Does Cain’s punishment support evolution?

Notedstrangeperson said:

I don't quite see what point you're trying to make. As the author himself points out, many aggressive Zionists "don't have a drop of Biblical Jewish blood in them".

Writing in huge fonts doesn't make your argument any more valid either

Click to expand...

Well,why do you have trouble answering Matthew 21:43:Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

....????????????






The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel






http://www.missiontoisrael.org/israelite.php#endnote14

progmonk said:

Well that's kind of common fare, all religions that I've looked at except for Bahai are exclusive, do you mean what's up with these Christian Cults and thinking that they are special, well that's just how they roll. Christian Identity/Kinism/British Israelism is a heresy based more on the gospel of "white man is the best" than Jesus' word, seriously this is not the place to espouse aryan ideologies it has nothing to do with Christianity let alone with how God created the world.

Click to expand...

Is it OK to be a Jewish Supremacist?

dagelos said:

Samaria wasn't non-white or colored,it was israelite(John 4)

Click to expand...

Yet Jesus says to both go there and not go there in the lesser and great commissions respectively, is this not a contradiction?

progmonk said:

Yet Jesus says to both go there and not go there in the lesser and great commissions respectively, is this not a contradiction?

Click to expand...

Do you think Samaria was a non-white colored people?

If the Apostles were to go to Israel,why would they go to people who were not Israel?

dagelos said:

Do you think Samaria was a non-white colored people?

Click to expand...

Yes, they were Israeli which is a rather middle-eastern complexion, very different to caucasian. But you still haven't really answered my question, you are basing your idea that Christ sent only to Israel on the Lesser commission, I'd agree with you that that is what the lesser commission is, however the great commission is for all of the world, not just Israel.

If the Apostles were to go to Israel,why would they go to people who were not Israel?

Click to expand...

Because they were told to go to people who were not Israel

dagelos said:

Well,why do you have trouble answering Matthew 21:43:Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Click to expand...

"The point of the story was obvious to the chief priests and the Pharisees (45) and would have been so to anyone who knew the book of Isaiah where the memorable parable of the vineyard (Is. 5:17) symbolised Israel's failure to live up to God's expectations. But the focus here was not on Israel as a whole but on its leadership, whose execution of God's son was about to bring to a head the repeated rejection of his prophets in the past. They could now expect only a wretched end, while others took their place.

Vs 42-44 work out the implications of the story V 42 (quoting Ps. 118:22) illustrates the divine reversal which was soon to happen, when the one rejected by Israel's leaders was to be proved to be the one chosen for the place of highest honour. V 44 takes up the same metaphor with allusions to the destructive stones of Is. 8:14-15 and Dn. 2:34-35,44-45. V 43 is more direct: the kingdom symbolised by the vineyard belongs to God not to them, and he will entrust it to someone more responsible.

A “people” suggests not just a change of leadership but that the very composition of the people of God was to change (along the lines suggested in 8:11-12). It was not, however, a simple matter of Jews being replaced by Gentiles (that would have needed a reference to 'peoples' in the plural, the normal Greek term for Gentiles); rather a new community of God's people was being created (cf. on 16:18), in which both Jews and Gentiles would find their place. What would characterise them was not their nationality, but that they would produce fruit (cf. 3:N, 10; 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 13:8, 26; and especially 21:18-20)."

"New Bible Comentry" published by Inter Varsity Press.


.

progmonk said:

Yes, they were Israeli which is a rather middle-eastern complexion, very different to caucasian. But you still haven't really answered my question, you are basing your idea that Christ sent only to Israel on the Lesser commission, I'd agree with you that that is what the lesser commission is, however the great commission is for all of the world, not just Israel.


Because they were told to go to people who were not Israel

Click to expand...

Right,right - so the Samaritans were not white?

....you are even confusing the modern Israel - you write ''Israeli''
The state of Israel is not the Israel of the Bible.
Israel in the Bible is not reffered to as ''Israeli''

Samaria was Israel,or it's inhabitants were part Israel i.e the woman at the well.
They were not another race.

The Apostles were told to go to Israel - not the world

Matthew 10:6:But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

WHO WERE THE SAMARITANS?

