forgiveness happens through His blood, not by symbol-only.

3. Isaiah 53 – You Claimed Jesus Never Referenced It

You asked where Jesus quoted Isaiah 53 about Himself?

Let’s try:

“It is written: And He was numbered with the transgressors — and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in Me.”
— Luke 22:37 (quoting Isaiah 53:12)

Even Philip in Acts 8 confirms that Isaiah 53 is about Christ.

So your claim — “Jesus never cited Isaiah 53” — is objectively false. You either didn’t know, or you hoped no one would check.

4. You Mock the Blood of Christ — And That’s the Line
You say blood atonement is pagan.
You mock substitution as “Roman blood cult nonsense.”

But Scripture couldn’t be clearer:

“Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins.” — Hebrews 9:22
“The Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” — Isaiah 53:6
“Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures.” — 1 Corinthians 15:3

You can dance around it, redefine it, or spiritualize it to death — but the truth remains:
Jesus died as a ransom, a substitute, a Lamb.
Not symbolically. Not metaphorically. But literally.

5. You’re Preaching Another Gospel
You want to redefine the Gospel as only Jesus' moral teachings — stripped of blood, stripped of the cross, stripped of the resurrection's meaning. That’s not the Gospel:

“In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” — Ephesians 1:7
“God made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us.” — 2 Corinthians 5:21

You said Jesus never claimed to be the Passover Lamb.
Then explain John 1:29:
“Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”

You are willfully blind to what the apostles, prophets, and Jesus Himself made plain.

6. You Question My Knowledge of Greek — While Misquoting It
You ask if I’m a Greek student. I ask if you’re an honest one.

Because anyone can copy-paste from a lexicon — but only truth-seekers submit to what the Word actually teaches.

Your issue isn’t with me.
It’s with the cross.
It’s with the blood.
It’s with the fact that Jesus' death wasn’t a tragic political accident — it was the plan from before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8).

You rail against Scofield — good.
But don’t replace his deception with your own sanitized, Gnostic “Jesus the teacher” who never atoned for sin.

“The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” — 1 Corinthians 1:18
You don’t get to rewrite the Gospel to avoid the blood.
You don’t get Christ without crucifixion.
You don’t get a new covenant without His sacrifice.

Jesus is the Lamb.
His blood was poured.
And that blood saves.

If that offends you, don’t debate me —
Take it up with the empty tomb.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Dear Brother, @The Gospel of Christ
Well said in your last two postings. #149 & 150

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[backNforth]

Is anyone home up in that head of yours? Jesus didnt write anything that we know of today. ALL of scripture was written by men inspired by God to do so. It seems you just think that Paul was not inspired by God, you must be one of those gospel only people, throw away everything but the words in red, which are only there as written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit to do so. Those you call "mere man".

On this particular issue, both of you are dancing around a phantom.

Here we see the problem with man's textual criticism laid out before us. Many of you believe that God inspired men to write God's words and, therefore, 'we better make certain we have credentialed EXPERTS doing the writing.'

This is why many of you would push for 'bigger and better bibles,' that appear "pleasant to the eyes" and "to make one wise," that come with the highest recommendations of the 'scholars' who offer periodic "updates" of their findings to their yes-men and other subscribers.

People, you've been sold a bill of goods by the world's best merchandiser, Satan himself.

God didn't "inspire" any man; rather, God inspired his word and then gave it to man.

Obviously, most do not know the truth about inspiration. They have not discerned and cannot discern, from their so-called bibles, the meaning and significance of the inspiration of God’s word. The reality of inspiration seriously bothers these guys, and they don’t understand why. Mention preservation, and their blood pressure kicks up even higher. If you tell them the word of God is inspired, they’re forced to redefine the definition of the word of God to match their un-belief in inspiration. The un-inspired (and copyrighted) inventions of un-saved men is their playground. Such men and their scholarly icons can be found hiding behind a relatively new arrival on the apostasy platter -- the ”originals only” heresy.

But, I digress.

The enemy's plan is to force us to pigeonhole the truths of inspiration so the 'scholars' can proceed with their (uninspired) dissimulations.

Inspiration is the lock that the scholar establishment will never attempt to open, because to do so would remove them from the throne of their own construction.

Let’s take a look at the relevant passage:

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Tim. 3:15-17 AV

Notice that even a child understands the holy scriptures -- no middlemen wanna-be ‘scholars’ required!

