Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

To: William Terrell

The teaching of what has been called British-Israelism has been in existence for over two centuries. Armstrong merely revived an old discredited belief rather than discover a new Bible secret.

He and his forerunners taught that Assyria invaded the northern kingdom of Israel in B.C. 721 and carried off all of its inhabitants to the last man, woman and child. As the Assyrians moved north and west into Europe, the captives were carried along with them. Eventually, all trace of their identity disappeared.

The blessing of Jacob upon the sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, bestowed upon them and their descendants the blessing of Abraham and the promise of God. Great Britain and the United States are these descendants according to the British-Israelism theory.

One problem with this scenario is found in II Chronicles 30:1 which reads: “And Hezekiah wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh that they should come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, to keep the Passover unto the Lord God of Israel.”

Further, II Chron. 30:18 states that “many of Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebu¬lum came to Jerusalem.”

This event occurred sometime after the Assyrian invasion and the carrying away of Israel.

In the year B.C. 628, Josiah called Israel and Judah to observe the Passover. In II Chronicles 34:9 it is recorded that Ephraim and Manasseh contributed to the rebuilding of the Temple by Josiah.

If the Northern Tribes were swept away and especially the bearers of the birthright, Ephraim and Manasseh, how could they be present years later at these feasts?

In Luke 2:36 it is recorded that Jesus was found at the Temple by a prophetess named Anna, of the tribe of Asher. If Asher had disappeared into Assyrian captivity, who had kept the lineage of Anna’s family?

British-Israelism has always been a theory without credible proof.
http://www.watchman.org/reltop/britisrl.htm

661 posted on 08/29/2007 10:31:27 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

You are very welcome.

662 posted on 08/29/2007 10:40:29 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

ONLY A THEORY

The theory teaches that when God’s people returned to Palestine after the captivity, only the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi really returned. The “House of Israel”, meaning the ten lost tribes, scattered. By Jesus’ day, supposedly only three tribes were represented. According to the theory, the “House of Israel” was missing.

THE BIBLE SPEAKS

The Apostle Peter was, however, unaware of British Israelism teaching, since he uttered these words at Acts 2: 36,

“Therefore let all the HOUSE OF ISRAEL know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.”

ARE “ISRAEL” AND “JEW” ALWAYS DIFFERENT?

Armstrong taught that “Israel” and “Jew” were two separate nations. “Jew” always meant “The House of Judah”, and “Israel” meant “the lost ten tribes”. 2 Kings 17:18-23 is a favorite passage of British-Israelism devotees, so let’s consider it.

“So the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them from His sight; none was left except the tribe of Judah. Also Judah did not keep the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the customs which Israel had introduced.

And the LORD rejected all the descendants of Israel and afflicted them and gave them into the hand of plunderers, until He had cast them out of His sight. When He had torn Israel from the house of David,they made Jeroboam the son of Nebat king.

Then Jeroboam drove Israel away from following the LORD, and made them commit a great sin. And the the sons of Israel walked in all the sins of Jeroboam which he did; they did not depart from them, until the LORD removed Israel from His sight, as He spoke through all His servants the prophets. So Israel was carried away into exile from their own land to Assyria until this day”.

Notice the last phrase of this scripture. Israel went as far as Assyria until this day! They relocated, but not far away, certainly not across oceans! Certainly not scattered far afield!

THE REBUILDING OF JERUSALEM IN NEHEMIAH’S DAY

According to the British-Israelism theory only Jews should have been participating in rebuilding Jerusalem since the house of Israel was “long gone”. Yet Ezra uses the words “all Israel” several times in the account. (Ezra 2:70; 6:17; 8:25,35; 10:5; Nehemiah 7:73; 12:47). Evidently the terms “Jew” and “Israel” were used interchangeably, thus spoiling the unsupported theory of British-Israelism.

THE TEN TRIBES IN CHRIST’S DAY

If the ten tribes were gone by Christ’s day, how does the B-I theory explain that Anna the Prophetess was of the tribe of Asher? (Luke 2:36). Paul mentioned all twelve tribes. (Acts 26:6,7). James mentioned all twelve tribes. (James 1:1).

The book of Revelation tells of 12,000 people from each of the twelve tribes of Israel. (Revelation 7:4-8). All Israel shall be saved, eventually. (Romans 11:26).

Upon consulting a Jewish rabbi, he assured me the list in Revelation was a literal one, as are the other lists in the Bible, although they differ from one another for various reasons. The Revelation list is not “figurative” or “spiritual” allowing for interpretation to apply to some other nation, but applies to literal Israel.

CHRIST THE KING

Since Christ had a sign over his head on the crucifixion reading “King of the Jews”, are we to assume that He was King for Judah only? No, for the scriptures are plain that Christ was the promised Messiah for all Israel. The disciples understood this when they questioned Him in Acts 16, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the Kingdom to ISRAEL?”

Obviously, “Jew” and “Israel” were used interchangeably in Christ’s day.

After putting up the sign “King of the Jews”, His mockers then said, “He is the King of Israel’; Let Him now come down from the cross and we shall believe in Him”. (Matthew 27:42). Again, the terms interchange.

CONCLUSIONS ON BRITISH-ISRAELISM

British-Israelism is not a revelation from God as some teach. Rather it is a theory that cannot stand up to Biblical or scientific examination. It should be rejected by those professing Christianity.

http://www.macgregorministries.org/cult_groups/british_isralism.html

663 posted on 08/29/2007 10:45:33 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

It seems to me that the Holy Spirit is able to keep all of those who have put their trust in Jesus as their savior.
Even those who hope for a pre-tribulation rapture, post- trib or even no rapture and want to go throuh the judgement of God on those who reject Jesus, Gods gift to all men.

Of course the Holy Spirit is able to do that. All of those that have their trust in Jesus will be kept safe. That is His promise. However, if you put your trust in someone else that no longer applies.

Would a Christian knowingly do that? Of course not but Satan is the great deceiver. Scripture tells us Satan comes first, pretending to be Christ. If he comes saying he is going to gather you together to rapture you away will you believe him? Christ tells us he is really, really, good at his deception, so good Christ shortened the days of his tribulation for the sake of His elect.

We (the church) are called the bride of christ, would you subject your bride to the worst conditions, including the risk of death, you could think of before you marry her?? I don’t think so. Neither would God. Think about that.

We will all die physically. Those of us still here when the true Christ arrives will be changed so the "risk of death" shouldn't bother any of us. I don't know what "conditions" we will go through but there are promises made that Satan can't touch His elect and that "not one hair of our head shall perish". Much of what you read about in that time is talking about spiritual death. You are spiritually dead if you follow Satan's lies. You are no longer a child of God but a child of Satan.

Is the "rapture" part of that deception? I believe it is certainly suspicious. In the Olivet Prophecies, where Christ was telling His disciples about what to expect at the end of days He went into detail. NOWHERE did He mention any type of rapture. That would be a very important detail to leave out.

.......Ping

664 posted on 08/30/2007 8:31:01 AM PDT by Ping-Pong

To: fortheDeclaration

I never said that, I said that the Jews were dispersed and did not forget who they are.

That is your theory. That is also a consensus among certain interest groups, of which you must be one. You have no evidence for it, except a couple ambiguous New Testament passages which just as easily admit to at least one alternate interpretation. You have nothing else at all.

The presumption is that because nothing was heard of Israel as Israel (the name) they must have been wiped out, which gives lie to one of God's promises for them, and prophecies about them.

