Gentiles

[just-me]

Is the entire NT the holy word of God, to be believed by all Christians?

Now you just replace words NT -OT and Christians -Fariceies in your sentecse above and you will understand why they crussified Christ and what were feeling inside them. Sound similar? Can you see now what happens when one separates NT from OT?

Ya, I understand you. The Old Testament was the only scripture that the Apostles had to confirm that Jesus was who He said He was. The proof was that Jesus revealed His true self by teaching the OT truth in the recorded law and the prophets to all people.

So one could also truthfully say 'Is the entire OT the holy word of God, to be believed by all Pharisees?' and also "Is the entire NT the holy word of God, to be believed by all Christians?: And the answer would be yes in both cases.

Paul was a scholar of the OT scriptures, and a believing Pharisee who brought the good news of salvation through Christ Jesus to the Gentiles that was confirmed by the OT that was available at that time. This confirms that the OT and the NT should never be separated by presenting the NT better or worse than the OT. God gave us all scripture. Separating the words of the Father from His only Son is heresy, causing the truth to be distorted as did the hypocritical Pharisees during Jesus' time on earth. Those who separate the scriptures falsely are doing the same thing as the unbelieving hypocritical Pharisees.

The Pharisees who distorted the truth were those who were attempting to be righteous by their own works of the law without having faith in God who gave the law. It was both false religion and politics that led to the crucifixion of Christ. It is also false religion that kills the truth today.

 

[Elin]

Ya, I understand you. The Old Testament was the only scripture that the Apostles had to confirm that Jesus was who He said He was. The proof was that Jesus revealed His true self by teaching the OT truth in the recorded law and the prophets to all people.

So one could also truthfully say 'Is the entire OT the holy word of God, to be believed by all Pharisees?' and also "Is the entire NT the holy word of God, to be believed by all Christians?: And the answer would be yes in both cases.

Paul was a scholar of the OT scriptures, and a believing Pharisee who brought the good news of salvation through Christ Jesus to the Gentiles that was confirmed by the OT that was available at that time. This confirms that the OT and the NT should never be separated by
presenting the NT better or worse than the OT. God gave us all scripture.

Yes, God gave us all Scripture, and God's Scripture does not present itself as "better or worse," but as incomplete and completed.

The revelation of Genesis was not as complete a revelation of Jesus Christ as were the Mosaic regulations.
The revelation of the OT was not as complete a revelation of Jesus Christ as is the revelation completed in the NT.

That is the point of God's Scripture in Heb 1:1-2, which presents the revelation spoken in the words of the Son in these last days through the NT writers as completed, compared to the incomplete revelation spoken through the prophets in the OT.

If you can't see that NT revelation of Jesus Christ is much more complete that OT revelation of him, that is the blindness and unbelief of heresy.

Separating the words of the Father from His only Son is heresy,
causing the truth to be distorted as did the hypocritical Pharisees during Jesus' time on earth.

Straw man. . .

The false doctrine of the heretical JW cult does not allow for the incomplete OT revelation given by the prophets to be completed in the words spoken by the Son on these last days (Heb 1:1-2) through the NT writers.

That is the corruption of God's truth, as did the Pharisees.

Physician, heal thyself.

 

[just-me]

In a general, a separation doctrine that separates God's word from "God''s Word" is the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes that leads to more and more corruption of the truth. This doctrine was adhered to in order to incorporate paganism into the church.

But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate. Revelation 2:6
Ephesus was one of the largest cities of the ancient world and a center for worship of the goddess Artemis, as well as the site of one of the largest Christian communities of the first and second centuries AD. More on Ephesus

So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Revelation 2:15Pergamum is the site of a magnificent acropolis situated atop a high hill overlooking the modern town of Bergama. More on Pergamum

The doctrine of the Nicolaitanes assisted in the incorporation of the doctrine of Balaam into the church. These doctrines of separation continue to assist true doctrines to be compromised.

Turkey was not Judea, so the 7 churches in Revelation can be classified as Gentile. Nevertheless,some Christians have noticed the differences between the doctrine presented to these seven churches and the doctrine in the epistles of Romans-Philemon written by the Apostle Paul to the partly Jew but mostly Gentile churches. They may have noticed that the Revelation passages contain far more Old Testament references and are more focused on works than Paul's writings. Thus, some believe that the seven churches of Asia were assemblies of Jews in the early church period and also represent believers during the future tribulation.

