Christiainty vs. Judaisim

[Theological1]

The term Christian and Crusades are still very much in the minds of many cultures around the world. What is it to be Christian? Christ was a Judahite or Jew. The Torah has always spoke of a coming Messiah so the concept is not exclusive to Christains. The ancient Jewish people rejected Christ as the Messiah. Yeshuah/Jesus said that he was the fulfillment of Torah the book of the Law. The current Israeli state has plans to select a Messiah from among its chief rabbis after the reconstruction of the temple. Messianic Judaisim is Judaisim, Christianity is Judaisim what is the difference? It seems that racisim is at the core of it all again. Christianity and Judaisim only differ in the opinion of who the King of the Hebrews will be. The Bible teaches that to believe in Christ makes the believer a Jew inwardly i.e. spiritually. So by the word of God all Christians are Jews or should be as it is written in scripture. The problem goes back a very long way even before the patriarch JUDAH was born. Judaisim is a Proto-Sumerian religion. The founders of Judaisim were Ethiopian or sons of Ham. Romans and many historians from different cultures all agree on this fact. Hitler and many other anti-Semites that flooded Europe with hate propaganda compounded the historical data by saying the Jews originated from monkeys and "mud people" and often displayed Jews in cartoons as half human ape like men with big lips and big noses etc. There can be no doubt that these hateful racial dipictions were directed at the founders of Judaisim and its people who happen to be African or Ethiopians in this case. As we can see today many Ashkenazi Jews don't physically look different from Germans, Polish, Italians or other Europeans. In most cases these people were targeted as traitors because they chose to convert to Judaisim, which many Europeans seen as non-Christian and non-Anglo? That is not to say that Jews did not live in Europe. Christianity as a term on a geographical scale will continue to carry some form of predjudice racial identity with it until it is put into a proper perspective by it's individual follwers. Peace be upon you all:pray:

[stauron]

The Bible teaches that to believe in Christ makes the believer a Jew inwardly i.e. spiritually.

Excellent point. The ethnic Jew/Hebrew/Israelite has no special status, good or bad, before God. The real key is to be circumcised in the heart, a NEW creation. The new creature is not bound by the old laws and codes. Partaking of Christ bestows the highest honor, adoption as sons.

All who are in Christ are part of the "one new man" that has been created from the old ethnic Jew/gentile distinction. Though they may have been "strangers to the covenants and without God" they are now "fellow partakers and members of the household with the saints" (ie faithful Israelites) due to their relation to Christ.

The prejudice and racial problems occur when anyone continues to hold the obsolete notion that there is some special status before God based on bloodline or birth or heritage and not the way John describes :

1:12 But to all who have received him—those who believe in his name—he has given the right to become God’s children 1:13 —children not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God.

[Suede]

Theolgical!

Interesting article here, let's have a look.

"The ancient Jewish people rejected Christ as the Messiah. Yeshuah/Jesus said that he was the fulfillment of Torah the book of the Law. The current Israeli state has plans to select a Messiah from among its chief rabbis after the reconstruction of the temple. "

Ultimately it doesn't matter who they chose, the Bible in accordance with Daniel tells us that the time for the Messiah has passed, and parts of the Talmud agree.

B. San 97a: "Our masters taught as follows of the particular seven-year period at whose end [Messiah] son of David will appear" (This seems to refer directly to the Danielic final week!)

B. San 97b: "Rav said: All times set for redemption have passed, and the matter now depends only on repentance and good deeds" (All time calculations had been fulfilled).

B. San 97b: "R. Samuel bar Nahmani said in the name of R. Jonathan: Blaste be the bones of those who presume to calculate the time of redemption. For they are apt to say, 'Since redemption has not come at the time expected, it will never come.' Rather, one must wait for it...what then delays its coming? The measure of justice delays it..."

The fact that Rabbinical Jews wish to chose their own Messiah doesn't surprise me at all. One, this isn't the first time Rabbinical Judaism has named a Messiah. Bar-Kocheba was named the Messiah in 135 AD, only to be overthrown by the Romans. They've deviated from the Bible for some time now and are still attempting to put God in their terms instead of the other way around.

"Messianic Judaisim is Judaisim, Christianity is Judaisim what is the difference? It seems that racisim is at the core of it all again."

Sort of, but not really. A Jew is unfortunately thought of as a race, it isn't though. It's a person of a faith. Rabbinical Jews will use the
halachic or Jewish law to state that a person born of a Jewish woman is a Jew. Unfortunately, this is not Biblical and has been challenged many times, most popularly perhaps by the Shalit Case of 1968.


"Christianity and Judaisim only differ in the opinion of who the King of the Hebrews will be."

That's a little bit vague there, but certainly a noteworthy point. There are other differences though.

"So by the word of God all Christians are Jews or should be as it is written in scripture. "

Yes, that's true. That brings us back to the whole race thing and how bunk that theory is.

"The founders of Judaisim were Ethiopian or sons of Ham."

No not really. One, just because Judaism shows up after Sumeria doesn't mean the founders were sons of Ham. Biblically speaking they are the sons of Isaac and in turn the sons of Shem.

"Hitler and many other anti-Semites that flooded Europe with hate propaganda compounded the historical data by saying the Jews originated from monkeys and "mud people" and often displayed Jews in cartoons as half human ape like men with big lips and big noses etc. There can be no doubt that these hateful racial dipictions were directed at the founders of Judaisim and its people who happen to be African or Ethiopians in this case."

Well this is an unfortunate mark of living in a Post Darwin world. But 'mud people' isn't exclusive to Jews. At the same time and just before Hitler, in America we said the same thing about Slavic or Eastern European people. There's a collective thought that ugliness and stupidity go hand in hand. So that doesn't really help support the African slant on Judaism.

"As we can see today many Ashkenazi Jews don't physically look different from Germans, Polish, Italians or other Europeans."