From the written history (about 23,000 translated tablets, cylinders and other forms) by the people who captured them, they most certainly will have forgotten who they are being place among other peoples. And they most certainly were in vast numbers.

From prior posts, you apparently don't know what "deported" means when applied to Assyrian conquered peoples.

Not hard to prove, they were all over and they were certainly dispersed after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. In the Book of Acts, Paul is going throughout his journey's to the 'Jew first, and then the Gentiles'.

First you haven't proved that the numbers of Israel were merged with the Jews. It is simply a presumption upon which you base speculation.

And the fall of the Temple in 70AD had what to do with the dispersal of Israel as Judah, specifically?

What does the passage of Paul's statement the Gospel is to be teached to the Jew first? You leave out his other words. He also said the good things would come to the Jew first for good behavior and bad things to the Jew first for bad behavior.

Had nothing to do with a journey. If you think so, post the passage and explain it. Remember, the line of Judah was to produce Jesus, so God gave them first pass, obviously.

You can place the interpretation you do on this passage only if you have a prior belief. Any passage, read in the light of a belief, can be shaded toward that belief.

So, Italy is part of Europe.

Yes. The most southern part of Italy, closest to Palestine. There is a lot more Europe.

They were also spread throughout the rest of Europe and Asia Minor as shown by the first chapter of Acts where the nations they came from are listed. No, that curse was made on all of the Hebrew people before the split in the Kingdoms. And it pertains to all of the 12 tribes.

What curse? I said," Your mistake is assuming that Israelites and Judah were one in the same peoples. That notion is not supportable. Beside other contrary facts, the fulfilling of Hosea and Ezekiel would have certainly been recorded, which fulfilling must have happened if, as you claim, Israel returned to Palestine and became "Jews"."

How does this statement apply?

The only difference is that they were split before the dispersion happened, first to the 10 tribes and then to the last 2 remaining tribes. All 12 tribes returned and were in Israel at the time of Christ and were dispersed again after the fall of the Temple in 70 AD and were not a nation again until 1948.

Israel disappeared into history as the name "Israelite". This assumption that is part of your own belief system. If they merged with Judah, they would have to have known who they were, or Judah would not have accepted them, as Judah is certainly aware to this day who they are.

The problems with the merging with Judah are many, numbers, Assyrian records, prophecy, God's promises to Israel, contrasted against a few passages in the New Testament that are ambiguous.

I keep asking for something to prove your assertion and each attempt I have been able to explain otherwise.

Do you folks (that subscribe to the consensus on your theory) make a habit of organizing your world view on convictions with so little evidence?

They will not be a Kingdom until the Millennial reign after the Tribulation occurs.

I think your distinction between the label for a group of people and the group of people themselves is laughable. Having to use such reasoning usually means you going down the wrong path.

The Millennium is clearly stated in those verses that were given to you. You just want to deny what you read which refutes your heretical, idiotic theological view. But why let the facts get in the way of a good fable!

There has been nowhere that you have produced any evidence that the prophecies of Hosea and Ezekiel have anything to do with the Millennium.

Matter of fact, you, or anyone else, knows nothing of the physical manifestation of what is called "Millennium". Remember, the Jews had, and have, a fixed idea of what the appearance of the Messiah would be and their viewpoint led them to reject the Master when He actually came.

No Israelites were in those areas that did not know they were Jews. Stop making up history.

Short answer amounting to a statement with no support. Only your belief otherwise makes that statement. Israelites had over 6 centuries to migrate into those regions, and there are records made at the time that indicate they were headed that way.

You have zero evidence and no presumption of anything like that happening, not from history, not from prophecy, not from anything in the New Testament. And to keep repeating a lie doesn't make it a truth. No Israelites moved anywhere after the Assyrian captivity except in your fantasy world.

History: Assyrian records, 23,000 of them. Prophecy: Hosea and Ezekiel, yet to be fulfilled and obviously not to be applied to a spiritual realm only and do not in any way imply that Christ will be the head of the reunited Judah and Israel. New Testament: clear passages, already posted to you, mentioning the House of Israel as present in the region, but not among the Jews.

They were either assimilated into the surrounding people or they were joined with the Southern tribes and became intermingled with them and became known as Jews as well.

I agree a portion were assimilated into the surrounding people, specifically the Medians. The Assyrian tablets were clear about that. Records were also clear about a portion migrating northward toward Europe. That was 600 years before the birth of Christ. How much multiplication can occur in 600 years?

But you miss an obvious fact. Even those assimilated with the Medians will still carry the line of Abraham, the covenant, and God's promises thereto.

Ofcourse there is, they were in Israel when the Lord was there and Peter addresses them in Acts 2 as the House of Israel. James sends out an epistle to the 12 tribes. There is alot more evidence of there assimilation then your myth of the tribes roaming to Europe and then forgetting that they are Hebrews!

We have already discussed the passages that you're talking about. Nowhere in those passages is the statement that the House of Israel was there in Palestine, or Rome and Greece, for that matter. the references always distinguish Judah from Israel, never Israel included with Judah.

If you look at a map of the ancient world, you will see all this occurred in a relatively tight region. Only the lack of speedy communication in that day prevented detail from being known, but the essential events would have been known. Jesus refereed to the "lost sheep" of the House of Israel. Judah was right there in front of Him and they weren't "lost".

James would have certainly been aware of their existence, as Jesus did direct His disciple to also go to them. But they certainly weren't refereed to as Jews. The southern kingdom and the northern kingdom were captured distinct from one another and remained distinct from one another until Hosea is fulfilled.

Why should I ask any Jew anything since he cannot know what tribe he is from. He has no records to tell him. All the genealogical records were destroyed.

Then try to ask one and see what he says. Like I said, I have two friends that know which tribe they are from and they are quite sure. I have one from Levi that has family records kept since the return to Palestine.

Ask one then tell him he can't possible know and see what he presents you with. Until you do that, your claim is mere rhetoric.

And there is nothing to indicate that they did not know who they were either.

You claim the Jews don't know who they were and their lineage.

So, if those tribes were in the Roman Empire (which they were) they were intermingled as a people, not as a separate entity, with differing tribes.

The Jews remained then and remain to this day separate from any people they find themselves among.

No, go and look it up, you are clearly intellectually a very lazy person.

You make the claims, you present the evidence.

The writer of this history is either a very lazy person or you have not read what he said.

It means all the people of the city, which totalled only 27,000. We have already seen that the army had been whittled down to only 10,000 men in an earlier chapter. The Northern Kingdom was a shell of itself when it was finally dispersed, it did not number in the millions as you conjure up in your fertile imagination.

Are you aware that deportations over the 25 years or so of the Assyrian occupation of the lands of the northern kingdom were of dissenters only, to other lands to separate them from their home folk? The majority were kept in their land to work it and make tribute the the Assyrian king.

This was a policy of Tiglath-pileser III. Did your professor mention any of this?

You professor cites about 27,000 deported from a capital in the region. Does he mention how many were left to till the fields? 27,000 were be the trouble makers, a small percentage of the total Israelite population in that one place.

Then of those deported and placed among the Medians and 4 generation to replenish their numbers. Between the time of the final destruction of the Assyrian empire and the birth of Christ was over 6 centuries, after mortal threats posed by the Assyrians.

Lots of babies can be born in 6 centuries.

Did I say that the 10 tribes were wiped out? They still exist, as Jews.

Yes, you did. For the Israelites to have been so few so that their numbers would have no increased the number of Judah in Palestine and the surrounding environs, they would have had to have been wiped out.