 

[Elin]

In a general, a separation doctrine that separates God's word from "God''s Word" is the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes

There is no Scriptural basis for this assertion, you made it up.

That leads to more and more corruption of the truth. This doctrine was adhered to in order to incorporate paganism into the church. The Necene creed reinforced a vow

Creeds don't "reinforce" vows, they are statements of belief.

That's the false doctrine of the heretical JW cult.

that the Jews had to quote vowing to be separated from their Jewish heritage, enabling them to join the universal church, later being identified as Roman Catholic. This practice of separation has infiltrated most, if not all denominations that are solely based on NT doctrine only, (neglecting the rest of scripture) and are identified as Christian dominations.

Baloney. . .more false doctrine of the heretical JW cult.

The Nicene Creed (Greek: Σύμβολον τῆς Νικαίας or τῆς πίστεως, Latin: Symbolum Nicaenum) is a profession of faith widely used in Christian liturgy. It is called Nicene /ˈnaɪsiːn/ because it was originally adopted in the city of Nicaea (present day Iznik, Turkey) by the First Council of Nicaea in 325.

But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate. Revelation 2:6

Ephesus was one of the largest cities of the ancient world and a center for worship of the goddess Artemis, as well as the site of one of the largest Christian communities of the first and second centuries AD. More on Ephesus

So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Revelation 2:15Pergamum is the site of a magnificent acropolis situated atop a high hill overlooking the modern town of Bergama. More on Pergamum

The doctrine of the Nicolaitanes assisted in the incorporation of the doctrine of Balaam into the church. These doctrines of separation

The doctrine of Balaam has nothing to do with separation.

continue to assist true doctrines to be compromise with ancient pagan practices, such as the birthday of Molech, Baal, and Nimrod, all being the same, and the celebration of Astaroth/Ishtar the fertility goddess.

Pure false doctrine of the heretical JW cult. . .

So is Jesus God?

 

[just-me]

The doctrine of Balaam is a doctrine of compromise, and the doctrine Nicolaitanes is the a doctrine of systematic removal of God's law from the church.

 

[Elin]

The doctrine of Balaam is a doctrine of compromise, and the doctrine Nicolaitanes is the a doctrine of systematic removal of God's law from the church.

There is no Biblical basis for this nomenclature.

Disobedience and paganism do not need to be renamed to fit the false doctrine of the heretical JW cult.

So is Jesus God?

 

[just-me]

The following verse describe Spiritual attributes of Gentiles worshiping God in His temple, which according to the NT we are the temple of the living Almighty God. God's perfect chronology is plainly seen.

"For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts." Malachi 1:11

"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" 1 Corinthians 3:16

The same judgments that God exacted on Israel for obedience and disobedience are still in effect for the Gentiles that are grafted in to the olive tree. Through Christ Jesus, there is no difference between Gentiles and Jews, for God is not a respecter of persons.

Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: Romans 2:9-10

"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" Acts 10:34

"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews" John 4:22

 

[Elin]

The following verse describe Spiritual attributes of Gentiles worshiping God in His temple, which according to the NT we are the temple of the living Almighty God. God's perfect chronology is plainly seen.

"For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts." Malachi 1:11

"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" 1 Corinthians 3:16

The same judgments that God exacted on Israel for obedience and disobedience are still in effect for the Gentiles that are grafted in to the olive tree. Through Christ Jesus, there is no difference between Gentiles and Jews, for God is not a respecter of persons.

Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: Romans 2:9-10

"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" Acts 10:34

"Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews" John 4:22

Yes, the Messiah comes from the Jews, not the Samaritans.

And the salvation of the Messiah is revealed in the words spoken by the Son in these last days (Heb 1:1-2) through the NT writers.

 

[just-me]

For all who read this that are not 1 of the 15 people that I have on my ignore list.

Why didn't God choose His only begotten Son from Gentile genealogy rather than Israeli Jewish roots, in light of the modern church saying the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant? What difference would it make to todays church doctrine? After all, you cannot put new wine into old skins neither should you put a new patch on an old pare of jeans.

 

[Elin]

For all who read this that are not 1 of the 15 people that I have on my ignore list.