Correct! 85% of 'Jews' today are of European or Caucasian descent. Most are NOT Semitic.

"In most cases these people were targeted as traitors because they chose to convert to Judaisim, which many Europeans seen as non-Christian and non-Anglo?"

Not quite. This actually happened roughly 900 years prior to WWII. Here's a brief history,

In 740 A.D. king Bulan of Khazaria decided to adopt the Judaistic religion for his country. A number of Jews were already living there. So he converted to Judaism, along with all his officials, and his whole nation ended up being known as a nation of Jews. In 970 A.D. Russia came in and dominated the situation, and the Khazars were scattered, many of them going down into Poland and Lithuania, where at the dawn of our modern civilization the largest concentration of Jews were found.


Take care,

SUEDE

[Theological1]

That is exactly my point! The obsolete notion is complex and cannont be over simplified. This notion has segregated Christianity not only into a different class from Judaisim, but into hundreds of denominations. The gospel was to be proclaimed to the Jew first and then to the Gentiles.(Matt.10:5-7) The only laws that would not bound a follower of Christ are the sacraficial offerings technically. Christ said he came not to do away with the law but to fufill it.(Matt.5:17-20)As a matter of fact, the Messianic Jews i.e. Christians were charged by Jesus to observe the Law more zealously than the Pharisees and Rabbis.(Matt 5:20) There is clearly a deep racial problem embedded in the ideology of Westren Christianty. This is very clear by the rational of the Westren Church and it's mosaic of racial doctrines and denomonations. Ultimately its inability to recongnize it's foundation will be it's undoing as an organized institution! It is an error to view the importance of the "ethinic Jew" as old news because prophecy itself would be obsolete without the ethinic Jew. In my opinion it is racism and selective interpertation that corrupts Messianic Judaisim because without accurate historical reference the Bible becomes a book of sensationalisim void of all prophecy. Peace be upon you all.

[Theological1]

Thank you for your analysis Suede!

The African slant you perceived is actually historical fact noted by Jewish and Roman historians. Flavius Josephus the celebrated Jewish historian states: Ham or Cham, the father of Cush, inhabited the country now called Judea and called it from his own name Canaan. Judadas, settled the Judadeans a nation of the Western Ethiopians and left them his name as did Sabas to the Sabeans. In 80 A.D Roman historian Tacitus, declares Jews originated in Ethiopia and fled to Arabia during the reign of King Cephus.


The King of Salem Melchiz'edek already served the "Most High God" when the patriarch Abraham arrived.(Gen.14:14-17) This King was obviously a "Judadean" or what we call Judean because he did not need to be converted by Abraham. He lived in the heart of Canaan and he was King over a people. Trade tablets from the the period of Amarna in Egypt called ancient Jerusalem Ursalimu. It means founded by the God Shalim or Salimu. This was ancient Jerusalem this explains how Caleb son of Jephunun was a Chief of the families of Judah although he was technically a Kennizite not to be confused with Kenite.(Joshua 14:6-7) So yes "Judaisim" or Judadisim was practiced in Westren Ethiopia or Canaan before Abraham arrived, it is Biblical and Historical fact.



I am very happy someone knows the history of Khazaria! The history of the Ashkenazi Jew is very special in relation to Edom or Idumeans. The Talmudic observation is abetted by scripture which names Ashkenaz as descending not from Shem but from Japheth through Gomer, and whoseuncles were Magog and Tubal.(See Gen. 10:3) Again Josephus explains the roots of the Ashkenazim Jew in relation to Idumeans:

I
n 95 A.D Hyrcanus took also the Dora and Marrisa , cities of Idumea [ Greek for Edom ] and subdued all the Idumeans ; and permitted them to stay in the country of their forefathers if they became circumcised , and make use of the laws of the Judeans." The Idumeans did convert, hereafter they were known as the Jews. [Ant. Book 13, ch. 9 part 1] The Edomite Jews were cast out of Palestine in 70 A.D by Titus at the head of the Roman army making their way to Europe, Khazaria and the Middle East labeled as "Jews".


You are correct in saying the conversion happened before WII, but Christian Rome was still calling the shots even then and the out come has lasted thus far. Thus we have the term Vatican Jew which is basically recognition of the apostate Jew. Christ makes note of a Synagogue of Satan (Rev2:9) Synagogue means assembly i.e goverment.



The Byzantium under Roman Christainty and Persians under Islam created pressure on the turkish and slavic people of Khazaria to pick a side or become booty for the larger empires. Of course it was not long before the Khagan selected Judaisim from the "Jews" who were traders and farmers in the region they intermarried etc. This method of amalgamation is very common and can be traced back to several Assyrian Kings who defeated Israel and ran massive Draconic Deportation methods against the fighting men of Israel.(2Kings 17:6-6) This is where the racsist myth that a man is a Jew by way of his mother not his father comes into being. It's purpose is of course for the discrimination policies practiced under the law of return in the current Israeli state.



Mizrahi Jews not to be confused with Sephardic Jews reject the Jewish Tumuld. It is filled with racsist rhetoric and was composed of non-hebrew sources during the authors fictitiously claim it was created during the Babylonian exile. It is that book that gives spiritual Zionisim a bad name and promotes racial tension among Jews and gives rise to myths of racial superiorty over black or Mizrahi Jews.

The time of the Messiah is on schedule in my opinion because Magog is in the holy place by historical accounts. The ninth-century monk Druthmar of Aquitaine, in his commentary on Matthew 24:14 in Expositio in Matthaeum Evangelistam, stated that the Gazari, or Khazars, dwelt "in the lands of Gog and Magog.



It seems that the majority of Christian authorities have missed what can very well constitute the first wave of Magog as foretold by the prophets in scripture. It only makes sense that the Tumuld being essentialy non-Jewish would make no mention of it this either.