By

Pastor Alan Campbell

The only detailed reference to the Samaritans is to be found in the Second Book of Kings. In the twenty fourth verse of chapter seventeen, we find that when the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel and deported the Ten Tribes into exile in Halah and Habor by the River of Gozan in the cities of the Medes, that the King of Assyria replenished the depopulated territory of Israel with foreigners: 'And the King of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava and from Hamath and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria, instead of the children of Israel and they possessed Samaria and dwelt in the cities thereof'

These people were heathen idolators with no fear of God; but, following attacks on their settlements by wild mountain lions (which they attributed to the anger of the God of the dispossessed Israelites), they petitioned the Assyrian monarch for help. His response was to send back one of the captive priests of Israel to teach them his laws and customs. Therefore we read: 'Then the King of Assyria commanded saying, Carry hither one of the priests whom ye brought from thence, and let them go and dwell there, and let them teach the manner of the God of the land. Then one of the priests whom they had carried away from Samaria came and dwelt in Bethel and taught them how they should fear the Lord' (II Kings 17:27, 28).

When we consider that the Israelites had themselves gone into captivity for their idolatry and Sabbath breaking, that they worshipped Baal and Ashtaroth, and that the official priesthood since the days of Jeroboam had fostered the cult of the Golden Bulls at the shrines of Dan and Bethel, it is hardly surprising that the priest who returned to teach the Samaritans, succeeded only in joining a corrupted form of Israelite belief and worship to the customs which these people already held. Thus while they now paid lip service to the God of Israel, they continued to serve their own gods as well, according to the Biblical account.

Consequently there evolved a mongrelized people of various national and racial backgrounds, practicing a hybrid religion which bore certain outward similarities to the worship of the now exiled Israelites. It was truly a rnulticultural, multi-faith society that had been created. Although called Samarkans, these people did not necessarily dwell in the area of the former Israelite capital of Samaria but tended to be found mostly in the area of Shechem; so much so that both in the Apocrypha and in the writings of Josephus they are referred to as Shechemites. They had developed into a distinctive people by the Hellenistic period, when Shechem was rebuilt after years of desolation.

It was, however, during this period of Hellenization carried out by Alexander the Great and his successors, that a group of religious purists emerged in the Samaritan community, who decided to make a fresh start, and who erected the Samaritan Temple at Mount Gerezim. They developed their own distinctive religious system, including: the worship of the God of Israel, obedience to the Law of Moses, expectation of a coming Day of Judgment, belief in Mount Gerezim as the appointed place of sacrifice and in the return of Moses as the Taheb or the Restorer/Returning One.

From this point onward, there is a rapid deterioration in relations with those of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, who had returned to Palestine from exile in Babylon. They regarded the Samaritans as racially inferior interlopers, and their religion as a spurious counterfeit. At the time of the Maccabean Revolt the Samaritans sided with the Seleucid oppressors, and to placate Antiochus Epiphanes, they even allowed their temple to be dedicated to Zeus Xenious!

Subsequently, in 128 B.C., they were conquered by the Hasmonean ruler John Hyrcanus (the conqueror and incorporator of Edom/ldumea), who destroyed their Temple on Mount Gerezim. At one particular Passover, between A.D. 6 and 9, the Samaritans defiled the Jerusalem Temple by scattering bones in it. Pilgrims travelling south from Galilee to Jerusalem for the religious festivals were afraid to go through Samaritan territory, a fear which was to be justified by the subsequent massacre of Galilean pilgrims by Samaritans at En-gannim in A.D. 52. The Samaritans rebelled against the Romans in A.D. 36. When a fanatic assembled them at Mount Gerezim, promising to reveal the sacred vessels which they had been taught were buried there by Moses, the rebels were ruthlessly massacred by order of Pontius Pilate. During the Jewish Revolt of A.D. 66-70, a group of Samaritans joined in the rebellion and were slaughtered by the Roman Commander Vettulenus Cerealis, once again at Mount Gerezim.