Why didn't God choose His only begotten Son from Gentile genealogy rather than Israeli Jewish roots, in light of the modern church saying the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant? What difference would it make to todays church doctrine? After all, you cannot put new wine into old skins neither should you put a new patch on an old pare of jeans.

You're asking the wrong person. . .you'll have to ask the one who did it.

He's the only one who can tell you why he chose Jacob to be the ancestor of the Messiah.

 

[passing_through]

The Noahic covenant (the proper name) is to all living creatures.

 

[just-me]

For all who read this that are not 1 of the 15 people that I have on my ignore list.

Why didn't God choose His only begotten Son from Gentile genealogy rather than Israeli Jewish roots, in light of the modern church saying the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant? What difference would it make to todays church doctrine? After all, you cannot put new wine into old skins neither should you put a new patch on an old pare of jeans.

The book of Hebrews actually uses this very issue to make a point of the fact that in coming from the tribe of Judah our Lord's new high-priesthood signals a change from the Old to the New Covenant, since of course in accordance with the Mosaic Law all prior priests came from the tribe of Levi. One important reason in the selection of the tribe of Judah for our Lord's genealogy is the membership of David in that tribe. Jesus, of course, is David's greater Son, and in the mention of our Lord's lineage it is usually His descent from David that is the point which is emphasized rather His tribal affiliation. Revelation 5:5 confirms where "from the tribe of Judah" is immediately reinforced by "[from] the root of David").

“And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.” Revelation 5:5

For Jesus is the "Son of David", the One who completes/finishes the original Covenant with Israel, the covenant to that great believer, King David, wherein he was promised a Son (2 Samuel 7:12-16) who would reign forever, the Branch who would spring from his root, namely, the Messiah. This son wasn't Solomon, even though Solomon is in the genealogy that led to Christ Jesus.

2 Samuel 7:12-16
12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.

The first and technical reason for Jesus' descent from Judah is the important fact that Jesus is THE "First-born" unique and only Son of the Father and Judah is the tribe of the first-born - by assignment. For although Reuben was technically Jacob's first-born son, he forfeited the double-portion rights of inheritance that would otherwise have been his through misconduct - and he lost them to Judah. Reuben lost his “first born” inheritance by committing adulterous incest.

“And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine: and Israel heard it.” Genesis 35:22

“Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power: Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel; because thou wentest up to thy father's bed; then defiledst thou it: he went up to my couch.” Genesis 49:3-4

 

[just-me]

Continuing from post 192
Now Judah was the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] in line, Simeon and Levi were Judah's older brothers, and they also forfeited their right to the scepter that eventually would belong to Judah.

Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, descendants of Canaan, fell in love with Jacob's daughter Dinah. Where Simeon and Levi messed up was to deceive these Hivites into believing that the “house of Jacob” would accept the marriage of Shechem to Dinah if they were circumcised in the flesh rather than being circumcised into the household of Jacob, i.e Israel. Circumcision of the heart was required in the law God gave to Israel via Moses recorded in Deuteronomy.

Simeon and Levi were deceivers by endorsing a reversal to the original promise of Abraham, by saying it was right to have their sister marry into a foreign household rather than Shechem's family circumcised into the “household of Israel” (Jacob).
So even after Shechem's family members physically were circumcised, but not according to God's foreknowledge, they murdered Shechem's family by deceiving them, and they also forfeited the double-portion rights of inheritance. (Genesis chapter 43)

It is for this that reason the "ruler's scepter" belongs to Judah. “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.” (Genesis 49:10)

Gentiles, sojourners, strangers, were all attached to Israel when they adhered to the God given instructions contained within Israel's Covenant with God. This format continues into the New Covenant that salvation is of the Jews, as Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well.

The reason a Gentile wasn't elected to be the Savior of the world is because a Gentile didn't have the truth of God's chronology in respect to not being given God's promise to Abraham, nor being given God's Covenant that contain the “Word of God.” The only way the Gentiles could receive that information is to be circumcised into the elect.

“Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.” John 4:22

Jews are not secondarily attached to the Gentiles, but the Gentiles are secondarily attached to the Jew through Jesus Christ our Lord. Paul, being a Pharisee, knew very well this concept and reason for this God given chronology when he wrote;

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” But also “Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: (Romans 1:16, and Romans 2:9-10)

 

[Elin]

The book of Hebrews actually uses this very issue to make a point of the fact that in coming from the tribe of Judah our Lord's new high-priesthood signals a change from the Old to the New Covenant, since of course in accordance with the Mosaic Law all prior priests came from the tribe of Levi. One important reason in the selection of the tribe of Judah for our Lord's genealogy is the membership of David in that tribe.