There is some knowledge hopefully without the slant, it was inspiring for me to see a post that reflected some knowledege of history. Peace be upon you all:pray:

[stauron]

That is exactly my point! The obsolete notion is complex and cannont be over simplified. This notion has segregated Christianity not only into a different class from Judaisim, but into hundreds of denominations. The gospel was to be proclaimed to the Jew first and then to the Gentiles.(Matt.10:5-7) The only laws that would not bound a follower of Christ are the sacraficial offerings technically. Christ said he came not to do away with the law but to fufill it.(Matt.5:17-20)As a matter of fact, the Messianic Jews i.e. Christians were charged by Jesus to observe the Law more zealously than the Pharisees and Rabbis.(Matt 5:20) There is clearly a deep racial problem embedded in the ideology of Westren Christianty. This is very clear by the rational of the Westren Church and it's mosaic of racial doctrines and denomonations. Ultimately its inability to recongnize it's foundation will be it's undoing as an organized institution! It is an error to view the importance of the "ethinic Jew" as old news because prophecy itself would be obsolete without the ethinic Jew. In my opinion it is racism and selective interpertation that corrupts Messianic Judaisim because without accurate historical reference the Bible becomes a book of sensationalisim void of all prophecy. Peace be upon you all.

You are not being very clear here. Are you saying there is still a special status for those with the blood of Abraham?

All the Jews/Israelites/Hebrews that understood became Christians and counted their previous life as dung the way Paul did. The new creation is now the dividing line in the same way that the Law/Old Covenant was before Christ.

The only way to have a righteousness that exceeds the pharasees and rabbis is to have Christ. Christ is the righteousness apart from the Law. The Law is a ministry of death.

[Bulldog]

You are not being very clear here. Are you saying there is still a special status for those with the blood of Abraham?

Mat 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.


The covenant was conditional that the Jews remained faithful to God.

Exodus 19:1-6
In the third month after the children of Israel had gone out of the land of Egypt, on the same day, they came to the Wilderness of Sinai.2 For they had departed from Rephidim, had come to the Wilderness of Sinai, and camped in the wilderness. So Israel camped there before the mountain.3 And Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel:4 ‘You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Myself.5 ‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine.6 ‘And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel. NKJV


(emphasis mine)

[Suede]

Theological1

" This notion has segregated Christianity not only into a different class from Judaisim, but into hundreds of denominations."

Well I agree that Christianity is rightfully viewed as one of the many Judaisms that did and still do exist.

"The gospel was to be proclaimed to the Jew first and then to the Gentiles.(Matt.10:5-7) The only laws that would not bound a follower of Christ are the sacraficial offerings technically. Christ said he came not to do away with the law but to fufill it.(Matt.5:17-20)As a matter of fact, the Messianic Jews i.e. Christians were charged by Jesus to observe the Law more zealously than the Pharisees and Rabbis.(Matt 5:20)"

You're failing to understand covenants here. You should read the book of Hebrews. For a time the Jewish believers were to keep the written law, but at the advent of the New Covenant, that ceased. The written Law was but a shadow, Christ is the object that casts the shadow. To go under the written Law is to smack the work of Christ.

"There is clearly a deep racial problem embedded in the ideology of Westren Christianty. This is very clear by the rational of the Westren Church and it's mosaic of racial doctrines and denomonations."

I don't really see racial problems in the Church. Are there some there, sure there are. But, that doesn't mean that they run deep or that they are a major problem. Take care,

SUEDE

[Suede]

Theological1


"The African slant you perceived is actually historical fact noted by Jewish and Roman historians. Flavius Josephus the celebrated Jewish historian states: Ham or Cham, the father of Cush, inhabited the country now called Judea and called it from his own name Canaan. Judadas, settled the Judadeans a nation of the Western Ethiopians and left them his name as did Sabas to the Sabeans. In 80 A.D Roman historian Tacitus, declares Jews originated in Ethiopia and fled to Arabia during the reign of King Cephus."

I still fail to see any reality or link between Africa and Jews, aside from their slave days in Egypt. The Bible states that Jews are descendents of Shem, not Ham. So the run around here is futile.

"The King of Salem Melchiz'edek already served the "Most High God" when the patriarch Abraham arrived.(Gen.14:14-17) This King was obviously a "Judadean" or what we call Judean because he did not need to be converted by Abraham. He lived in the heart of Canaan and he was King over a people."

You're getting into a bit of problems listing things out of order. Judah would come about much, much later after Abraham. It's wrong to link up Canaanites with Judaeans. That's sort of on par with saying that before Europeans came to Amercia, Indians were United States Citizens. We really can't put the cart before the donkey. It's incorrect to claim that Melchizedek is from the land of Judah.


"Trade tablets from the the period of Amarna in Egypt called ancient Jerusalem Ursalimu. It means founded by the God Shalim or Salimu. This was ancient Jerusalem this explains how Caleb son of Jephunun was a Chief of the families of Judah although he was technically a Kennizite not to be confused with Kenite.(Joshua 14:6-7) So yes "Judaisim" or Judadisim was practiced in Westren Ethiopia or Canaan before Abraham arrived, it is Biblical and Historical fact."

There's no link here either. Caleb was with Moses, not pre-Moses. He wasn't in the land of Caanan prior to Moses or the Israelites. I fail to see connection here.

"The history of the Ashkenazi Jew is very special in relation to Edom or Idumeans. The Talmudic observation is abetted by scripture which names Ashkenaz as descending not from Shem but from Japheth through Gomer, and whose uncles were Magog and Tubal.(See Gen. 10:3) "

Yes, this is why most Jews today are not Semitic.

"The time of the Messiah is on schedule in my opinion because Magog is in the holy place by historical accounts. The ninth-century monk Druthmar of Aquitaine, in his commentary on Matthew 24:14 in Expositio in Matthaeum Evangelistam, stated that the Gazari, or Khazars, dwelt "in the lands of Gog and Magog."