After almost two thousand years, only a tiny remnant of the descendants of the Samaritans remain. They have preserved their religion and culture, and are to be found to this day in Palestine, living in two small communities at Nablus and Holon, with their own scrolls and priesthood.

In spite of our Lord's instruction to His disciples: 'Into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not' (Matthew 10:5), and the incident when the disciples wanted to call down fire from heaven to destroy a Samaritan village which refused to receive them (Luke 9:52-54), Samaritans receive fairly favorable comment from the New Testament writers Luke and John. The one leper out of the ten who returned to Jesus to give thanks for his healing was a Samaritan (Luke 17:16). The Lord Jesus asked for water from, and subsequently ministered to, a woman of Samaria (John 4:4-30 & 39- 40); while we read of a great spiritual revival accompanied by signs, wonders and miracles in Sarnaria (Acts 8:5-25). How do we account for these events? Could there have been two types of Samaritans?

Just as every Jew residing in the Roman Province of Judea, and practicing the Jewish religion at the time of Christ, was not necessarily a true Judahite, a similar situation existed in Samaria, also a Roman territory. Isaiah the prophet had made it clear that, even though the vast bulk of Ten-tribed Israel had been taken into captivity in Assyria, a tiny pathetic handful would survive the mass deportations. This is what he says: 'Yet gleaning grapes shall be left in it as the shaking of an olive tree two or three berries in the top of the uppermost bough, four or five in the outmost branches thereof saith the God of Israel' (Isaiah 17:6).

This accounts for the presence in the Holy Temple at Christ's Presentation as a baby, of the aged prophetess Anna of the Tribe of Asher. It also accounts for the favorable reaction of some Samaritans to Christ, and to the preaching of the Gospel. Some of them, like the leper, and the woman by the well of Sychar, while they were Samaritans by religion (worshipping at Mount Gerezim), and by provincial designation (living in the Roman province of Samaria), were clearly not descended from the mixed multitude who had been sent into the area some seven hundred years earlier, but rather from the little handful of true Israelites who had escaped deportation - the grapes and berries of Isaiah's prophecy.

In her discussion with the Lord Jesus, the woman of Samaria made her racial ancestry crystal clear, for she said to Jesus: 'Art thou greater than our father Jacob which gave us the well...' (John 4:12).

She actually claimed descent from Jacob-lsrael. Furthermore, her own life was symbolic of the experience of the woman Israel, for the Lord Jesus said to her: 'Thou hast had five husbands and he whom thou hast is not thy husband' (John 4: 18)

Israel had indeed had five husbands; her first whom she married at Sinai was:

1. ALMIGHTY GOD. She then served the following succession of alien Empires spoken of in prophecy as her lovers:

2. ASSYRIA

3. BABYLON

4. MEDO-PERSIA

5. GREECE - And the sixth whom she served in the time of Christ was:

6. PAGAN ROME

It was to cancel their bill of divorce to redeem them and bring them again into covenant relationship by His atoning death that Jesus came.

Thus we see revealed the true identity of the various types of Samaritans; and in the ministry of our Lord and His Apostles, to them we see the fulfilrnent of the words recorded by the Old Testament prophet Amos: 'For lo I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth' (Amos 9:9).

1an said:

"The point of the story was obvious to the chief priests and the Pharisees (45) and would have been so to anyone who knew the book of Isaiah where the memorable parable of the vineyard (Is. 5:17) symbolised Israel's failure to live up to God's expectations. But the focus here was not on Israel as a whole but on its leadership, whose execution of God's son was about to bring to a head the repeated rejection of his prophets in the past. They could now expect only a wretched end, while others took their place.

Vs 42-44 work out the implications of the story V 42 (quoting Ps. 118:22) illustrates the divine reversal which was soon to happen, when the one rejected by Israel's leaders was to be proved to be the one chosen for the place of highest honour. V 44 takes up the same metaphor with allusions to the destructive stones of Is. 8:14-15 and Dn. 2:34-35,44-45. V 43 is more direct: the kingdom symbolised by the vineyard belongs to God not to them, and he will entrust it to someone more responsible.