I'm sure that the notion of all Israelites being Jews today is very convenient and attractive to certain agendas, it ignores much historical records and Biblical references, both Old and New Testaments.

You have not provided any facts to anything. As for calling names, if you want to keep posting nonsense and reject the truth, that is what you deserve, rebuke and ridicule.

Oh, but I have. From records of the players at the time it happened. You still haven't come up with anything to refute Hosea and Ezekiel, except to try to push the reunion so far into the future, and under condition described in total symbolism, that such a reunion would violate the clear words in those prophecies.

What you, and those who subscribe to that same consensus, see as truth. Last I looked a consensus on anything does nto qualify as truth (I might note the Sun revolving around the Earth was a consensus). So you are nasty merely because of a theory.

He did alot more research then you ever did. He actually has historical evidence. And you have-your opinion!

Either he certainly didn't peruse the Assyrian writings, or you didn't give him a close read. As indicated above.

How hard is it to look up an old post. Look it up.

How hard is it to types "yes" or "no". You are being unreasonable and petty, it seems. I should read through all these words you posted to each other when it would take pressing two keys?

Is this the spirit with which you are making your other case?

I know the tactics of you bunch of frauds.

What is "our" tactics. You are hanging off a consensus opinion with no evidence in the face of written evidence the other way, and you call that supported by those records a "fraud"?

Too many real frauds have been perpetrated among people and have become the status quo. History is littered with them. I don't think you have guilty knowledge, just have been conditioned into a certain belief system before you were shown evidence for it.

665 posted on 08/30/2007 9:38:49 AM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)

To: fortheDeclaration

The House of Israel is the one who is being addressed and they are told what they had done. That is why they ask, 'what shall we do'. The English is very clear, but you guys have a problem with simple English sentences.

Are we still on this? The Jews, to whom Peter was talking, was right there in front of him. He refereed to Israel. I can't believe you parse the passage this way. You would have to be so mired in your own prior belief you can't read clearly.

But, the real point is, that you try to use this passage as some evidence that Israel has merged with Judah, against Hosea, and that passage clearly and without doubt can be seen legitimately another way. Therefore, it is no evidence at all. Do you understand the meaning of this fact to the support of your belief?

And where does it state that they would forget who they were as part of the curse on them-no where! The curse is that they would cease to be a Kingdom, not a people. The curse is on them as a people and it will continue until the Millennnial reign when all 12 tribes are reinstated and receive their land inhertances as stated very clearly in Ezek.48.

You yourself in a prior post, posted a passage from the Old Testament, using forgetfulness as God's judgment on them.

If you cease to be identified with a group (kingdom) for 6 centuries, you have forgotten who you were, as God intended. Later God will reunite them, after His purposes have been fulfilled.

But that "curse" was not on all 12 tribes. Judah clearly remembers.

Ezekiel has nothing to do with any notion of any "millennium" so named by those who impose their pre concepts on Revelation symbolism. If you think it does, post the specific passage(s) and explain them.

No, that is not the simplest explanation, nor is it consistent with prophecy and God's promises, since there is no history of it, nor is it in prophecy that those tribes would forget who they were!

I have already shown you the history. And I have shown you where you did not understand the the term in the parts of history you posted. For Hosea to reunite the two Houses, under one head they pick, which has not happened yet, and the consensus being that Israel vanished from history, how can you reach any other conclusion, except from a prior accepted belief system seeking to impose itself on the facts?

You belong to a sacred cow. I seek to make burgers out of it.

Dumbest thing I every heard.

Actually, I'd say basing your doctrine on a consensus contrary to evidence and without clear evidence for it is pretty dumb.

Well, doesn't he say that the blacks have forgotten their heritage as well?

Are you seriously saying the two are related?

That view that an entire people have forgotten who they are is for kooks and you British Israelite guys fit right in there with them.

You doubt the power of God to follow through with His judgments?

That was because they weren't a kingdom in Italy or Palestine at the time of the Roman Empire. They were under the authority of Rome, not a Kingdom. And a Kingdom doesn't have to be a particular size. A kingdom can be quite small.

You missed the point. A kingdom is the people. "Kingdom" is just a name describing a group of people. The people and the kingdom are one. You are trying to impute meaning to an abstract term. Throughout the scriptures God cares about people, and about groups like a "kingdom" only that it is a name meaning the people.

Those were the tribes moved by Assyria. There is no record of those tribes moving anywhere else-now is there?. So stop repeating things that has nothing to do with proving your theory. We know that the 10 tribes were dispersed to the Assyrian empire that is in the records. What is not in the records is that those same tribes went anywhere. That is what you have to show to prove your thesis. Not that they were in Northern Assyria.

There are numerous plates of inscriptions available that show people dressed in western Semite garb. There are numerous letters to the Assyrian king that mention Israelites being, called "Gamerians", traced back to "Khumri (Omri).

These letters were assembled by R.F Harper in 1930 and were translated by Leroy Waterman and published by the University of Michigan.

There are missives from Assyrian outposts near when the Median and Israelite tribes were placed, those that had not already moved to other places, after being impressed into tilling the land for tribute to the king, showing clear Israelite priestly clothing, being sighted moving north through what is now Turkey.

There are translated records of Israelite communities having trouble with Assyrian tax collectors, and prevailing because of numbers.

Why have you not been exposed to any of this?

I don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that they did. Since there is no records of any such movement, it is an historical myth. Your logic is as bad as your historical knowledge. History is about showing facts, which you cannot do, not putting forth conjecture and then asking me to prove them wrong. I can't prove that a UFO didn't move them either.

I have presented evidence. You seem to forget we are talking about 6 centuries worth of history between the fall of Assyria and Jewish Palestine.

The greatest part of the remaining tribes escaped from the Assyrian rule after the fall. Many went north. Many stayed in the land and were called other names.

Most had probably forgotten all relationship with Judah by then, except through tales. We are talking about a lot time here.

The notion of the vast number of Israelites merging with Judah appears false on its face, and appears to be the realm of those who haven't' researched further into the matter. All this makes up a prima facie conclusion.

The only way to challenge a prima facie conclusion is with greater facts, which you have not provided.

Yes, that is true. And those of the line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (known today as Jews) would be the heirs to the Covenant. Are there individuals who do not know they have Jewish blood, yes I am sure there are. But an entire group of 10 tribes didn't stop knowing who they were and become a different race of people.

You still are using a preconception of a consensus opinion that all were/are Jews. After all these centuries, the world can reasonably be said to be virtually covered with the seed of Abraham, and you say it is all comprehended in about 5 million or so Jews?

The word "Jew" is a mistranslation of the word "loudaious" and is to mean specifically the remnant of Judah, and would never have been applied to the tribes of Israel except the House of Judah, Judah and Benjamin.

Even if the tribes merged with Judah, Judah would not have allowed them to be called Jews. Jews have been very proud and territorial of their royal patent.

Hosea will be fulfilled after the Millennial reign. There is still a Tribulation ahead in which most of mankind is going to be wiped out, including 3/4 of the seed of Abraham. So, your attempts to deal with the population issue in Hosea are based on your own poor theology which doesn't know that God is going to repopulate Israel with the 12 tribes after most are destroyed, as stated very clearly in Matt.24 and Zech.13

We already discussed this. You have provided no link between Hosea and what you call the Millennium. You don't even know how the millennium will come about applied in real world physical existence, the nature of it applied there to or any connection of ancient peoples and prophecies related to that construct from complete symbolism.

I'll bet you believe in a "rapture" so God's chullins will be able to avoid pain in their bodies, too. And you call mine "bad theology".