Well, ultimately our opinions don't matter, but the Bible does. It's quite clear that the Messiah was to appear in the 1st century. Jesus fulfills this.

"It seems that the majority of Christian authorities have missed what can very well constitute the first wave of Magog as foretold by the prophets in scripture. It only makes sense that the Tumuld being essentialy non-Jewish would make no mention of it this either."

Well as far as 'End Times' go, I'm a Preterist so I put that event well in the past, 70 AD. The Talmud does contain quite a collection of awful and hateful phrases, but that's fine. To me, it's just another book that can and should easily be ignored.

"There is some knowledge hopefully without the slant, it was inspiring for me to see a post that reflected some knowledege of history."

No offense taken. You've got some interesting ideas, but you need to organize and filter them. Many of them are out of order or are counter to the Bible. I must agree with another poster here that your hypothesis was never clearly stated, and therefore your thesis isn't clearly understood. You should flat out list, this is what I am getting at, and then list your 'proofs'. It's hard to tell if you are aginst Jew, or against Christians; are you one of those 'Black Jews' like Bobby Brown, or are you a Falasha? There's some interesting material here, but the presentation of it leaves a lot to be desired. No offense meant. Take care,

SUEDE

[Theological1]

Stauron: "Christ is the righteousness apart from the Law"

Those are your words and your understanding however, Christ said this: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Lawuntil everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19) Christ is teaching from the Law through the book of Matthew. I understand covenants very well it seem that the foot notes of study bibles has led some of you astray. Christ was the sin offering that redeemed us from the "judgement" of the Law. Last time I checked there was still a sky and prophecy is yet to be completed. The Law was not abolished by Christ he clearly says it even if you gather scriptures that reflect what Christ may have meant, for your convience you can read what he said clearly. For what the Law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the Law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but to the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4)


The remnant of Israel does have special status but this is not a civil status it is spirtual. It is one of grace. Please understand the Israelite remnants will be saved by a special grace prepared for them apart from the covenant that Christ has set for the gentiles.

In Romans speaking of the Israelite remnants it says: As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as the election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gift and his call are irrevocable. (Roman 11:28-29) This relates to the fact that God does not lie or go back on his word. So that speaks to the point Bulldog made "That the covenant was conditional only if they remained fathful to God. Why would God forsake the Jews covenants and make an eternal covenant with Gentiles and totally ignore the first promises he made to the patriarchs on Israel's behalf? Again we see Christan sensationalisim at it's best, all the promises he made to the patriarchs just go out the window in the new Christianity.


The promise to Abraham still stands and was a covenant with him. I will say it again a remnant of Jews have a special status because of the promises made to the Patriarchs.


In my opinion Christianity seperates from Judaisim for two main reasons, sensationalisim and racsism. Christ did not do away with the Law Christian simply don't want in involve themselves in Messainc Judaisim for various reasons. Many Christain denomonations believe their leaders are the "elect of God" which is a remnant of the Israelites. Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses even some main stream denomonations hold this theory secretly yet abolish the Law as something old and no longer needed. Surely Christ did not want us to do away with Laws and precepts the Prophets lived by. What would prophecy be without the Law? Messianic Hebrews follow the commandments of the Law just as Yeshua/Jesus did. Christians should try to do the same. Peace be upon you all.

[Theological1]

I am a Mizrahi Jew.
The Black Hebrews of the Damonas district in Israel are legal citizens now, just like the Whites ones. To answer your question we are related in the fact that we are all Jews by rabbinical ruling under Israeli law at least last time I checked.

I never claimed to be an authority on english or "thesis" so bare with me. I find it odd that you agreed with my points at first but now you cant seem to read it and understand it. Thats fine because I realize there were typo and a few phrase errors but your "proof reading" comments were somewhat slanderous.


" I still fail to see any reality or link between Africa and Jews, aside from their slave days in Egypt. The Bible states that Jews are descendents of Shem, not Ham. So the run around here is futile."

The Bible does not state that "Jews" are decendants of Shem it stated Eber was and later he was denoted as Heber/Hebrew. There is no run around here, I only ask that you at the least state what the scripture says before you say something is futile.

There is nothing wrong with the reality of the link because you fail to see it my friend. Read the scripture concernig Melchize'dek he in ancient Jerusalem when Abraham arrives. He is already the King of "Salem" before the patriarch with the name Judah was born. Salem was in ancient Judea I will get to this point in a second.


"You're getting into a bit of problems listing things out of order. Judah would come about much, much later after Abraham. It's wrong to link up Canaanites with Judaeans. That's sort of on par with saying that before Europeans came to Amercia, Indians were United States Citizens. We really can't put the cart before the donkey. It's incorrect to claim that Melchizedek is from the land of Judah".


That was malicious and you displayed a little intellectual ridicule on that one, but I am a humble man no offense taken.

It seems you did not read very much of my post before you made your conclusions. Flavius Josephus the celebrated Jewish historian states: Ham or Cham, the father of Cush, inhabited the country now called Judea and called it from his own name Canaan. Judadas, settled the Judadeans a nation of the Western Ethiopians and left them his name as did Sabas to the Sabeans. In 80 A.D Roman historian Tacitus, declares Jews originated in Ethiopia and fled to Arabia during the reign of King Cephus."
The Jewish and Roman historians made these observations. Bobby Brown and I did not make them up.(joke) Information on these "historians" can be found at the library or book store or internet etc, I urge you to research their works.

It's is obvious the tribe of "Judadeans" which the historian Josephus mentioned were living in the region of Canaan practicing Judadisim. In fact Melchiz'edek was already in the region and new of the Most High God. Logically Melchiz'edek was practicing Judaisim if he was a "Priest" of the Most High God when Abraham met him. He was a King also so his subjects would have been what Josephus called Judadeans. What is so hard about understanding the connection? Ethiopians are African, Canaanites are mentioned as the son sons of Ham nobody disputed that.