God made a Messiah covenant with David--that his throne would be eternal, which was fulfilled in Jesus.
Yes, the Messiah would necessarily be David's descendant.

The first and technical reason for Jesus' descent from Judah is the important fact that Jesus is THE "First-born" unique and only Son of the Father and
Judah is the tribe of the first-born - by assignment.

Judah is not the tribe of the first-born by assignment.

Actually, it is because David was of the tribe of Judah, with whom a Messianic covenant was made, that Jesus was a descendant of David.

although Reuben was technically Jacob's first-born son, he
forfeited the double-portion rights of inheritance that would otherwise have been his through misconduct - and he lost them
to Judah.

No, the right of first-born was given to Joseph (1Chr 5:1), as well as the double-portion (Ephraim and Manasseh) of the first-born (1Chr 5:2).

Jesus came from the tribe of Judah because the eternal Messianic throne was promised to David, who was of the tribe of Judah.

More false doctrine of the heretical JW cult?

 

[Elin]

The reason a Gentile wasn't elected to be the Savior of the world is because a Gentile didn't have the truth of God's chronology in respect to not being given God's promise to Abraham, nor being given God's Covenant that contain the “Word of God.”

You are so confused. . .

The Messiah would not be a Gentile because he was promised to come from Abraham (Ge 12:3)

More false doctrine of the heretical JW cult.

 

[Karraster]

In other words....

Based on a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof of something belonging to, or for the use of one particular person, only explaining the meaning of something accurately, attempting to describe or predict what will happen in the future, making statements intentionally phrased so as to require ingenuity, which others in the body of Christ will explain this heard information to mean something that is generally believed or recognized to be valid, correct, or true, but not being completely the same as another or each other.

Please follow the thought process. LOL

Now that's factually demonstrating your assertions.

Facts speak for themselves.

 

[jaybird88]

i agree and also believe that many of our global leaders today are very deep in doctrine of Balaam or what i refer to as the Canaanite belief system. why else would everything recently seem to be running so fast into evil. these leaders making these decisions, setting this agenda are not crazy, they are doing exactly what they want. and they are trying to drag everyone else with em. i dont ant to go.

i meant to say doctrine of Baal. Baal was one of the Canaanite gods not Balaam.

 

[just-me]

i meant to say doctrine of Baal. Baal was one of the Canaanite gods not Balaam.

You are correct, and the doctrine of Balaam and the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes both incorporate the attributes of the god called Baal. It goes as far back as Nimrod. I have attempted to describe this current persuasion in the church, community, and the entire world for that matter, on http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...ystematic-distortiona-negation-scripture.html this thread. There are those who detest the truth that reveals that these false doctrines are very prevalent in our day. Right here, right now! The stalking is very obvious. Please take note who wants to repress.

 

[Elin]

You are correct, and the doctrine of Balaam and the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes both incorporate the attributes of the god called Baal. . .this current persuasion in the church

Baloney. . .

Assertion without demonstration is without merit.

 

[just-me]

No Gentile Christian can be anti-Semitic toward the Jews. Christ was a Jew, and that by divine intent. In a conversation with a Samaritan woman, Jesus declared: “Salvation is from the Jews” (John 4:22). The focus, of course, was upon his personal identity as the Messiah. All people are indebted to the Hebrew nation for the Savior.

Christians are to love all people, but that does not mean that Gentiles are permitted to ignore Jewish history. The Jews have both a positive and negative history concerning Christ. What did Jesus mean by his statement: “Salvation is from the Jews”?

There are two important preliminary points.
1. Jesus acknowledged his Jewish heritage, and Christians should rejoice in this fact as well.

2.The term “salvation” is preceded by the article in the Greek Testament, “the salvation,” signifying that his salvation is the only plan of deliverance made available to humanity. None who rejects it will be saved. Christ’s is the exclusive way (cf. John 14:6; Acts 4:11-12); men do not have the option of designing their own plan!

This is an uncompromising truth in a day when many contend that no religious system can claim to be the only way. Religious pluralism (one standard for the Jews and another standard for the Gentiles) is heresy.