666 posted on 08/30/2007 11:48:03 AM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)

To: fortheDeclaration

The tribes are reunited under the Millennial reign of Christ and the land inheritances are given out.

This is the group belief you subscribe to. Nothing is said anywhere that will make that connection.

That is what Hosea is discussing when he talks about the Northern tribes being the 'sand of the sea', it will be during the Millennial reign and not before.

Hosea speaking of Israel being the "sands of the sea" would mean them being very numerous. This specification is fulfilled by the seed of Abraham being spread all over the Earth in vast numbers by centuries of offspring of those whose seed traced back to Abraham, which it certainly should have by this time.

The Millennial reign need have nothing to do with it. Neither you nor I have any knowledge of what the Millennium is or how it will come in nonsymbolic terms and what it will look like. All interpretation thereof are from pre conditioning into a belief system.

We know nothing. We theorize much. I think your vulnerability is believing the theory is proved and absolute truth, like evolutioners believe in macroevolution.

667 posted on 08/30/2007 12:16:56 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)

To: William Terrell; Thinkin' Gal

And where does it state that they would forget who they were as part of the curse on them-no where! That view that an entire people have forgotten who they are is for kooks and you British Israelite guys fit right in there with them. FTD

You yourself in a prior post, posted a passage from the Old Testament, using forgetfulness as God's judgment on them WT

[Isaiah 42:16-19] And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not; I will lead them in paths that they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them. They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods. Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD's servant?

[Hosea 1:7-10] But I will have mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, by horses, nor by horsemen. Now when she had weaned Loruhamah, she conceived, and bare a son. Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

[Romans 11:25] For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

668 posted on 08/30/2007 1:48:43 PM PDT by Diego1618

I guess we’ll all find out when the times comes who’s right.

As an aside, how could the rapture possibly be secret? Wouldn’t somebody notice we were all gone?

669 posted on 08/30/2007 1:51:55 PM PDT by Not A Snowbird (Some people are like slinkys, the idea of them tumbling down a flight of stairs makes you smile.)

To: fortheDeclaration

First, you stated that it was your last post in the series-which it clearly wasn't Second, since you started posting to me it is up to you to let me finish the posts-not you. So, clearly, as with everything else you have a problem with simple etiquette. So, as long as you continue to post to me, I have the right to respond, which I am doing.

Oh, get off this silly carp. You should know very well I wasn't going to stop responding to you on this topic. You are th mouthpiece for a sacred cow, one built out of consensus instead of evidence.

Oh, no, I wouldn't think of it.

Good. Plenty of good hard challenges to this mindset was lost the last thread the tactic was used on.

Read chapter 12, and you will see the Lord's return in vs.10. That hasn't happened yet. Chapter 13 follows chapter 12. And Chapter 13:9 hasn't happened yet either. I know scripture is a mystery to you, but you ought to try reading it once in a while.

I mean, specifically where in the future. There is no mention of waiting until what you call the Millennium, especially since you don't know the logistics of that event, unless you can interpret symbology with confidence.

The future could happen in this world, in a way that, perhaps by revelation of some kind, or unambiguous records being uncovered, makes the knowledge of all these seeds of Abraham who know not what they are public in a way that can't be covered up.

Happening during a Millennium is your, and the camp of thought where you reside's, theory, and that's all it is.

The Tribulation, Matt.24:29-it says that right in the passage. Now, I am not going to do your reading for you anymore. You clearly a very lazy person when it comes to actually studying anything, thinking that your great 'reasoning' abilities are sufficient enough to forgo actual reading.

Thank you for your assessment. But you have already posted this and I have read it. I see no evidence that the reunion of Israel and Judah reuniting during this Millennium.

I'm trying to get you to show me something that relates the two.

No, what I am refuting is the myth that Israelites are not Jews, they are both the same and are called the same, since they have both intermingled together as a people and do not know any longer their individual tribes.

And I've been refuting the myth that all tribes are comprehended by the tiny number of Jews. Again, that is your theory. It is what you believe. And there is no specific evidence for it. And it doesn't make sense along side history, prophecy, God's promises to the seed of Abraham and Biblical authority.

t doesn't have to be that far into the Millennium. A couple of centuries will repopulate the earth as well as Israel. As for Revelation, the symbolism is explained in the Old Testament and it is clear that a Millennial reign will occur after a great Tribulation. You just don't want to deal with what prophecy actually says.

It doesn't have to be in what you call the Millennium at all.

If only a couple of centuries will repopulate Israel, then 6 centuries will repopulate in spades, maybe unto the sands of the sea, do you agree?

Israel is the sands of the sea, now. We don't need to wait until any Millennium.

I agree that the thousand year reign of Christ will come after tribulation, but folks that think they're going to be raptured up beforehand will miss it, yes?

Nothing in scripture mentions anything that might lead one to think that the fulfilling of Hosea will wait until Christ's return. There is good sense in the notion that Judah and Israel will have to be reunited in order for Christ to return.

It hasn't happened, but it will. And it can, given enough time and perfect environment.

Ok, wait around and see.

So, it makes alot more sense then to depend on your myth that the Israelites are someone else, like the Americans and British! LOL!

My evidence is a lot stronger than your evidence. Mainly because your position is a consensus based on wishes of certain groups that haven't studied the issue enough to know anything else to believe.

And some that would loose much conceptual power, and much specialness, if brothers under the covenant were as common as star in the sky.

Most of the world is going to be destroyed as well in the Tribulation as well, so there is not going to be anyone left that will constitute the sands of the seas.

I believe the Angel said the third part.

You just want to deny the fact of the Tribulation occurring and the effects it is going to have on the world, which the Lord made very clear in Matt.24.

I'll wager that these events will come down in a totally different way than you think.

I have to admit, your ignorance of prophecy is really mind-numbing. The dead in Christ will rise (1Cor.15) and they will be rulers in the Millennial kingdom, with Christ as the head, as the son of David (Ps.89).

The dead in Christ will rise in their spiritual bodies. Remember Paul describing how we will lose the corruptible body and put on one of incorruption?

That being so, what difference in the numbers of Israel, and how will it bless the nations of the Earth. What even will a nation mean?

No, you have adopted your idiotic theory because you do not know any prophecy, Bible, history or logic. What you are talking about is simply fables based on ignorance of the truth.

Blah, blah, blah.

On the contrary, I am describing prophecy.

You cannot assume anything of the sought, since the capital city of Samaria when it fell had only 27,000 people in it. God was whittling down the Northern Kingdom for years before the final deportation. So once again, your theory has no historical support, only conjecture that disregards the historical facts.

I've already described what 27,000 "deported" meant, and what the rest of the Israelites were used for in a prior post you haven't had time to respond to yet. No significant numbers were reduced, and we had 6 centuries for them to grow even greater until the birth of Christ. So I'll not repeat myself here.

God did no whittling, unless it was of knowledge of inheritance.

No, I don't have to prove anything.

You have to overcome prima facie evidence, as I explained in the last post in this set.

You have to prove that there were large numbers deported-which you can't.

I did. You haven't gotten to it yet.

You have to prove that those large numbers moved-which you can't.

Ditto. Already have.

You have to prove that those same tribes lost their memory of who they were and became someone else-which you can't.

Already have.

Now, I do not have to prove anything except to show that there is no a shred of historical fact to support your idiotic theory.

And you have not. That can be nailed down to other than ambiguous meaning.

It is up to you to prove any of those assertions listed. Since you cannot, your theory falls flat on its face. The number of Jews were scattered throughout Europe, in the Roman Empire and that is a well known fact.