"There's no link here either. Caleb was with Moses, not pre-Moses. He wasn't in the land of Caanan prior to Moses or the Israelites. I fail to see connection here."


Who said anything about a "pre-Moses" nor was Moses ever in the land of Canaan. If Caleb was not from a region or inside of Canaan why does the Bible make mention that his father and he were Kenizzites/ Ha'qunizzi?

I explained how Caleb "of course later in history" could have been a Chief of the families of Judah although he was native to the region of Canaan. He was a Kennizite look it up they were a sub tribe of Canaan already in the region, so they didn't have to pick him up at "Bobby Browns" house on the way to the promise land he was already there practicing Judaisim.

It's strange how you yourself agreed that the Jews are not a race but instead a Theology but at the first hint that Africans may have been it's progenitors my post became unreadable redundant. (The irony of it all).

I would not care if the evidence said that Japanese founded Judaisim or that all the patriarch were whites with blonde hair blue eyes if it was true, and could be stated by "multi-ethinic" sources. I enjoy learning and testing knowledge concerning Messianic Judaisim and Christainty the myths and truths the similarites and prophetic messages etc regardless. It's not a racial thing or Black Jew thing it's a theological thing most ancient truths fly in the face of popular belifes anyway do some research. Peace be upon you all:pray:

[stauron]

Stauron: "Christ is the righteousness apart from the Law"

Those are your words and your understanding however, Christ said this: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Lawuntil everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19) Christ is teaching from the Law through the book of Matthew. I understand covenants very well it seem that the foot notes of study bibles has led some of you astray. Christ was the sin offering that redeemed us from the "judgement" of the Law. Last time I checked there was still a sky and prophecy is yet to be completed. The Law was not abolished by Christ he clearly says it even if you gather scriptures that reflect what Christ may have meant, for your convience you can read what he said clearly. For what the Law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the Law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but to the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4)
Well, I am not sure why you think that I said this:3:21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God (which is attested by the law and the prophets) has been disclosed— 3:22 namely, the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus ChristGod revealed a higher standard then the old law could achieve due to its weakness. Which is exactly the point of the verse in Romans 8. I don't understand why you think that contradicts me, but the Law couldn't perform (indeed it was powerless) so God did. You seem to have conveniently left out any comment about the Law being a ministry of death and condemnation. A veil still covers those that read the Law with out seeing Christ as the fulfillment of it.

Since the old heaven and earth were the Old Covenant, and that has been abolished, those in Christ are now part of the New Creation. Christ's days were the "days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written."

The remnant of Israel does have special status but this is not a civil status it is spirtual. It is one of grace. Please understand the Israelite remnants will be saved by a special grace prepared for them apart from the covenant that Christ has set for the gentiles.Here you start up racism again. God is no respecter of persons. There is one truth, one narrow way, one saviour; Christ the annointed. The Israelites that receive/received "special grace" became/become Christians.

In Romans speaking of the Israelite remnants it says: As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as the election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gift and his call are irrevocable. (Roman 11:28-29) This relates to the fact that God does not lie or go back on his word. So that speaks to the point Bulldog made "That the covenant was conditional only if they remained fathful to God. Why would God forsake the Jews covenants and make an eternal covenant with Gentiles and totally ignore the first promises he made to the patriarchs on Israel's behalf? Again we see Christan sensationalisim at it's best, all the promises he made to the patriarchs just go out the window in the new Christianity. WOW, this is a tangle. Your question "why would God forsake the Jews covenants and make an eternal covenant with Gentiles" reveals your lack of understanding. The New Covenant is the hope of the fathers. They looked forward to Christ. The Gentiles are fellow heirs with the Jews/Israelites/Hebrews. They are members of the covenants of promise. In Christ is a bold new access to God and all who believe are born again and brought near, because He " nullified in his flesh the law of commandments in decrees.." The new covenant is composed of both and both are made into one new body.

The promise to Abraham still stands and was a covenant with him. I will say it again a remnant of Jews have a special status because of the promises made to the Patriarchs.
Racism is the belief that people of different races have different qualities and abilities, and that some races are inherently superior or inferior. (From encarta.com's online dictionary) The covenant to Abraham was fulfilled in Christ and all who believe are members.

In my opinion Christianity seperates from Judaisim for two main reasons, sensationalisim and racsism. Christ did not do away with the Law Christian simply don't want in involve themselves in Messainc Judaisim for various reasons. Many Christain denomonations believe their leaders are the "elect of God" which is a remnant of the Israelites. Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses even some main stream denomonations hold this theory secretly yet abolish the Law as something old and no longer needed. Surely Christ did not want us to do away with Laws and precepts the Prophets lived by. What would prophecy be without the Law? Messianic Hebrews follow the commandments of the Law just as Yeshua/Jesus did. Christians should try to do the same. Peace be upon you all.


Well you are separating yourself from Christianity by trying to reintroduce a dividing wall that Christ tore down. I can just suggest that you take Paul's ministry to heart:

Seeing that I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, 11:14 if somehow I could provoke my people to jealousy and save some of them.

Paul was taking the promises to the Gentiles and they were gladly receiving them. The Jews were following Paul around calling him a blasphemer and stoning him. Why were the Jews jealous? Paul was extending the "promises to the fathers" to Gentiles.

As far as the Law is concerned:

7:12 For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come as well.

7:18 On the one hand a former command is set aside because it is weak and useless, 7:19 for the law made nothing perfect.

8:13 When he speaks of a new covenant, he makes the first obsolete. Now what is growing obsolete and aging is about to disappear.

10:1 For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself, and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year after year, to perfect those who come to worship.

I guess your thread should be called Judaism vs Christianity instead.