Notice that it is God who gives scripture -- not man. Man does not even feature in this verse.

Notice that the purpose of God giving to man, God’s inspired scripture is so “that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”

Notice how God gives scripture -- by inspiration. Nowhere does it say that God inspired men! “All scripture is given by inspiration of God.” God’s Spirit (i.e. inspiration) is the vehicle with which God ‘gives all scripture’ -- God does not give scripture via any man, or by inspiring any man, or by any other means. Thus, God’s scripture has life -- it is alive, it is the living Spirit-filled words of God. Conversely, man does not have life; outside of God, man is dead. Yes, man has breath, but mere breath is not life; God’s Spirit is life. The words of men are mere breaths; whereas God’s word is Life itself. The reality of the inspiration of scripture has no connection with any efforts of man.

This living quality of scripture puzzles those who are not born again. It even puzzles those who are born again but who have had their thought processes impaired by spiritual deception.

Don’t let the wanna-be scholars deceive you by their attempts to shift the inspiration of God’s living Spirit-filled words to man’s mere breath. So the next time you hear, “only the ‘Hebrew and Greek’ is the inspired text,” you’ll know the truth of the matter.

God's pattern has always been the same: He gives the COMMON man the COMMON bible in the COMMON language of the day, to do one thing -- EVANGELIZE the world.

Further, back in the 1800's, Calvinist B. B. Warfield could not defend the Bible in hand. He did not have a strong enough background in manuscript evidence or a humble enough faith in the scriptures to counter the barrage of textual variants and 'problems' thrust at him in the German classroom. He invented a plan whereby he could retain the creed, that stated that 'the Bible' was inspired. He redefined the word 'Bible' for seminary students. He moved the locus of inspiration from the Holy Bible to the lost originals.

In order to divest themselves of a living book that contains the words of the Spirit of God, today's liberals have adopted a distinction between the so-called 'originals' and the word of God extant today in vernacular Holy Bibles. This 'original' idea about the originals has "crept in unaware" into Bible school textbooks and doctrinal statements. It provides a comfortable respite for those who, as Jesus said, are "ashamed of me and my words," when questions arise (Mark 8:38).

Unwittingly, they have in a sense adopted the neo-orthodox position that the Bible (that we have) only contains God's message (but accurately translated by men into English).

To them Bibles are no longer God's own English words. Remember, he said "I speak" "other tongues." Practically speaking they have adopted the same view as those who create and use modern versions, who say that the Bible was inspired only in the originals and consequently they are free to reconstitute it themselves according to rationalistic methods. There is not a lot of difference (in presumption, not text) between men making NIVs and men making the 'updated' KJV Easy-Reader or KJV Evidence Bible (Ray Comfort). Is the Holy Bible God's words or man's? There is no middle ground. The title even says 'Holy' Bible. Since when can unholy men make a wholly holy book?

Many of the Statements of Faith issued by various bodies now speak of the Scriptures being inspired 'as originally given' whereas before this time the conviction was that inspired Scripture was preserved in the copies. All this took place almost unnoticed, but we are being asked to swallow a real whopper! The apostle Paul is right, "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22).

 

[Garee]

You just gave me five paragraphs of poetic allegory, typology, and metaphysical rambling — but not one verse that actually refutes what I wrote.

I asked for Scripture.
You gave me riddles.
I laid out Galatians, Romans, Hebrews, and Ephesians — and instead of engaging those passages, you started parsing the difference between “forever” and “forever and ever” as if that somehow nullifies the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

It would seem many underestimate the power of parables to teach us of the unseen things of Christ.

Without Parables the signified understnding using the thing seen temporal compared (Parable) to the unseen things of Christ's faithfulness as prophecy. Without Christ spoke not even once. They hide the gospel understanding from those who treat them as some sort of good bedtime stories for children. . Hi diddle, diddie

The commandment is without the signified tongue of parables Christ spoke not. It would be up to you to prove different

.It would seem to indicate those who walk or understand by sight looking to the temporal historical and not the spiritual invisible

The prescription needed to rightly divide or interpreter the parables must be applied or according to Hebrew 4:1-2 there can be no gospel revealed hid in the parable

2 Corinthians 4:1818&nbsp;While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things (dying) which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

et’s stay grounded for a moment.

“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” – Galatians 3:29

That doesn’t require a timeline, an allegory, or a riddle.
It’s direct. Final. Covenant-closing.