A “people” suggests not just a change of leadership but that the very composition of the people of God was to change (along the lines suggested in 8:11-12). It was not, however, a simple matter of Jews being replaced by Gentiles (that would have needed a reference to 'peoples' in the plural, the normal Greek term for Gentiles); rather a new community of God's people was being created (cf. on 16:18), in which both Jews and Gentiles would find their place. What would characterise them was not their nationality, but that they would produce fruit (cf. 3:N, 10; 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 13:8, 26; and especially 21:18-20)."

"New Bible Comentry" published by Inter Varsity Press.


.

Click to expand...

I take it your using Gentile as meaning Non Jew?

dagelos said:

I take it your using Gentile as meaning Non Jew?

Click to expand...

Israel will consist of Jew and Gentile alike, the criteria being that they all believe, follow and worship Almighty God.

Read it again.

"A “people” suggests not just a change of leadership but that the very composition of the people of God was to change (along the lines suggested in 8:11-12). It was not, however, a simple matter of Jews being replaced by Gentiles (that would have needed a reference to 'peoples' in the plural, the normal Greek term for Gentiles); rather a new community of God's people was being created (cf. on 16:18), in which both Jews and Gentiles would find their place."

.

1an said:

Israel will consist of Jew and Gentile alike, the criteria being that they all believe, follow and worship Almighty God.

Read it again.

"A “people” suggests not just a change of leadership but that the very composition of the people of God was to change (along the lines suggested in 8:11-12). It was not, however, a simple matter of Jews being replaced by Gentiles (that would have needed a reference to 'peoples' in the plural, the normal Greek term for Gentiles); rather a new community of God's people was being created (cf. on 16:18), in which both Jews and Gentiles would find their place."

.

Click to expand...

Malachi 3:6:For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Basically your saying God changed - and opened up to let ''non Jews'' in to Israel - though you do not give the meanings to Jew or Gentile?
I take it,that all a ''non-Jew'' has to do is believe,and not be one of the elect?(but Just believe)?
Matthew 15:24:But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Romans 9:11For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

Romans 8:30:Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Romans 8:29:For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.



GENTILE DOES NOT MEAN NON JEW

dagelos said:

GENTILE DOES NOT MEAN NON JEW

Click to expand...

Gentile: A person who is not Jewish.
- Thefreedictionary.com

Gentile: a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith; especially: a Christian as distinguished from a Jew
- Marriam-webster.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- dictionary.reference.com

Gentile: not Jewish
- OxfordDictionaries.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- Definitions.net


Just to hammer the point home.

Dagelos, we know you believe that Matt 10:6 is binding on the great Commission, I'm asking why are you missing 10:5 where Christ says that they aren't to go to the Samaritans, while the great commision says they should, so you obviously accept that Jesus is widening the scope of his commission, why do you then say that it still holds that they are not to go in among the gentiles?

Notedstrangeperson said:

Gentile: A person who is not Jewish.
- Thefreedictionary.com

Gentile: a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith; especially: a Christian as distinguished from a Jew
- Marriam-webster.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- dictionary.reference.com

Gentile: not Jewish
- OxfordDictionaries.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- Definitions.net


Just to hammer the point home.

Click to expand...

Ah,the modern meaning!

Why don't you give the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance definition?


1828 Definition(Webster's)
GEN'TILE, n. [L. gentilis; from L. gens, nation, race; applied to pagans.]
In the scriptures, a pagan; a worshipper of false gods; any person not a Jew or a christian; a heathen. The Hebrews included in the term goim or nations, all the tribes of men who had not received the true faith,and were not circumcised. The christians translated goim by the L. gentes, and imitated the Jews in giving the name gentiles to all nations who were not Jews nor christians. In civil affairs, the denomination was given to all nations who were not Romans.
GEN'TILE, a. Pertaining to pagans or heathens.




'' In civil affairs, the denomination was given to all nations who were not Romans.''


That would make Jesus and the Apostles,Gentiles - unless you claim otherwise as they were not Romans?

progmonk said:

Dagelos, we know you believe that Matt 10:6 is binding on the great Commission, I'm asking why are you missing 10:5 where Christ says that they aren't to go to the Samaritans, while the great commision says they should, so you obviously accept that Jesus is widening the scope of his commission, why do you then say that it still holds that they are not to go in among the gentiles?