[Theological1]

The Jews from every nation have not returned to Israel. (Review the covenants of the patriarchs.) The current Israeli nation is composed of mostly non Semitic-Jews of European descent they have placed themselves as an authority on who can be a Jew and who is not under the law of return. Most Christians know the current Jews who control Israel are "Apostate" Jews and yet they send millions of dollars from Churches to aid in "Colonialisim" masked as Zionisim. The founding of the current Israeli nation is a political campaign and it's characteristics "don't line up" with what the prophets foretold of the true Restoration. Most Christians know this, but still support them because of the color of their skin European origin i.e. politics.(That is racsism my friend) There are even some Ashkenazim Jews that agree. The non-Semitic Jews are the first wave of Gog who the prophets foretold would invade the holy land for a time.(Read Khazaria 13th Tribe it was even wrote by an Ashkenazim Jew)

There were multiple aspects to the covenants made with the patriarchs you should know that. Christ in his first coming fulfilled only part of all prophecy that the prophets spoke of. It is nonsense for one to say that a man can not follow the Law and follow Yeshua/Jesus as the Messiah. That is what Messianc Judaisim is and what Christianity should become.

Sensationlisim rules your understanding of scripture instead of seeking knowledge and understanding you seem to adhere only to scripture that agree's more with your personal ideology than truth.

Your misunderstanding stems from your unwillingness to accept what Christ clearly says: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; (I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.) I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven

You stand on what you hope the apostles meant in other scriptures when "Christ Himself" is noted here giving clear understanding.

That is the sticking point here my friend. All prophecy has not been fulfilled, that we can both agree on. So the practice of the Law is not abolished just it's punishment in that if you mess up you are not sentenced to death as was the custom, one may now repent under the Covenant of Salvation.

7:12 For when the priesthood changes, a (change in the law) must come as well. Again here it clearly says that Changes are made In the LAW.

7:18 On the one hand a (former commands) is set aside because it is weak and useless, 7:19 for the law made nothing perfect. (This is Speaking of commands with in the Law)

8:13 When he speaks of a new covenant, he makes the first obsolete. Now what is growing obsolete and aging is about to disappear.(You do your self a deservice here because clearly "this alone" out of context would imply God does not fufill his promises)

10:1 For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself, and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year after year, to perfect those who come to worship.

Again this does not say that the Law is abolished, it clearly shows that changes concernig some of the commands of the Law and sacrificial ordinances have changed through Christ.


To the issue of the special spirtual status. I did not say the Jew is better than anyone that was slanderous to imply that. Status in your mind automatically equates being "better" than someone yet you you quote the definition of racisim. (Insteresting)

This will help you understand:
I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don't you know what scripture says in the passage about Elijah how he appealed to God against Israel: Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left and they are trying to kill me? And what was God's answer to him? I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal. So, too at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.(Romans 11:1-5)

Revelation reflects multiple status when mention is made of the elect 144,000 from each tribe. It does not mean special status in "race" or civil life all grace is special! Should we take offense at the Levites who were made priest unto God? Should we take offense to the fact the the heavenly New Jerusalem will have the apostles names and the twelve tribes of Israel's names carved on it's gate. The spiritual realm has order and status but it all relates to grace so it does not make me better than you. You are mistaken if you think that God has done away with the covenants of the patriarchs. Different aspects of those Covenants were fulfilled when Christ came but all is not complete until the in gathering under the Christ in the second coming. (Read Ezek. and Rev)

One last point: Race in the Bible is a complicated issue because the terms Creeds, Race, Colors all present many different meanings. However to think that Gentiles are the new Jews ethinically just because "you" said so, conflicts with there being a remnant. The remnant of Israelites are different from spiritually circumsised Jews i.e. Christians.(Not better than just different) You don't think he meant a remnant of Gentiles do you? It is clear that the Jew in God's eye is still a people scattered through out the world. If it were not how could the Arabs even today be known as the son's of Ishmael and they are a race of people? What would define prophecy if there was no ethnicity? It is sad but it is reality, most Westren Christian are against Jews but most Jews are non-Semitic imposters. Christianity is in denile of it's roots for "racial reasons" and the non-Semitic Jews who rule Israel are in denile of their ethincity because of racial reasons. Both should try looking outside of themselves to truly understand the message of Christ and prophecy.

Peace be upon you all.

[Suede]

Theological1

"The Bible does not state that "Jews" are decendants of Shem it stated Eber was and later he was denoted as Heber/Hebrew. There is no run around here, I only ask that you at the least state what the scripture says before you say something is futile."
Well, Shem is where Semitic peoples originated from. Granted, most "Jews" today are of Eastern European descent, but this means that they are under Japheth. I still fail to see the Hamitic connection.

"It seems you did not read very much of my post before you made your conclusions. Flavius Josephus the celebrated Jewish historian states: Ham or Cham, the father of Cush, inhabited the country now called Judea and called it from his own name Canaan. Judadas, settled the Judadeans a nation of the Western Ethiopians and left them his name as did Sabas to the Sabeans. In 80 A.D Roman historian Tacitus, declares Jews originated in Ethiopia and fled to Arabia during the reign of King Cephus."
The Jewish and Roman historians made these observations. Bobby Brown and I did not make them up.(joke) Information on these "historians" can be found at the library or book store or internet etc, I urge you to research their works."

No, I read your post throughly, but I'm still unconvinced. Quoting Tacitus and Jospehus over the Bible won't have any effect on me. Sorry, not trying to be rude here or cause offense, I just don't see it. Another problem here, and elsewhere, is jumping to conclusions. In the above, what starts out as Cush, is later replaced by Ethiopia. The location of Cush is not known though. It is popularly placed as Ethiopia because of the King James Bible, but that is no way conclusive. A lot of modern scholarship places Cush in the Middle East, to the east of the Red Sea, not to the West of it. Internal evidence in the Bible and external evidence as noted in Josephus support a Middle Eastern origin, not an African one for Cush.
"It's is obvious the tribe of "Judadeans" which the historian Josephus mentioned were living in the region of Canaan practicing Judadisim. In fact Melchiz'edek was already in the region and new of the Most High God. Logically Melchiz'edek was practicing Judaisim if he was a "Priest" of the Most High God when Abraham met him. He was a King also so his subjects would have been what Josephus called Judadeans. What is so hard about understanding the connection? Ethiopians are African, Canaanites are mentioned as the son sons of Ham nobody disputed that."

