How many People Think the Jews Could Be Wrong?

When involved in contentious argument, participants often become confused if I interject with a concordant post. It made perfect sense to me. Temple builders' endeavor to resurrect their religion but have completely missed the temple that housed their god when He walked among them.

We have temple seeker here on this forum. They have me on ignor because i keep pointing to Jesus. They desire to see an earthly temple and animal sacrifices, just as pharasees by their false religion (talmud) sought a Messiah that would over throw Rome and set up an earthly kingdom. Its the same spirit, a materialist ideology.

And by "the Jews" do you mean practitioners of modern antiChrist Talmudic Judaism?

I still find it amazing how people like him, can refuse the to see the TRUTH. Even when it is printed in plain English.

We have temple seeker here on this forum. They have me on ignor because i keep pointing to Jesus. They desire to see an earthly temple and animal sacrifices, just as pharasees by their false religion (talmud) sought a Messiah that would over throw Rome and set up an earthly kingdom. Its the same spirit, a materialist ideology.

many other peoples were ever sought out for extermination solely for reason of crime being the makeup of their dna, with absolutely no option for conversion? So, it makes me wonder that since they were so passionately hated for such an obviously irrational reason (by earthly forces of evil even if there is good in them) then there might be something in that they may also be favored for no apparent reason other than their lineage (by heavenly forces of good even if there is evil in them).

However, if the topic is that Christians will be in heaven while Jews left on Earth come to Christ in the millennium, I don't see how that is any different from the amillennial view which says we are currently in the millennial reign where Christ reigns from heaven with the saints that have gone and are currently, reigning, with Him?

The Talmud encourages an ethnocentric racial supremacist attitude. It's easy to see that this has nothing to do with DNA and everything to do with culture and the lack of Christian sensibilities in Talmudic teachings. But even if Saul could be despised, it's not as though this carries over to his existence as Paul. Things like usury and other predatory business practices were often the cited reason for why these cultures were expelled from Christian countries historically. These expulsions weren't based on ethnicity (as Christians of Jewish heritage were allowed to stay), it was based solely on antiChristian cultural practices which can be found explicitly stated in the Talmud.

When Martin Luther lost his mind on "Jews" he wasn't talking about all people of Jewish heritage, he was talking about local Talmudic Jews and adherents of Talmudism generally. This happened because a Jewish apostate translated the Talmud for him. It's not hard to see that this may have happened many times in history in one form or another. If a scam artist was caught in the act of their scam, it's easy to see why a town might throw the scam artist out of town.

And even if these Talmudic Jewish supremacist attitudes were not adhered to as required by the Talmud, the perception still exists that any zealous adherent of the Talmud will commit the immoral acts condoned by the Talmud. If anyone is to have an honest conversation about how to smooth over this perception, the starting point is going to be about the Talmud. This is a topic that is often buried because talking about the Talmud reveals the fact that the religion is founded on bigoted, xenophobic, racial supremacism, that encourages predatory, unneighbourly practices against outsiders. The Talmud is absolutely worthy of rebuke.

All of that said about the teachings of the culture, it isn't necessarily the case that all people of a culture will adhere to evil teachings of that culture. A person with a good heart can hear an evil instruction and refuse to follow it. We see this kind of wisdom with the way that Jesus dealt with the adulteress. Had he wanted to show harsh judgement instead of mercy, he could have easily allowed the Pharisees to commit to their claim and see to it that the woman was executed. This isn't what happened, despite being a legally valid path under the ordinances of the law at the time.

If we apply this logic to adherents of the Talmud and other Rabbinic teachings, we see that despite the Talmud and many Rabbinic teachings being evil, the adherents of the Talmud themselves won't necessarily be evil if their heart does not resonate with the content. And thus even some Rabbis may not themselves be committed to spreading the vile teachings of the Talmud and instead focus on the neutral or positive messages instead.