Abram in the long line of the second born again seed, singular Christ the spiritual seed .not seen .

Christ as Emanuel in used a parable to represent the doctrine of mankind "must be born again" It began with Cain the first born and Able. Abel the second born by grace became a born-again believer. When he preached the gospel to Cain the first-born Cain murdered the apostle Abel, the first recorded martyr.

God replaced Abel with another second born called Enoch to emphasize again a man must be born again. It was then that born again men could call out and be heard,

Genisis 4:25-26And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.

Abram meaning Father of one family, His born-again name was changed to Abraham the father of all the nations of the worl.to represent our Holy Father in heaven as in cal no man on earth Holy Father

Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his (Christ' spiritual unseen) seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds,(flesh of Abraham) as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

It would seem many underestimate the power of parables to teach us of the unseen things of Christ.

Without Parables the signified understnding using the thing seen temporal compared (Parable) to the unseen things of Christ's faithfulness as prophecy. Without Christ spoke not even once. They hide the gospel understanding from those who treat them as some sort of good bedtime stories for children. . Hi diddle, diddie

The commandment is without the signified tongue of parables Christ spoke not. It would be up to you to prove different

.It would seem to indicate those who walk or understand by sight looking to the temporal historical and not the spiritual invisible

The prescription needed to rightly divide or interpreter the parables must be applied or according to Hebrew 4:1-2 there can be no gospel revealed hid in the parable

2 Corinthians 4:1818&nbsp;While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things (dying) which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.



Abram in the long line of the second born again seed, singular Christ the spiritual seed .not seen .

Christ as Emanuel in used a parable to represent the doctrine of mankind "must be born again" It began with Cain the first born and Able. Abel the second born by grace became a born-again believer. When he preached the gospel to Cain the first-born Cain murdered the apostle Abel, the first recorded martyr.

God replaced Abel with another second born called Enoch to emphasize again a man must be born again. It was then that born again men could call out and be heard,

Genisis 4:25-26And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.

Abram meaning Father of one family, His born-again name was changed to Abraham the father of all the nations of the worl.to represent our Holy Father in heaven as in cal no man on earth Holy Father

Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his (Christ' spiritual unseen) seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds,(flesh of Abraham) as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

You’re doing it again.

I asked for Scripture that refutes the plain teaching of Galatians 3, Romans 9–11, Ephesians 2, and Hebrews 8 — where the New Covenant is spelled out line by line — and instead, you gave me a Scofield-flavored sermonette using Cain, Abel, Seth, and Enoch like they’re pieces in some divine crossword puzzle.

You said “a man must be born again,” and I agree completely — but being born again doesn’t lead anyone back to the Old Covenant, or to ethnic Israel, or to geopolitical allegories, blood moons, red heifers, or any other Scofield-induced hallucinations.
It leads you straight to Christ.

And in Christ —
there is no Jew or Gentile,
no “dual covenant,”
no prophetic loophole for Christ-rejecting nations.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

If you’re still obsessing over bloodlines, land deeds, or Hebrew DNA, then you’re not walking in the Gospel.
You’re walking backward — into the shadows of a covenant that Christ already fulfilled 2,000 years ago.

You referenced Galatians 3:16, but ignored Galatians 3:29:

“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

That’s not a parable. That’s Paul.
And unless you believe Paul needs a Scofield decoder ring to be understood, you should take him at his word.

You are either in Christ and part of Abraham’s spiritual seed —
…or you’re still clinging to the flesh and missing the whole point.

So just answer the question plainly:
Is there salvation in anyone or anything outside of Christ? Yes or no.
Because your whole argument hinges on that.

And let’s not forget the most basic fact of all:

Cain, Abel, Seth, Enoch, Noah, Abraham — and even Moses — weren’t Jews.
The word “Jew” comes from Judah, Abraham’s great-grandson.
So unless Abraham somehow descended from his own great-grandson, the whole “salvation belongs to the Jews” narrative collapses on itself.

God didn’t promise salvation to a race.
He promised it to a Seed — and that seed is Christ (Galatians 3:16).
Only those in Him are heirs. Period.

 

[Garee]

You’re doing it again.

I asked for Scripture that refutes the plain teaching of Galatians 3, Romans 9–11, Ephesians 2, and Hebrews 8 — where the New Covenant is spelled out line by line — and instead, you gave me a Scofield-flavored sermonette using Cain, Abel, Seth, and Enoch like they’re pieces in some divine crossword puzzle.