That is correct. But the number of the seed of Abraham extant in Europe and elsewhere that are not called Jews and have no knowledge of their heritage is an emerging fact. You have already agreed to the essential portions of it.

Your assertion that there has to be a certain number of Jews to fulfill God's promise is a false premise that is not necessarily for God to fulfill God's Plan.

Not my assertion. Hosea's. And God's.

Try looking at Zech. 13:9. But as I said about you, your ignorance of the Bible is quite mind numbing as well as your inablity to read clear, plain English.

And what is the third part of the sands of the sea? The stars in the sky?

And Gentiles make up all nations. For added prove look up Isa.49:6 as well.

Isa 49: 6And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

Nothing here about the Earth being all gentiles except the Jews.

Matter of a fact the "tribes of Jacob" haven't been, in all their 5 millions, a salvation unto the end of the Earth. The Jews have been looking out for themselves only.

Who has been the "salvation of the Earth" so far? who has been a "shining light"?

What they have lost is memory of their particular tribe, not that they are of the lineage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

This a notion you have stated and not given any evidence for. This is, again, a theory, merely a consensus. If, as you contend, that the Israelite tribes were absorbed into other peoples (I agree that some were), the seed of Abraham should be covering the earth after all these centuries, and only 5 million or so acknowledge being Israelites.

And once again, what any Jew says regarding his own tribe is irrelevant since he cannot know what tribe he is from-there are no records.

But, have you asked one, have your checked it out instead of just making an assumption? And have you told him he didn't know what he was talking about? I want to hear the story.

So, what tribe are you from, since you must think you are an Israelite?

I have no idea if I'm an Israelite or not. You may be one. If the "British Israelites" are right, neither of us is likely to know even if we are.

The remnants of Judah know, all right. They kept track of it during the Babylonian dwelling and have been to this day.

Oh, the Millennium is clearly laid out in the Old Testament, in many Books, so stop playing ignorant. It is clear that there will be a tribulation first and then a Millennial reign in which Hosea will be fulfilled. So, your theory that millions of Israelites must exist so that Hosea can be fufilled is just another stupid illconceived assertion on your part, not based on any correct reading of scripture.

Oh, I have no doubt that Christ's reign will come. But unlike you who has the key to Revelation, I don't know how, exactly, that will manifest.

We know there will be tribulation, but that is all we know. We don't know what form it will take and how it will play out. We know some of the effects, expressed entirely in symbology.

That Hosea will be fulfilled then is your theory with no scriptural backing.

If the seeds of Abraham have inundated the Earth after all these centuries of being spread around, it is unlikely that the fulfilling thereof will wait until Christ returns. Matter of fact, Christ's return may just as credibly be conditioned on the fulfilling of Hosea.

And what part of those verses do you have a hard time understanding? Clearly there will be a time of Jacobs trouble (tribulation) and before that the Church will be removed since the church is not Jacob-Israel. [ that an Anti-Christ will arise that will come to power in peace, but will soon wage war against Israel (Dan.11, Rev.13) Daniel 11 could be talking about anything. There is nothing there about an Anti-Christ. Verses 11:36:45 are referring to the future Anti-Christ. But in order to know that you would have actually read your Bible a few times.

These versus link Hosea to being fulfilled at Christ's return to you? Please explain.

Jacob's trouble may not be the tribulation spoken about in Revelation. That is something you add to the words of the scripture.

This is all pretrib rapture crap. You have lots of dissenters and few believers in the world. Because yuo say it, that does not make it truth. There are as many passages against the rapture as there are for it. And the ones for ti, in my opinion, are ambiguous with other interpretations.

"Refers to" is another way to say that is how you interpret it.

Revelation speaks of the Anti-Christ and Chapter 12 refers to Israel. As for the symbolism of Revelation, it can be understood if one takes the time to compare the verses with others with the same symbolism, but for those who would prefer to live in a fantasy world, that would be too much trouble.

Doesn't seem to be any references to Israel in Revelation.

Understanding the symbolism in Revelation is pure vanity. Everybody has an interpretation, and most use the rest of the Bible to support theirs. Show me how your's carries any more credibility.

The Stone made without hands destroys the anti-Christ's Kingdom, that is Christ. Surely you have Christ referred to as the Stone (1Pe.2:6)?

You're saying that the statue is the Anti-Christ and Christ hitting it on its clay feet is the destruction thereof? This is an interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

I would take it to mean that a extremely powerful nation founded on weak principles and amoral ideals can be toppled by simple truth (stone cut without hands). Why would Nebuchadnezzar be dreaming about Christ killing the Anti-Christ?

I think this is another example of letting pre conditioning into an ideal clouding the vision and understanding.

I am not wary about using Revelation, since it is the word of God and is very clear to those who actually read the Bible and not use the Bible to make up false theologies.

It is very clear to various and sundry nutcases who have a prior accepted conviction to prove.

No, they stand up very well, But you actually to have know scripture to understand that-which you don't.

Sez you, in your enlightened condition of superior knowledge and wisdom.

Now, I am using the Bible the way it is suppose to be used, comparing scripture with scripture not ignoring those that don't fit my theological paradigm-which is what you are doing

And casting your pre conditioned acceptance of belief on it, like many representing a belief system do. Lumberyard.

And what makes you think anyone could be considered reasonable who would put forth a theory that has not facts such as yours? You are not reasonable, so your views on what is reasonable, and anything else mean nothing to me. You have shown yourself ignorant of the Bible, history, reading ability, and logic.

But my theory has hard, written facts recorded during the events by the people who participated in them.

You seem to be basing yours on some consensus. And inteprpreting scripture on a precondition belief in a pretribulation rapture, a conviction that God want to save His loved ones physical pain, which He has never done in scripture. God has used pain in scripture to teach and temper.

You have given nothing to refute those scriptures except that you do not believe they say what they do. Your refutation is the same as it is with all facts given to you-you simply brush them off and supply nothing in their place except empty rhetoric and hot air.

I just did. Above. and many times in this conversation. You have offered nothing material, except some misunderstanding of a history text.

Look them up, I am not here to teach you Bible.,/I>

I have. I've read them. They can say what you claim only if read with pre conceived idea and conviction.

And I am going to tell you once more, that the question is a moot one since the 'great nation's' of the world do not constitute the Israelites.

I gave you an "if", and you still avoided the question.

If you are saved, you are not part of any 'new covenant' that is for Israel, not the Church.

Jesus said He bought a new covenant. Paul verified it. I'll stick with those, thank you.

As for your responses to my allegation of unsureness, fear, tones of contempt, lack of decorum, nastiness and demeaning rhetoric and name calling.

Blah, blah, blah.

670 posted on 08/30/2007 2:33:35 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)

671 posted on 08/30/2007 2:55:44 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)

What do you think of the verse in Rev. 12:17, whom do you think the dragon is making war with? If you look in Rev. 13:7 you will find the answer.

At that point in the tribulation, anyone who holds to the testimony of Jesus will be “fair game”(to borrow a phrase)

And if the rapture comes at the end of the tribulation and all who have followed the beast are killed, and all of the people who believed in Jesus for their salvation are changed to become like the angels, where are the people and nations whom Jesus will rule for 1000 years?

If things happen as you believe, there will be no one left on the earth to rule.

During the first 3 1/2 years of the tribulation 1/3 of the total population of the earth will die, that now is about 2 billion plus people(6th trumpet) , add to that those who die during the seal judgments and close to 3 billion people will have died in 3 1/2 years, add to that those who die as a result of those wars of famine and disease and short rations.