Well part of the problem above is in assumptions. This assumes an awful lot, particularly with Melchizedek. As far as saying he was practicing Judaism is a bit too much given the little we know. Obviously he was a monotheist that worshipped the same God that Abraham did. But to say he practiced Judaism? No, that's a bit much. Similarly, Abraham was not a "Jew" nor did he practice Judaism. Nor did Enoch, or Noah, or Adam. Judaism later.

"Who said anything about a "pre-Moses" nor was Moses ever in the land of Canaan. If Caleb was not from a region or inside of Canaan why does the Bible make mention that his father and he were Kenizzites/ Ha'qunizzi? I explained how Caleb "of course later in history" could have been a Chief of the families of Judah although he was native to the region of Canaan. He was a Kennizite look it up they were a sub tribe of Canaan already in the region, so they didn't have to pick him up at "Bobby Browns" house on the way to the promise land he was already there practicing Judaisim."

Two problems here are as follows. One, no one, and I mean no one is positive of a connection with Kenezites. There is not a way to trace where they came from, or what son of Noah they came from. Some scholars believe there's a Esau connection, but of course if this is true, this makes them once again descendants of Shem, not Ham. Also, there is no way to conclude that they were practicing Judaism based off of land location. Monotheists? Yes, they may very well have been. Jews? No.

"It's strange how you yourself agreed that the Jews are not a race but instead a Theology but at the first hint that Africans may have been it's progenitors my post became unreadable redundant. (The irony of it all)."

The problem is that most people don't understand what Jews are. The normative standard is that they are a race. This is wrong of course, but to avoid semanitc games I go with it. However though, historically though, people that have practiced Judaism have been Semitic, which means they descend from Shem, not Ham.

"I would not care if the evidence said that Japanese founded Judaisim or that all the patriarch were whites with blonde hair blue eyes if it was true, and could be stated by "multi-ethinic" sources. I enjoy learning and testing knowledge concerning Messianic Judaisim and Christainty the myths and truths the similarites and prophetic messages etc regardless. It's not a racial thing or Black Jew thing it's a theological thing most ancient truths fly in the face of popular belifes anyway do some research."

Well, I must call your bluff on this one. Take it with a grain of salt though, ok? I think you DO care about the races that lead to the 'Jewish' people, if not, we wouldn't be here. Not to say that you are like this, but I have encountered White Supremecists that try to get the patriarchs and Jesus to be 'white' and descended from Japheth. This is wrong. We could say that it doesn't ultimately matter, but it does. We need to promote good scholarship. It seems that you are accepting ideas without a critical examination of them. The defense given is very thin and weak at many points and jumps to conclusions often based on assumptions. Again, not a personal attack against you. We must understand that 'Jews' or the Hebrews are historically understood to come from Semitic people. Take care,

SUEDE

[stauron]

There were multiple aspects to the covenants made with the patriarchs you should know that. Christ in his first coming fulfilled only part of all prophecy that the prophets spoke of. It is nonsense for one to say that a man can not follow the Law and follow Yeshua/Jesus as the Messiah. That is what Messianc Judaisim is and what Christianity should become.

Sensationlisim rules your understanding of scripture instead of seeking knowledge and understanding you seem to adhere only to scripture that agree's more with your personal ideology than truth.

Your misunderstanding stems from your unwillingness to accept what Christ clearly says: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; (I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.) I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven

You stand on what you hope the apostles meant in other scriptures when "Christ Himself" is noted here giving clear understanding.

That is the sticking point here my friend. All prophecy has not been fulfilled, that we can both agree on. So the practice of the Law is not abolished just it's punishment in that if you mess up you are not sentenced to death as was the custom, one may now repent under the Covenant of Salvation.
We don't agree on that. All prophecy has been fulfilled.

Christ did not abolish the Law, He fulfilled it and it is now obsolete the same way that a contract is obsolete when the terms and conditions have been fulfilled. Christ paid the debt and the Old Covenant is no longer binding.

You continue to dance around the verses that claim that the Law was a ministry of death and condemnation. That it actually gave power to sin.

Considering that Christians have every spritual blessing in Christ you are plain wrong when you say there is some other spritual benefit to be had outside of Christ.

Lastly, there is a reason that Jerusalem and the temple and the priesthood and the genealogical records were all destroyed. The had outlived their usefullness and were fading away, just like the Old Covenant. Christ came on that generation and required the blood of all the prophets those rebels had killed. He took the kingdom from them and gave it to a new nation. That generation was the harlot, the synagogue of satan, the stiff-necked rebels, hagar, children of the devil, a brood of vipers, the goats. The remnant was the righteous of Paul's day that believed and turned to Christ, as Paul said "at the present time" that is in his day, in the first century. So when Paul says (in another verse you conveniently leave out) their rejection means the reconcilliation of the world, he really means that they were rejected. So your view makes nonsense of these verses. Paul is saying that some were rejected (those I mentioned above) and because of them the gentiles were streaming in (cf Acts 15 and Amos 9). But there were some driven by jealousy, and they believed, and were grafted back in again. And the key is that it was all going on then, in Paul's day, not waiting for some sensational end times scenario like you are positing.