You said “a man must be born again,” and I agree completely — but being born again doesn’t lead anyone back to the Old Covenant, or to ethnic Israel, or to geopolitical allegories, blood moons, red heifers, or any other Scofield-induced hallucinations.
It leads you straight to Christ.

And in Christ —
there is no Jew or Gentile,
no “dual covenant,”
no prophetic loophole for Christ-rejecting nations.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

If you’re still obsessing over bloodlines, land deeds, or Hebrew DNA, then you’re not walking in the Gospel.
You’re walking backward — into the shadows of a covenant that Christ already fulfilled 2,000 years ago.

You referenced Galatians 3:16, but ignored Galatians 3:29:

“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

That’s not a parable. That’s Paul.
And unless you believe Paul needs a Scofield decoder ring to be understood, you should take him at his word.

You are either in Christ and part of Abraham’s spiritual seed —
…or you’re still clinging to the flesh and missing the whole point.

So just answer the question plainly:
Is there salvation in anyone or anything outside of Christ? Yes or no.
Because your whole argument hinges on that.

And let’s not forget the most basic fact of all:

Cain, Abel, Seth, Enoch, Noah, Abraham — and even Moses — weren’t Jews.
The word “Jew” comes from Judah, Abraham’s great-grandson.
So unless Abraham somehow descended from his own great-grandson, the whole “salvation belongs to the Jews” narrative collapses on itself.

God didn’t promise salvation to a race.
He promised it to a Seed — and that seed is Christ (Galatians 3:16).
Only those in Him are heirs. Period.

Hi Thanks for the reply

Did you forget to look at the Galatians 3 seed one the spiritual unseen seed, Christ' Holy Spirit working in us.

Reminds me of the "do not even think of it" doctrines. The outward Jew that was trusting in their own dying flesh and blood were having their understanding or faith in respect to the temporal things seen oral tradition called Abraham who was dead as if it was to our invisible Holy Father.in heaven

Our father gave words to his apostle the Son of man Jesus revealing if our invisible father desires he could make children out of living stones to represent the spiritual unseen house of Christ prepared for his bride the Chistian church.

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father:(eternal God) for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. (the father of all the nations) giving meaning to the word Abraham

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Hi Thanks for the reply

Did you forget to look at the Galatians 3 seed one the spiritual unseen seed, Christ' Holy Spirit working in us.

Reminds me of the "do not even think of it" doctrines. The outward Jew that was trusting in their own dying flesh and blood were having their understanding or faith in respect to the temporal things seen oral tradition called Abraham who was dead as if it was to our invisible Holy Father.in heaven

Our father gave words to his apostle the Son of man Jesus revealing if our invisible father desires he could make children out of living stones to represent the spiritual unseen house of Christ prepared for his bride the Chistian church.

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father:(eternal God) for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. (the father of all the nations) giving meaning to the word Abraham

You agreed that the seed is Christ — great. That’s what Galatians 3:16 says.

But then you drifted right back into Scofield-speak, talking about “outward Jews,” “temporal things,” and “representing” Abraham — all while sidestepping Paul’s plain point: only those in Christ are heirs. Period.

Your response almost sounds like a riddle from a Gnostic fortune cookie. But the Gospel isn’t vague. It’s not some mystical puzzle.

Paul didn’t say, “the seed is an invisible spiritual pattern that can represent various stages of collective awakening.”
He said: “The seed is Christ.”

And he didn’t say, “If you’re ethnically Jewish, or spiritually poetic, or loyal to Hebrew concepts, you might be in.”
He said: “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)

That’s it. That’s the Gospel.
Doesn’t matter if you’re Jew or Gentile — you’re not in without Christ.
Period. The End.

You referenced Matthew 3:9, where Jesus says God can raise up children for Abraham from stones — but you missed the point. He was rebuking those who thought their lineage gave them favor with God. Jesus was tearing down ethnic privilege, not reinforcing it. Jesus and the apostles consistently demolish the idea that physical descent equals covenant status. The entire New Testament pivots away from genealogy — and toward spiritual rebirth through Christ alone.

So again — I’ll ask the question....

Is there salvation outside of Christ?
If yes, you’ve denied the Gospel.
If no, then all this talk of Israelite flesh, Jewish roots, and genealogical speculation is a distraction — a theological detour back into the very shadows Christ fulfilled.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Let’s clear the air with some biblical truth most misled Christians have never been taught — or worse, have been trained to ignore.
Welcome to Oxford-level adult Sunday School… and warning: it’s going to get uncomfortable.