Then we get to the last half of the tribulation, which is worse than the first half. about half of those survived the the seals and trumpet judgements will die, about 1.5-2 billion people. (after adding those who come to faith in Jesus during the tribulation and are killed that number could be higher).

Their is no one I know that I would like to see go through these judgements, so I plant seeds where and when I can to help as many as I can to avoid the comming wrath on this earth.

And yes, I believe that the church will be taken out of the world before God judges mankind. Believeng in a pre-tribulation rapture motivates me to share the good news of Gods forgivness of our sins and the hope that we are not taking part in the wrath to come.

672 posted on 08/30/2007 4:07:10 PM PDT by coincheck (America, the most generous country on the planet.)

To: William Terrell

God of Jacob, God of Israel (Part 2)
Hunt, Dave
September 1, 2006
Last month we noted that the only true God, the Creator of the universe and all things therein—the God of the Bible—has linked His name with and tied His integrity to Israel. Yet many evangelicals, including well-known leaders, insist that Israel is of no significance to God any longer, having been cut off for rejecting Christ and now having been replaced by the church. There are even groups (not only among white supremacists or cults such as Herbert W. Armstrong’s die-hard followers today) who persist in the ridiculous theory that the “Ten Lost Tribes” of Israel migrated to the British Isles and that therefore all those of British descent are the true Jews today. Some go so far as to say that all of the “white races” are the true Jews—as though not only England but all of Europe and Russia was uninhabited wasteland until these remnants of the “Ten Lost Tribes” settled there.

We have proved that the ten tribes taken to Assyria (2 Ki 17:6-23) were not “lost” but make up most of those called Jews today (see 2 Chr 34,35; Q&A Nov ’92, May ’96). Far from Israel being cut off, hundreds of prophecies foretell Israel’s importance in world affairs in the last days, the attack of all the world against her at Armageddon, her rescue by the Messiah, and her glorious final restoration in the Millennial Kingdom. Nor is there ever a reference to Israel anywhere in Scripture that could possibly be interpreted as meaning the British Isles or the British people, much less the “white races”!

Most of the more than 2,000 references to Israel or Israelites in the Bible and the thousands of prophecies (already fulfilled or yet to be fulfilled) pertain to the historical land of Israel in the Middle East, whose boundaries are clearly described (Gn 15:18-21), or to the people who lived there for nearly 2,300 years, were cast out under God’s judgment, and will be brought back by God so that not one ethnic Jew will be left outside Israel (Ezk 39:27-29).

We know who the Jews are today by DNA testing. The Israeli Immigrant Liaison Bureau requires DNA tests where there is some question as to the authenticity of claimed Jewish ancestry. Such tests would draw a complete blank if applied to the average person of British descent, and prove British-Israelism to be utter folly. No other ethnic group without its own land and scattered around the world for more than 2,000 years has or could maintain its DNA identity as have the Jews.

It is not important to know who is an American, German, Arab, Greek, et al. In contrast, it is vital to know who is a Jew. Why? About 70 percent of the pages of Scripture are taken up in recounting Israel’s history and prophesying her future: her continued and unrepentant rebellion against God, His reluctant and long-delayed but finally severe discipline (the worst of which is yet to come), the Jews’ worldwide dispersion, their re-gathering from all over the world back into their own land in the Last Days, hundreds of prophecies concerning Israel’s present key role in world affairs, of her greatest trial just ahead (Jer 30:7) when two-thirds of all Jews on earth will be killed (Zec 13:8,9), and of her final restoration under the Messiah (Zec 12-14). Unquestionably, Israel is the major subject of God’s Holy Word. To be wrong about Israel is therefore to be wrong on almost everything in the Bible.

The One whom the Bible 203 times calls “the God of Israel” has sworn by an everlasting covenant that Israel (three times called the “apple” of His eye–Dt 32:10; Lam 3:18; Zec 2:8) will never cease to exist as a nation: “Therefore fear thou not...O Israel...though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I...will not leave thee altogether unpunished” (Jer 30:10,11). “Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city [Jerusalem] shall be built...it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever” (Jer 31:38-40). The language could not be clearer here and throughout God’s Holy Word.
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/2558

673 posted on 08/31/2007 4:02:22 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

To: William Terrell

Jews are Jews
“Jews and Arabs are all really children of Abraham,” says Harry Ostrer, M.D., Director of the Human Genetics Program at New York University School of Medicine, an author of the new study by an international team of researchers in the United States, Europe, and Israel. “And all have preserved their Middle Eastern genetic roots over 4,000 years,” he says. The researchers analyzed the Y chromosome, which is usually passed unchanged from father to son, of more than 1,000 men worldwide. Throughout human history, alterations have occurred in the sequence of chemical bases that make up the DNA in this so-called male chromosome, leaving variations that can be pinpointed with modern genetic techniques. Related populations carry the same specific variations. In this way, scientists can track descendants of large populations and determine their common ancestors. Specific regions of the Y chromosome were analyzed in 1,371 men from 29 worldwide populations, including Jews and non-Jews from the Middle East, North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, and Europe. The study, published in the June 6, 2000, issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (on-line May 9, 2000), found that Jewish men shared a common set of genetic signatures with non-Jews from the Middle East, including Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, and these signatures diverged significantly from non-Jewish men outside of this region. Consequently, Jews and Arabs share a common ancestor and are more closely related to one another than to non-Jews from other areas of the world” (www.bibarch.com/News/News-Genetic-Brothers.htm). Regardless of how convincing the arguments of British Israelism and its kindred philosophies may sound, the pronouncements of God’s Word concerning the preservation of Israel still stand. See Jeremiah 31:35-37.

http://www.thebereancall.org/node/113

674 posted on 08/31/2007 4:03:51 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

To: William Terrell

Tom: Dave, a little background, did this idea come from, you know as we know, the kingdom of Israel was really divided after Solomon, Rehoboam his son just wouldn’t do, wouldn’t follow the council of the elders, good council that he was given, and God raised up Jeroboam, and Israel was split into the Northern kingdom and the Southern kingdom.

The two tribes of the Southern kingdom would be Judah and Benjamin, and then the 10 of the Northern kingdom, isn’t that really what it’s referring to? Their dispersion, I mean, that’s where we get the term, Samaritans, from. Those of Syria were intermingled with the Jews to some degree, and the Jews were taken out of that land, for the most part. So, isn’t that where the idea basically comes from?

Dave: It’s where the idea comes from but it’s not God’s idea, and He did not divide them, man divided them. And the point I’m making is that although they are under His judgment now, scattered everywhere, not just the 10 tribes, but everybody is scattered, that He promised that He would preserve them, and in the last days would bring them back into their land. And Jesus promised that his disciples would sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. So, if 10 of them are lost, then the Bible isn’t true, and as you said, God must be 100% true, so this is very serious. So, if 10 tribes are really lost, then God’s a liar, and Jesus is a liar. Now, what about it? What does the Bible say? See, this is a myth, as you said, it comes out of the idea, well, because there were 10 tribes carried away by the Assyrians, that therefore they never came back. Now that’s a joke! Of course they came back.

Tom: And this is a teaching sometimes referred to as British Israelism. Who was it, World Wide Church of God, I believe taught it, and others?

Dave: Right, and the white races are the Jews, we’re the 10 lost tribes. Now, again, that is some kind of a joke, Tom.