[Theological1]

My only question to you stauron would be what did Christ mean? (Matt.5:17-20)

The second coming of Christ is yet to happen by most indications of scripture.
The man of sin i.e. anti-Christ has not been revealed.
These things have not happened yet but they both are prophecy.
I could go on with a list of prophecy yet to happen, but this should help you to see that Christ's first coming completed many important things concerning salvation for the sinner yet all is not done. One can see this fact just by looking in the book of Rev. or do you suppose in your understanding that all those events i.e. prophecies have past too?

Peace be upon you all

[Theological1]

Suede

It is funny how the Bible becomes the only source when there is something noted in history that conflict's with eurocentric ideology . How would we know the about Khazars in relation to the Ashkenazim Jews if it was not for non-Biblical sources?

Why does everything concerning people of color in ancient history become so obscure or lost? For instance the so called Lost Tribes; who says they were lost besides westren Europeans who were not looking for them until the late 20th century? The so-called Lost Tribes seem to have known where they were all along.

"Well part of the problem above is in assumptions. This assumes an awful lot, particularly with Melchizedek. As far as saying he was practicing Judaism is a bit too much given the little we know. Obviously he was a monotheist that worshipped the same God that Abraham did. But to say he practiced Judaism? No, that's a bit much. Similarly, Abraham was not a "Jew" nor did he practice Judaism. Nor did Enoch, or Noah, or Adam. Judaism later".

The problem comes in here when you conviently erase the Judadeans who settled in the region of ancient Israel. If you don't agree with the "Jewish Historian" that is fine. He did not change the Bible he simply pointed out an African tribe of Westren Ethipoians who obviously by the Semitic name had knowledge of Judaisim.

The empire of Cush is not obscure either, Nimrod was the first to impose Imperialisim over the ancient world. Mizrahi Jews and Jews in Ethiopia and Yemen seem to know that at one time the whole Fertile Crescent and Mesopotamia was called Cush ,Kish, Cuss, depending on where you were from.

It is a known fact that the Hebrew language and writing form comes from Sumerian Script an African language. Hebrew to this day is classified by the US Department Of Foriegn Affairs as a North African language. So it is no brain buster that knowledge of ancient Judaisim was being practiced before within the Sumerian cultures. Especially if a Jewish historian points out a non-Semitic tribe of Africans called Judadeans. This should not be hard to understand sense you believe the issue of Jewishness is a Theology not race.

It is only a shrewed attempt on your behalf to avoid the obvious when you say "we don't know" you should say "we don't want to know" concerning Melchiz'edek's religion and of the people of whom he ruled over in Canaan. It is clear that he was a "Priest" of some "organized religion" that worshipped EL Shaddi it is not a brain buster. Adam and Enoch were not "Priest" my friend. One does not have to look very far to know that El was a Cannanite name for God. The problem with most westren theology is that they reject it's origins if it leads toward a people of color.

Most Europeans scholars obscure history by throwing the lable Cannanite on all of the people in that region. The history of Caleb being a Edomite is absurd. You pay to much attention to racsist eurocentric "commentary" in your western dictionary and study Bibles.

Caleb was a Kennizzite (geographically speaking) Westren Ethiopian not an Edomite. You are correct in saying we need better scholarship because the Bible clearly shows Caled's tribe in Gen.15:19 which put's the "we don't know" if he was Edomite thing to rest. His tribe would constitute Westren Ethiopians with a knowledge of the true God but because their rebellion they are to be deposed by Israel just as Israel was deposed by other nations.

Did you even look up Flavius Josephus the Jewish Historian?

Did you look up the Roman Historian Tacitus?

What about the the Roman Caesar Justinian?

I guess they are all racist Africans too? It seems we become champions of King James and Zondervan and Thompson Bible Authorities when historical evidence reflects that dark skin or non-European people played apart in the Bible and Torah besides being cursed.

Peace be upon you all.

[stauron]

My only question to you stauron would be what did Christ mean? (Matt.5:17-20)

The second coming of Christ is yet to happen by most indications of scripture.
The man of sin i.e. anti-Christ has not been revealed.
These things have not happened yet but they both are prophecy.
I could go on with a list of prophecy yet to happen, but this should help you to see that Christ's first coming completed many important things concerning salvation for the sinner yet all is not done. One can see this fact just by looking in the book of Rev. or do you suppose in your understanding that all those events i.e. prophecies have past too?

Peace be upon you all



Sorry you somehow missed it in the first two posts, but Christ came to fulfill the Law. Christ is the replacement for Moses as lawgiver the same way He replaced Elijah as prophet and David as king. The New Covenant replaced the old.

3:1 Therefore, holy brothers and sisters, partners in a heavenly calling, take note of Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess, 3:2 who is faithful to the one who appointed him, as Moses was also in God’s house. 3:3 For he has come to deserve greater glory than Moses, just as the builder of a house deserves greater honor than the house itself! 3:4 For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God. 3:5 Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house as a servant, to testify to the things that would be spoken. 3:6 But Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. We are of his house, if in fact we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope we take pride in.
The anti-christ was present in John's day. They were "against Christ". The generation that rejected Christ was antichrist. They made a false profession and snuck in like wolves. Matt 7:15; 10:16; Luke 10:3 and Acts 20:29 all talk about the wolves. Who were the wolves Christ and Paul were worried about? The unbelieving Jews that rejected their Messiah. 2:18 Children, it is the last hour, and just as you heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. We know from this that it is the last hour. 2:19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us, because if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But they went out from us to demonstrate that all of them do not belong to us.

Jesus promised to come back against that generation. Revelation starts and finishes with time statements. Soon, at hand, quickly, soon. His judgement and wrath He poured out on them to the uttermost.16:27 For the Son of Man will come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. 16:28 I tell you the truth, there are some standing here who will not experience death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

[OldShepherd]

Since the OP is arguing pro-Messianic Judaism, this thread is moved the appropriate froum, Messianic Judaism.

[Henaynei]

This thread is closed after moderator review ;)

b'Shalom
Henaynei
Moderator