We’re not here for soft sermons.
We’re here to tear down sacred cows, expose religious propaganda, and reclaim the Gospel from the grip of deception.
So buckle up.

Abraham wasn’t a Jew. He was a Hebrew — a descendant of Eber. The word “Jew” doesn’t even appear in Scripture until 2 Kings 16:6 — over 1,000 years after Abraham.

Moses wasn’t a Jew either. He was from the tribe of Levi, not Judah. So if being “Jewish” means descending from Judah, Moses doesn’t qualify.

Most of the Old Testament isn’t about Jews. It’s about Hebrews, Israelites, and the twelve tribes — with Judah being just one tribe among twelve. Even the name Israel was given to Jacob, not Judah.

The “chosen people” were never defined by ethnicity. God chose a nation — Israel — to bring forth the Messiah, and then opened salvation to all nations through Him (Genesis 12:3, Galatians 3:8).

Judah was not the chosen heir of Israel. Jacob gave the birthright — the covenantal blessing — to Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (1 Chronicles 5:1–2). Judah received the scepter — the right to rule — not the inheritance.

So think of how twisted this is:
The very tribe that calls themselves “Jews” today — Judah — is the same tribe that didn’t receive the covenantal birthright.
That was given to Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (1 Chronicles 5:1–2).
Yet somehow, Judah is now claiming the name Israel, the inheritance, and the covenant — as if none of the other tribes ever existed.
It’s one of the boldest rewrites of biblical history the world has ever seen — and the modern, misled Church swallowed it whole.

The modern state of Israel is a political creation — not a biblical restoration. It was established in 1948 through British imperialism, UN manipulation, and Zionist lobbying — not by the return of Christ, not by the trumpet of God, and certainly not by the fulfillment of any true biblical prophecy.
But it gets worse.
The uncomfortable historical truth is this: a massive portion of the people now living in False Israel™ — destabilizing the Middle East, launching endless wars, and dragging the West into blood-soaked alliances — are not Semites at all.

They are Eastern European converts: Khazars. Russians. Slavs. Ashkenazim.
Their ancestors converted to Judaism around 740 A.D. under King Bulan, in the region of modern-day Ukraine and southern Russia.

They are not descendants of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob.
They are not Semitic Hebrews.
They are not biblical Jews.

They are converts from a medieval Turkic kingdom — and they now make up the majority of world Jewry.
And yet they scream “anti-Semite!” at anyone who dares question their supposed divine claim to the land of Canaan…

…when they’re not even Semites themselves.

It’s a masterclass in delusion.

To put it in perspective:
Imagine the Pennsylvania Amish suddenly converting to Judaism in the 1800s — and then in 1948, trading in their horse-and-buggies for warships, sailing to Palestine, learning Hebrew on the way, changing their last names from Schmidt to Ben-David, and stepping off the boat shouting:

“WE’RE ETHNIC JEWS! THIS IS OUR LAND!”
With the help of the United Nations, British elites, and Rothschild funding, they begin slaughtering Palestinians and seizing territory — all while waving Bibles and claiming God gave it to them.
That’s what happened in 1948.
And we’re all supposed to pretend it was “prophecy fulfilled”?

This has nothing to do with "hatred". It has everything to do with truth.
If pointing this out gets you labeled “anti-Semitic,” then we’ve reached a point where Scripture is hate speech and Scofield is gospel.
Pointing this out doesn’t make you hateful.
It makes you biblically literate.
Scofield’s theology has millions of Christians defending a Christ-rejecting regime based on a twisted reading of Scripture — propped up by footnotes written by a convicted con man (Scofield), funded by Zionist bankers, and disguised as “study notes.”
This isn’t "anti-Semitism".
This is anti-deception.
And if your theology can’t stand without Scofield’s footnotes, maybe it was never built on Scripture in the first place.

What these Eastern European carpetbaggers have done is hijacked the word “Israel” and convinced the entire Western world that they own it — as if it’s their ethnic brand name. But nothing could be further from the truth.
They’ve hijacked language, lineage, and legacy.
They took the name Israel, which belonged to Jacob and his twelve sons, and applied it solely to Judah's descendants, erasing the rest of the tribes.
They stole the word Hebrew and rebranded it as if it belonged exclusively to them — even though many Semitic nations descend from Eber,
and even though they themselves come from Russia and Eastern Europe.