We’re not the 10 lost tribes, obviously. If we are, Wow! we have really exploded, and these 10 tribes have practically taken over the world because the European, the white people, I mean, go up into Scandinavia, and all over, it simply isn’t true.... So, it makes nonsense of the Bible, okay. But if we went to, for example, went to 2 Chronicles Chapter 30, it will tell you it’s not too many years after they were carried away into Assyria that they started coming back, and you’ve got a lot of them back there. I mean, how are you going to keep these Jews out of their land? They’re not in irons, they are not having their legs shackled, and so forth. So, they got back.

Now, if you went a few more chapters, 2 Chronicles 34, the revival, the Passover, under Josiah, 7 of the tribes are named as participating in this. They are rebuilding the Temple, they are getting donations, you know, offerings from all of these tribes, and out they go to these various tribes they are named.

So, they are not lost! I don’t know why that myth has stuck around so persistently! But that’s the way with many myths....

http://www.thebereancall.org/node/1895

675 posted on 08/31/2007 4:28:49 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

Diego, please explain the following to me:

Michah 4:5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.

That can't mean God is allowing worship of other gods. It goes against everything He teaches. To me it had to be mistranslated or these "gods" are those that made the first resurrection and are the priests (teachers) of those that were not part of the first resurrection. (Ps.82:6 and John10:34-35).

Please let me know your thoughts on this (as well as anyone else that has an opinion).

Thank you........Ping

676 posted on 08/31/2007 4:52:52 AM PDT by Ping-Pong

To: William Terrell

[Inever said that, I said that the Jews were dispersed and did not forget who they are.]

I have history and the New Testament, as well as the Old Testament prophecies that state that the Jews would be dispersed as part of their judgment.

Interest groups?

The presumption is that because nothing was heard of Israel as Israel (the name) they must have been wiped out, which gives lie to one of God's promises for them, and prophecies about them.

No one said that the Israelites were wiped out, only that they reunited with the Southern tribes as individuals and thus, still exist and are known today collectively as Jews.

Two more assumptions you have made you cannot prove.

One, that they forgot who they were, when it is possible they kept their traditions alive and eventually returned to the Land on an individual basis.

We see former Assyrian lands mentioned in the 2nd chapter of Acts.

Two, that there were alot of them, considering when their capital city of Samaria fell, it only had 27,000 people in it.

So, once again, your theory is full of assumptions that you cannot prove.

From prior posts, you apparently don't know what "deported" means when applied to Assyrian conquered peoples.

I know what deported means by the Assyrian, it means putting them into a land very much the land they left so they could more easily assimilate.

[ Not hard to prove, they were all over and they were certainly dispersed after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. In the Book of Acts, Paul is going throughout his journey's to the 'Jew first, and then the Gentiles'. ]

First you haven't proved that the numbers of Israel were merged with the Jews. It is simply a presumption upon which you base speculation. And the fall of the Temple in 70AD had what to do with the dispersal of Israel as Judah, specifically? What does the passage of Paul's statement the Gospel is to be teached to the Jew first? You leave out his other words. He also said the good things would come to the Jew first for good behavior and bad things to the Jew first for bad behavior.

First, the fact is that many of the Israelites had returned to Israel as shown by passages in 2Chro. and the fact that Anna of the tribe of Assar was present in Lk 2.

Second, the fall of Jerusalem led to those same Jews being dispersed throughout all of the Roman Empire as slaves.

Third, there was no need for the entire quote, since the point of the quote was that Paul was going to Jews throughout his missionary journeys that entailed the vast Roman Empire.

Had nothing to do with a journey. If you think so, post the passage and explain it. Remember, the line of Judah was to produce Jesus, so God gave them first pass, obviously.

Again, the point is that the Jews/Israelites were scattered throughout Europe.

You can place the interpretation you do on this passage only if you have a prior belief. Any passage, read in the light of a belief, can be shaded toward that belief.

Well, if anyone should know that it would be you and the rest of those who believe your goofy theory!

[ So, Italy is part of Europe. ]

Yes. The most southern part of Italy, closest to Palestine. There is a lot more Europe.

So?

Jews were in Italy and they were in all parts of Europe as well, including Britain, which was part of the Roman Empire.

[ They were also spread throughout the rest of Europe and Asia Minor as shown by the first chapter of Acts where the nations they came from are listed. No, that curse was made on all of the Hebrew people before the split in the Kingdoms. And it pertains to all of the 12 tribes.]

The curse put on them in Deut, long before they were split into two separate kingdoms.

How does this statement apply

[ The only difference is that they were split before the dispersion happened, first to the 10 tribes and then to the last 2 remaining tribes. All 12 tribes returned and were in Israel at the time of Christ and were dispersed again after the fall of the Temple in 70 AD and were not a nation again until 1948. ]

There is no assumption, it is based on fact and Biblical history.

The only one with assumptions is you who cannot understand history and the Bible.

Those 10 tribes were back in Israel after the deportation as seen by Anna being there and the House of Israel being mentioned by both the Lord and Peter.

The problems with the merging with Judah are many, numbers, Assyrian records, prophecy, God's promises to Israel, contrasted against a few passages in the New Testament that are ambiguous.

No, the problem is that you are ignorant of any numbers (you do not know how many Israelites ended up in Assyria), ignorant of Assyrian records (you did not know of Sargan's record of only 27,000 being deported from the Captial of Samaria) and God's promises which state that the Kingdom will be reunited, and it will be, and they will be of the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not any other race.

I keep asking for something to prove your assertion and each attempt I have been able to explain otherwise. Do you folks (that subscribe to the consensus on your theory) make a habit of organizing your world view on convictions with so little evidence?

You have zero evidence for your theory.

All you know for a fact is the the 10 tribes were deported to Assyria.

Now, name a single other fact that you can cite!

You do not know how many.

You have no prove that those tribes went anywhere as tribes.

Your entire theory is simply a figment of someones imagination.

[ They will not be a Kingdom until the Millennial reign after the Tribulation occurs. ]

I think your distinction between the label for a group of people and the group of people themselves is laughable. Having to use such reasoning usually means you going down the wrong path.

I think your inability to distinguish between simple concepts reveals a childlike intelligence.

[ The Millennium is clearly stated in those verses that were given to you. You just want to deny what you read which refutes your heretical, idiotic theological view. But why let the facts get in the way of a good fable! ]

There has been nowhere that you have produced any evidence that the prophecies of Hosea and Ezekiel have anything to do with the Millennium.

Ofcourse they do, they show when Hosea prophecies will be fulfilled.

The House of Israel cannot be as the sands of the sea, 2/3 of them get destroyed in the Tribulation-you remember the Tribulation-Jacobs trouble (Jer.30:7).

Note the word Jacob, referring to all of the 12 tribes, not just the tribe of Judah.

The Millennial reign is very clearly depicted in Isaiah.

All of Israel had a view of what the Messiah would be like and it was a conquerer to bring in the Millennial reign, not a suffering saviour.

That is why they were looking for a King and not a saviour dying for the sins of the world.

[ No Israelites were in those areas that did not know they were Jews. Stop making up history. ]

Short answer amounting to a statement with no support. Only your belief otherwise makes that statement. Israelites had over 6 centuries to migrate into those regions, and there are records made at the time that indicate they were headed that way.

No, history backs up my view as well as the Bible, with both Christ and Peter referring to the House of Israel.

It is you who have no support for your assumptions and myths.