That's the danger of stereotypes and putting people into categories. That's the danger of slogans like "all people of X ethnic/cultural group are bad" because it can cause a mental short-circuit to treat everyone within a group the same way when we should be considering the heart and mind of individuals individually. This can be said of Talmudic Jews, where some are evil while others may bear the fruits of kindness in their lives, and it can also be said about historical nations that expelled Talmudic Jews from their societies, where the attribute of them expelling a culture from their midst was not necessarily wrong of them to do (and may truly have been God's will to expel a specific collection of local people that were bad and unrighteous). We should never use blanket statements like "all Jews are bad" or "all those that expelled Jews are bad". We should judge each case mindfully with open consideration. (The same is true of the crusades where righteous Christian soldiers executed murderous Moslem raiders. The crusades often get cast in a bad light despite the fact that the Christians of that day did the right thing to ensure the protection and safe passage of pilgrims.)

If a Talmudic Jewish person murdered a person, and a judge sentenced them to the electric chair. Their execution is not evidence that the Judge hates Talmudic Jews, it is merely a judgement ruled on an individual in accordance with a due process. The acts of the individual do not reflect on the larger group. If you had a biker gang that was committed to organized crime, it is possible that the gang is ruled to be a collection of outlaws and becomes thrown out of a country. If the biker gang happens to be composed primarily of one type of ethnicity, that does not speak against the entire ethnicity, only that collection of individuals that have membership in that specific group. If a group of mischievous kids start wearing the biker gang's colour, symbols, and referencing their subculture and claim to be adherents (though do not adhere to the actual immoral acts), that doesn't necessarily mean that the kids are genuinely part of that biker gang nor that they would share the same justification for rebuke. Discerning these things and how to deal with people can be a difficult task.

Hatred can be addictive like a drug, and many groups like the trillionaire-owned media corporations become like drug dealers to the masses. The media constantly tells us to hate people, and if that is all we listen to, it can start to permeate into our lives and our way of thinking. It's better to abstain from hate altogether.



While Talmudic Judaism have their own black and white definition for what counts as a Jew (and therefore Dispensationalism would also share that definition), Christianity defines Jews differently. Jews and Christians aren't mutually exclusive groups from a Christian perspective. So from a Christian perspective, the idea that "Christians go one way and Jews go another" makes no sense. This is the first thing we should be picking up on. In the end there are Christians and nonChristians, and that's it.

When we talk about "amill", if we mean what the RCC proposes, "amil" is a misnomer, it would be more to the understanding of a symbolic 1000 year kingdom ("sym-mil"?). Revelation is regarded as largely symbolic, having descriptions and imagery that applies to past events (such as the birth of Christ) as well as meanings and imagery that spread over the present and future. Despite accepting a symbolic meaning of things, there is nothing stopping that person from also accepting the concept that a double-entendre is present and that simultaneous literal meaning could exist in the text.

It's a complicated subject, but that is the nature of prophecy interpretation.

The Talmud encourages an ethnocentric racial supremacist attitude. It's easy to see that this has nothing to do with DNA and everything to do with culture and the lack of Christian sensibilities in Talmudic teachings. But even if Saul could be despised, it's not as though this carries over to his existence as Paul. Things like usury and other predatory business practices were often the cited reason for why these cultures were expelled from Christian countries historically. These expulsions weren't based on ethnicity (as Christians of Jewish heritage were allowed to stay), it was based solely on antiChristian cultural practices which can be found explicitly stated in the Talmud.

When Martin Luther lost his mind on "Jews" he wasn't talking about all people of Jewish heritage, he was talking about local Talmudic Jews and adherents of Talmudism generally. This happened because a Jewish apostate translated the Talmud for him. It's not hard to see that this may have happened many times in history in one form or another. If a scam artist was caught in the act of their scam, it's easy to see why a town might throw the scam artist out of town.

And even if these Talmudic Jewish supremacist attitudes were not adhered to as required by the Talmud, the perception still exists that any zealous adherent of the Talmud will commit the immoral acts condoned by the Talmud. If anyone is to have an honest conversation about how to smooth over this perception, the starting point is going to be about the Talmud. This is a topic that is often buried because talking about the Talmud reveals the fact that the religion is founded on bigoted, xenophobic, racial supremacism, that encourages predatory, unneighbourly practices against outsiders. The Talmud is absolutely worthy of rebuke.