Let that sink in:
Non-Semitic Europeans hijacked a Semitic identity —
then weaponized it to control the narrative of Scripture, history, and geopolitics.
That’s not just deception —
It’s spiritual identity theft on a global scale.
They convinced millions of Western Christians that all Israelites were Jews — when biblically speaking, most were not.
They revived modern Hebrew — an artificial, reconstructed language — and used it as a weapon of identity to make their European lineage feel ancient and biblical.

They manipulated Bible prophecy, slapped it on a U.N. map, and told the world, “This is what God wants.”
And the Church — blinded by Scofield’s footnotes and Zionist propaganda — went right along with it.

But let’s be clear: the return of true Israel isn’t about land, bloodlines, or politics. It’s about Christ — and those who are in Him.
“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” — Galatians 3:29

So no, modern Israel is not the fulfillment of prophecy.
It’s the fulfillment of Rothschild real estate schemes, Rapture delusions, and the worst misreading of the Bible in modern history.
And if you dare to speak the truth? You get called anti-Semitic — by people who aren’t even Semites.

Modern Judaism is not Old Testament religion. It’s largely built on the Babylonian Talmud — written centuries after Christ — a text that openly mocks Jesus and calls Him a deceiver (Sanhedrin 43a).
Being against Scofield Zionism doesn’t make you an anti-Semite.
“Semitic” refers to the descendants of Shem — including Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Hebrews, Arabs, and others — not just Jews.

So let’s stop pretending this is about race.
It’s not.
It’s about truth.
It’s about the Gospel.
And it’s about whether or not Christ is enough.

Because at the end of the day, the Kingdom of God isn’t inherited through bloodlines, bank deals, or Balfour declarations.
It’s inherited through the blood of Jesus Christ — and only through Him.

If you’re in Christ, you are the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16).
And if you’re not in Christ, it doesn’t matter how many flags you wave, temples you rebuild, or genealogies you trace.

Without the Son, you have nothing.
No covenant. No inheritance. No hope.
Only Christ — or nothing.
I pray to God you evangelicals wake up from the blasphemous Scofield delusion you’ve been infected with.
To merely call you “deceived” would be the understatement of the millennium.
You’re not just misled — you’ve been discipled by a con man, trained to twist Scripture, and enlisted to defend a Christ-rejecting regime in the name of “prophecy.”

This isn’t just error.
It’s Zionism with a cross necklace.
It’s apostasy wrapped in Bible verses.
It’s spiritual adultery dressed as patriotism.
It’s false prophecy in a Sunday suit.
It’s a golden calf stamped with John 3:16.
It’s anti-Christ doctrine sung in a worship tune.
It’s Israel-first idolatry hiding behind a stained-glass window.
— and it’s dragging the brainwashed Church following the wide road straight into judgment... and the gates of Hell.

So choose today whom you will follow:
Scofield… or Scripture.
Bloodline myths… or the blood of the Lamb.
The wide road of deception… or the narrow gate of truth.

The time for soft sermons is over.
You have been deceived beyond measure.
The trumpet has sounded.
Come out from Babylon — before it falls.
Because when it does… there will be no time left to choose.

 

[Dave M]

God didn’t promise salvation to a race.
He promised it to a Seed — and that seed is Christ (Galatians 3:16).
Only those in Him are heirs. Period.

Amen !
let me ask a question, many teach that God promised the a race (Jew) land and that promise was never fulfilled so it is still to come. WOuld love to hear your thoughts, but if I am to far off topic let me know and maybe we can go another route, do not want to clutter up your thread.

And by the way thank you for this thread I have not had a chance to read all of it, but what I have read I see you are a trues blessing to this community!

 

[Curtis]

Just some of my thoughts.....

Abraham was not a jew, he was a gentile whom God had chosen to become the father of the circumcision (Jews), and the uncircumcised. (Gentiles)

Jews did not exist until many years after Abraham. The word “Jew” is a shortened form of the word meaning “Judah”
So, the word "Jew" is short for the word "Judean," meaning a resident of Judea, the area also now called Palestine. The word "Jew" did not mean an ethnic background or race.

The word “Hebrew” is not associated with Jews; it is a word that describes a person who goes from one place to another. Abraham was called a “Hebrew” not because he was Jewish, but because he crossed over the river Euphrates to get to the Promised Land God had given him.