Click to expand...

The Samaritans were not non - whites,did you read the text?

YOU are widening the scope.

If you read Matthew 10:5:These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

Gentiles in Matthew 10:5 is defined in Strong's as....

1484. ethnos eth'-nos probably from 1486; a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; specially, a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually, by implication, pagan):--Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

A race as of the same habit,Tribe,nation,people.

dagelos said:

Why don't you give the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance definition?

1828 Definition(Webster's)
GEN'TILE, n. [L. gentilis; from L. gens, nation, race; applied to pagans.]
In the scriptures, a pagan; a worshipper of false gods; any person not a Jew or a christian; a heathen. The Hebrews included in the term goim or nations, all the tribes of men who had not received the true faith,and were not circumcised. The christians translated goim by the L. gentes, and imitated the Jews in giving the name gentiles to all nations who were not Jews nor christians.

Click to expand...

Your own definiton says a gentile is not a Jew ...

Dagleos said:

'' In civil affairs, the denomination was given to all nations who were not Romans.''

Click to expand...

In civil affairs. Your own quote says in scriptural terms "gentile" simply meant non-Jew. You've just refuted your own argument.

dagelos said:

The Samaritans were not non - whites,did you read the text?

YOU are widening the scope.

If you read Matthew 10:5:These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

Gentiles in Matthew 10:5 is defined in Strong's as....

1484. ethnos eth'-nos probably from 1486; a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; specially, a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually, by implication, pagan):--Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

A race as of the same habit,Tribe,nation,people.

Click to expand...

That doesn't actually answer my question, does or doesn't Christ by telling them to go to the samaritans in the Great Commission widen the scope of the commision from that of Israelites excluding Samaritans to include Samaritans.

Notedstrangeperson said:

Gentile: A person who is not Jewish.
- Thefreedictionary.com

Gentile: a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith; especially: a Christian as distinguished from a Jew
- Marriam-webster.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- dictionary.reference.com

Gentile: not Jewish
- OxfordDictionaries.com

Gentile: of or pertaining to any people not Jewish.
- Definitions.net


Just to hammer the point home.

Click to expand...

Gentile...

gentile - definition of gentile by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Of or relating to a gens, tribe, or people.

Gentile | Define Gentile at Dictionary.com

of or pertaining to a tribe, clan, people, nation, etc.

What does gentile mean?

of or pertaining to a tribe, clan, nation, etc.

Notedstrangeperson said:

Your own definiton says a gentile is not a Jew ...


In civil affairs. Your own quote says in scriptural terms "gentile" simply meant non-Jew. You've just refuted your own argument.

Click to expand...

In civil affairs.........

Were Jesus and the Apostles,gentiles?

progmonk said:

That doesn't actually answer my question, does or doesn't Christ by telling them to go to the samaritans in the Great Commission widen the scope of the commision from that of Israelites excluding Samaritans to include Samaritans.

Click to expand...

Read about the woman at the well(John 4)
Various Samaritans were Israelites.
Read the text I posted.

It seems Matthew 10:5 was localized as they were not to go to the gentiles(nations)/(Ethnos) either.

1484. ethnos eth'-nos probably from 1486; a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; specially, a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually, by implication, pagan):--Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

A race as of the same habit - A Tribe - Nation - People

How does Jesus widen it to include Asians,Africans,Latins etc etc?

dagelos said:

gentile - definition of gentile by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Of or relating to a gens, tribe, or people.

Gentile | Define Gentile at Dictionary.com

of or pertaining to a tribe, clan, people, nation, etc.

What does gentile mean?

of or pertaining to a tribe, clan, nation, etc.

Click to expand...

All of those links - which I gave you - also say a gentile is a non-Jew. One definition does not refute the other.

Dagelos said:

In civil affairs.........

Were Jesus and the Apostles,gentiles?

Click to expand...

If you're trying to suggest Jesus wasn't jewish we've already been through this. Christians were considered atheists under Roman law because they did not pay respects to the Roman gods.