@ GLJCA
Quote:
The above verse NEVER calls the stranger Israel. The stranger shall be treated as Israel, but never is called Israel. V. 50 says the children of Israel obeyed God's instruction, and the stranger traveled out of Egypt with the children of Israel. But the stranger "became Israel"??? Fiction.
DDub, this is a play on word game. You are saying that we can't comprehend a truth unless it says it word for word yet very little of what you believe is word for word in scripture.
This is no word game, and that isn't what I'm saying. I'm saying that what you're saying isn't the truth, and the proof is that there are NO direct scriptures which say so, and when you look at scripture as a whole, it doesn't say what you're saying. Added to that, there are direct scriptures which contradict what you're saying. therefore, it's a proven fact that what you're saying is incorrect.
The teaching of the Trinity is not word for word in scripture. Do you not believe in the trinity?
I disagree.
Jhn 10:30 I and [my] Father are one
That's pretty direct, and there are more. But you have nothing like that to support what you're saying. Please don't compare your argument to the trinity argument.
"I know the trinity argument, it's a friend of mine. And your argument, sir, is no trinity argument."
The Bible does not say that the only baptism today is the baptism of the Spirit yet MAD teaches it that way and if I am not mistaken you believe it that way also.
I believe that the only baptism BY GOD is the baptism of the Spirit. Do you disagree with that? I can't speak about what MAD believes or teaches.
So DDub you can not practice what you are preaching here by saying that if it doesn't say if word for word it isn't true.
Again, that's not what I said. I said that what YOU are preaching is untrue, and not supported by scripture. you obviously agree that there are no direct scriptures which say what you're saying, and your non-credible story has been taken apart by scripture. Don't be upset with me over that fact.
Let's look again at one of the passages that you rejected because you said that the Word does not say that they were the children of Israel. These people were children of the mixed multitude that left Egypt. Many of those people were not of the bloodline of Abraham yet they are called the Children of Israel by God himself.
Joshua 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
Notice DDub, I will highlight the place where it calls these people the Children of Israel even though they were children of the mixed multitude that came out of Egypt and not all were of the bloodline of Abraham.
5:3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
5:6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people [that were] men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
It is as plain as day that even though these people were not of the bloodline of Abraham they were still considered the children of Israel.
Now allow me to point out for you why what you say is fiction.
Jos 5:2-3 ¶ At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time. And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
This says nothing about anyone other than the children of Israel being the children of Israel. It doesn't say the Egyptians were the children of Israel, that's what you say. But notice that these scriptures DON'T say that.
Jos 5:4 And this [is] the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, [that were] males, [even] all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
As we see here, all those who came out of Egypt died in the wilderness.
Jos 5:5-6 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people [that were] born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, [them] they had not circumcised. For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people [that were] men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
So we see that all those NOT children of Israel died in the wilderness. So the Egyptians who came out were never referred to as the children of Israel as you claim, as they were already deceased at this time.
Who were the covenant people of God?
The covenant included both Jew and Gentile from it's inception. Paul states that clearly (Gal 3:8).
Did they have to be Abraham's bloodline to be a child of Israel?
Being from Abraham's bloodline wasn't enough. It had to be Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. ALL THREE. No one else is called a child of Israel.
Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which [is] not of thy seed.
13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.
What was the criteria here? Once a person whether one of Abraham's seed or one bought with his money, or a slave that was born in his house, was circumcised he became one of the children of Israel, God's covenant people.
Simply untrue. They were referred to here as "strangers", or someone outside of the children of Israel. Welcomed? Yes. Children of Israel? No. That's not what scripture is saying, that is what YOU are saying. See the difference?
When a person was circumcised he became one of God's covenant people. If he refused to be circumcised he was cut off from the people of God because he broke the covenant.
Ok.
Israel was God's covenant people but not all of Israel were of Abraham's direct bloodline as I have shown above.
You've shown no such thing, and that is fictitious. None of the scripture you list supports such a thing as I have shown above.
I have shown you plain scripture showing without a doubt that many of the children of Israel were not of the bloodline of Abraham, therefore if you reject these scriptures that is between you and the Lord.
I have shown you with your plain scripture that NOWHERE in it does it say the children of Israel are anyone other than those born of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. NOWHERE in what you list does it call anyone other than them the children of Israel.
That just simply isn't true.
It shows that you are not out to learn but out to disrupt good sound bible study. You may need to find out what the Bible says about that.
I'm surely not out to learn things that the Bible doesn't say, and have someone claim it does say those fictitious things.
You have
NO SCRIPTURE which says what you say, and
MANY SCRIPTURES that contradict what you're saying. Yet, you want to make a claim that someone is disrupting your good sound bible study. The problem is that you want me to ignore the fact that you're wrong. If you were right, you would be able to prove that with sound Bible. But you can't, so you're looking for an
easy out of this.
The solution is simple. Just list the scriptures which say others are also the children of Israel. What you've listed has been soundly refuted. So, either try again, or accept the truth.
God Bless!