Abraham, though often called the "father of the Jewish nation," was a Chaldean, from Ur of the Chaldees, an area of Babylon as was his wife, Sarah. Abraham is referred to as a Hebrew:

"And there came one that had escaped and told Abram the
Hebrew ..." (Gen 14:13)


“Hebrew” means "one from beyond" and is derived from Eber (or Heber, Strong's no. 5676), meaning "the region beyond" (the Euphrates)

The term Hebrew is also taken to mean "to pass" or "to cross over." Abraham "crossed over" the River Euphrates to get to the land of Canaan, from Chaldea. Chaldean was Abraham's ethnic origin. He Abraham lived long before there was ever was a Jew.

Abraham is the father of anyone who walks after the same faith steps as Abraham did!

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that HE MIGHT BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but WHO ALSO WALK IN THE STEPS OF THAT FAITH OF OUR FATHER ABRAHAM, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

The nation of Israel, which was descendants from Issac, who begat Jacob, whose name was changed to “Israel” by God, were “Hebrews” because they crossed the “Red Sea” on their way to get to the promised land from Egypt. When they left Egypt, Israel was made up of many ethnic groups who intermarried yet as a group they were still called Israel.

Exo 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.
Exo 12:38 And A MIXED MULTITUDE WENT UP ALSO WITH THEM; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

As a Christian, we have passed over from death to life, darkness to light, delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of God's dear Son.(1 John 3:14)(Col 1:13)(Eph 5:8)

The true “promised land” is the Kingdom of God in which all born again Christians have been translated into. The physical promise land in the Old Testament was only a shadow (type) of the real eternal promised land which is received, and entered by the same faith as Abraham.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Amen !
let me ask a question, many teach that God promised the a race (Jew) land and that promise was never fulfilled so it is still to come. WOuld love to hear your thoughts, but if I am to far off topic let me know and maybe we can go another route, do not want to clutter up your thread.

And by the way thank you for this thread I have not had a chance to read all of it, but what I have read I see you are a trues blessing to this community!

You’re not off-topic at all. The belief that God promised a specific ethnic group a permanent deed to a strip of land is one of the most widespread biblical betrayals of all time — twisting God’s covenant into an ethnic entitlement instead of the spiritual inheritance it was always meant to be.
It’s not just bad theology — it flat-out contradicts everything the New Testament reveals in Christ.

Here’s the truth:
God did not promise land to a race. He promised it to Abraham and his Seed — and Paul makes it crystal clear in Galatians 3:16 that “Seed” does not refer to many (a nation or ethnic group), but to One — Christ.

And who inherits the promise? Not those born of the flesh — but those born of the Spirit.
“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.” – Galatians 3:29

So the land promise?
It was fulfilled — in Christ.
Not postponed. Not reassigned.
Not transferred to a Christ-rejecting nation-state built on war and Western guilt. Fulfilled.

And now — through Him — extended to all nations, just as God intended.

The New Testament couldn’t be clearer:

“Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” – Matthew 5:5
Not a dusty strip of land with barbed wire and bombs —
but the entire renewed creation under the Lordship of Christ.
That’s why Hebrews 11 says the faithful never looked for an earthly homeland:
“But now they desire a better country — that is, a heavenly one… for He has prepared a city for them.”

So no — we are not waiting for God to return real estate to a secular regime
run by Christ-hating Talmudists and Eastern European identity thieves.
That’s not prophecy.
That’s apostasy.

The true Israel of God isn’t found in Tel Aviv or under a flag.
It’s found in Christ — where the inheritance already lives.

Israel is not a land. It’s a Body.
The Body of Christ is Israel — the true people of God, born not of bloodlines, but of the Spirit.

According to the Gospel — not Scofield, not Zionist fairy tales, but the actual Gospel — followers of Christ are modern Israel.
Not a patch of dirt.
Not a regime that denies the Son.
Not a political flag waving over a Christ-rejecting military.
The true Israel lives in Christ — not in Tel Aviv. Not in tanks. Not in temples.

“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” – Galatians 3:29

So let’s say it loud:
It’s not dirt in the Middle East.
It’s the blood of the Lamb that makes you Israel.
Anything else is spiritual fraud.

To claim that Israel is a land — instead of the Body of Christ — is to deny that Jesus Christ is the Messiah.