All of that said about the teachings of the culture, it isn't necessarily the case that all people of a culture will adhere to evil teachings of that culture. A person with a good heart can hear an evil instruction and refuse to follow it. We see this kind of wisdom with the way that Jesus dealt with the adulteress. Had he wanted to show harsh judgement instead of mercy, he could have easily allowed the Pharisees to commit to their claim and see to it that the woman was executed. This isn't what happened, despite being a legally valid path under the ordinances of the law at the time.

If we apply this logic to adherents of the Talmud and other Rabbinic teachings, we see that despite the Talmud and many Rabbinic teachings being evil, the adherents of the Talmud themselves won't necessarily be evil if their heart does not resonate with the content. And thus even some Rabbis may not themselves be committed to spreading the vile teachings of the Talmud and instead focus on the neutral or positive messages instead.

That's the danger of stereotypes and putting people into categories. That's the danger of slogans like "all people of X ethnic/cultural group are bad" because it can cause a mental short-circuit to treat everyone within a group the same way when we should be considering the heart and mind of individuals individually. This can be said of Talmudic Jews, where some are evil while others may bear the fruits of kindness in their lives, and it can also be said about historical nations that expelled Talmudic Jews from their societies, where the attribute of them expelling a culture from their midst was not necessarily wrong of them to do (and may truly have been God's will to expel a specific collection of local people that were bad and unrighteous). We should never use blanket statements like "all Jews are bad" or "all those that expelled Jews are bad". We should judge each case mindfully with open consideration. (The same is true of the crusades where righteous Christian soldiers executed murderous Moslem raiders. The crusades often get cast in a bad light despite the fact that the Christians of that day did the right thing to ensure the protection and safe passage of pilgrims.)

If a Talmudic Jewish person murdered a person, and a judge sentenced them to the electric chair. Their execution is not evidence that the Judge hates Talmudic Jews, it is merely a judgement ruled on an individual in accordance with a due process. The acts of the individual do not reflect on the larger group. If you had a biker gang that was committed to organized crime, it is possible that the gang is ruled to be a collection of outlaws and becomes thrown out of a country. If the biker gang happens to be composed primarily of one type of ethnicity, that does not speak against the entire ethnicity, only that collection of individuals that have membership in that specific group. If a group of mischievous kids start wearing the biker gang's colour, symbols, and referencing their subculture and claim to be adherents (though do not adhere to the actual immoral acts), that doesn't necessarily mean that the kids are genuinely part of that biker gang nor that they would share the same justification for rebuke. Discerning these things and how to deal with people can be a difficult task.

Hatred can be addictive like a drug, and many groups like the trillionaire-owned media corporations become like drug dealers to the masses. The media constantly tells us to hate people, and if that is all we listen to, it can start to permeate into our lives and our way of thinking. It's better to abstain from hate altogether.



While Talmudic Judaism have their own black and white definition for what counts as a Jew (and therefore Dispensationalism would also share that definition), Christianity defines Jews differently. Jews and Christians aren't mutually exclusive groups from a Christian perspective. So from a Christian perspective, the idea that "Christians go one way and Jews go another" makes no sense. This is the first thing we should be picking up on. In the end there are Christians and nonChristians, and that's it.

When we talk about "amill", if we mean what the RCC proposes, "amil" is a misnomer, it would be more to the understanding of a symbolic 1000 year kingdom ("sym-mil"?). Revelation is regarded as largely symbolic, having descriptions and imagery that applies to past events (such as the birth of Christ) as well as meanings and imagery that spread over the present and future. Despite accepting a symbolic meaning of things, there is nothing stopping that person from also accepting the concept that a double-entendre is present and that simultaneous literal meaning could exist in the text.

It's a complicated subject, but that is the nature of prophecy interpretation.

Jocund said: It's a complicated subject, but that is the nature of prophecy interpretation.

Didn't you mean TWISTED prophecy interpretation ? ? ?

Believe what you WANT to, and we will believe what the Bible actually says.

Yes I have at 73, bad spelling, but some day yours will be worse.

@VCO

Are you saying that a new Jewish temple will help lead the Jews to Christ?