[ You have zero evidence and no presumption of anything like that happening, not from history, not from prophecy, not from anything in the New Testament. And to keep repeating a lie doesn't make it a truth. No Israelites moved anywhere after the Assyrian captivity except in your fantasy world. ]

,I> History: Assyrian records, 23,000 of them. Prophecy: Hosea and Ezekiel, yet to be fulfilled and obviously not to be applied to a spiritual realm only and do not in any way imply that Christ will be the head of the reunited Judah and Israel. New Testament: clear passages, already posted to you, mentioning the House of Israel as present in the region, but not among the Jews.

There is not a single Assyrian record that states that those 10 tribes moved anywhere.

Now, if you have such a record produce it or stop citing it as a source for something that is false.

I have cited two published historians, one on the history of Assyria which states that those 10 tribes assimilated into the surrounding culture.

Only individuals from those tribes returned to the Land.

As for Hosea, the reading of it is for a future event, when the Israelites will be reunited to the to other 2 tribes in the Millennial reign.

We know this by seeing those tribes listed in the inheritance given in Ezek.48.

So, you are just misreading Hosea, as you do the rest of the Bible.

[ They were either assimilated into the surrounding people or they were joined with the Southern tribes and became intermingled with them and became known as Jews as well. ]

You have no records of any of the Tribes migrating anywhere-so stop your lying!

But you miss an obvious fact. Even those assimilated with the Medians will still carry the line of Abraham, the covenant, and God's promises thereto.

No, it will be those who are in the lind of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob that will receive the promises.

If some individuals have that racial lineage, then and only then can they be considered in the line of the Hebrew Promises.

All others are Gentiles.

[ Ofcourse there is, they were in Israel when the Lord was there and Peter addresses them in Acts 2 as the House of Israel. James sends out an epistle to the 12 tribes. There is alot more evidence of there assimilation then your myth of the tribes roaming to Europe and then forgetting that they are Hebrews! ]

Hey- it is to the 12 tribes!

What part of the 12 tribes do you not understand?

If you look at a map of the ancient world, you will see all this occurred in a relatively tight region. Only the lack of speedy communication in that day prevented detail from being known, but the essential events would have been known. Jesus refereed to the "lost sheep" of the House of Israel. Judah was right there in front of Him and they weren't "lost".

They were 'lost' in the sense they were -without their sheperd!

And that was for all of the 12 tribes of Israel, not just Judah.

Once again, your inability to understand simple English is showing.

And once again, James did not write to the 10 tribes, he wrote to the 12 tribes, and thus, he knew where they were, they spread throughout the Roman Empire-as Jews.

[ Why should I ask any Jew anything since he cannot know what tribe he is from. He has no records to tell him. All the genealogical records were destroyed. ]

There are no official records.

There is DNA testing, but there are no official records.

Ask one then tell him he can't possible know and see what he presents you with. Until you do that, your claim is mere rhetoric.

No my claim is based on fact.

The reason that no one can tell for sure what tribe he is from is because the records were destroyed in Jerusalem and those that survived, later in Alexandria Egypt.

That is why no one can claim any lineage for the Kingship from the tribe of Judah, there are no records to support that claim.

No, many Jews from the tribe of Levi did take the name of Cohn, so they would know what lineage they are based on that last name, but not on the basis of any official records.

[ And there is nothing to indicate that they did not know who they were either. ]

You claim the Jews don't know who they were and their lineage.

I claim that they know that they are Jews, but do not know their particular tribes (with the exception of the Levi's).

Try to grasp the difference.

[ So, if those tribes were in the Roman Empire (which they were) they were intermingled as a people, not as a separate entity, with differing tribes. ]

The Jews remained then and remain to this day separate from any people they find themselves among.

Yes, many do, but not always.

Before the Nazi Holocaust, the Jews were losing their own identity by intermarrying with the Germans.

[ No, go and look it up, you are clearly intellectually a very lazy person. ]

You make the claims, you present the evidence.

I have prevented more evidence in one post then you have in all of yours combined.

All your posts are based on conjecture, not a fact in them.

The writer of this history is either a very lazy person or you have not read what he said.

Well, he said what I said, and it refutes your entire false theory which is based on hot air.

[ It means all the people of the city, which totaled only 27,000. We have already seen that the army had been whittled down to only 10,000 men in an earlier chapter. The Northern Kingdom was a shell of itself when it was finally dispersed, it did not number in the millions as you conjure up in your fertile imagination. ]

And that would support my view, not yours!

If most of those tribes were left in the land, then there were not millions deported and thus, it would have been easy for individuals of those tribes to make their way back to the land.

This was a policy of Tiglath-pileser III. Did your professor mention any of this?

Yes, he explains the deportations very clearly.

No, Sargon is referring to the captives he took from the Captial city.

So, your intention to get around that number is futile.

Whent that city fell it had only 27,000 people left in it.

Then of those deported and placed among the Medians and 4 generation to replenish their numbers. Between the time of the final destruction of the Assyrian empire and the birth of Christ was over 6 centuries, after mortal threats posed by the Assyrians.

Well, that is nice fantasy history.

Any actual prove?

The deportation occurred in 1Ki.17 and that is the only recorded instance of the deportation.

But it is true many were left in the Land as seen by them going to the South-so your theory is defeated and shown to be nonsense by your own admission.

Lots of babies can be born in 6 centuries.

Yes, and they were born in the land of Israel as well and came to known as Jews.

So all 12 tribes were in the Land when the Lord arrived-by your own admission.

[ Did I say that the 10 tribes were wiped out? They still exist, as Jews. ]

What the heck are you babbling about?

The Israelites who went South increased and became known as Jews.

That is how Anna from the tribe of Assar go there.

Your reasoning ability is fatally flawed.

No, your theory is the one without any historical evidence and Biblical basis.

As you said, the Israelites were left in the land.

What people the Assyrians did deport did not constitute the majority and thus, the Israelites would have been in the Land when Christ came.

[ You have not provided any facts to anything. As for calling names, if you want to keep posting nonsense and reject the truth, that is what you deserve, rebuke and ridicule. ]

You have not come up with a single fact supporting any exodus that left Assryia and went into Europe.

You are lying through your teeth about Assyrian records saying they did-and you know it.

The prophecies will happen in the future, since the House of Israel, is not yet as the 'sand of the seas' because they are intermingled with the other 2 tribes.

So, try actually providing a single fact to show any actual departure from Assyria by those tribes, which you have no admitted did not make up the majority of the members of the tribes.

Anyone who would say that the Israelites left for Europe before Moses went out of Egypt has a screw loose!

What you, and those who subscribe to that same consensus, see as truth. Last I looked a consensus on anything does nto qualify as truth (I might note the Sun revolving around the Earth was a consensus). So you are nasty merely because of a theory.

Well, since you have no facts to support your nonsense, your theory is simply a myth, and does not even rate to be considered a theory.

[ He did alot more research then you ever did. He actually has historical evidence. And you have-your opinion! ]

Either he certainly didn't peruse the Assyrian writings, or you didn't give him a close read. As indicated above.

He is an expert in Assyrian history, so he, unlike you, actually know the records.

[ How hard is it to look up an old post. Look it up. ]

How hard is it to types "yes" or "no". You are being unreasonable and petty, it seems. I should read through all these words you posted to each other when it would take pressing two keys?

Like I said, look it up.

Is this the spirit with which you are making your other case?

I know the spirit in which you are posting, so stop pretending otherwise.

[ I know the tactics of you bunch of frauds. ]

What is "our" tactics. You are hanging off a consensus opinion with no evidence in the face of written evidence the other way, and you call that supported by those records a "fraud"?

You have no records that support you and stop lying about it!

There is not a single Assyrian record that says a single word about any Israelites leaving Assyria and you know it.

So your tactics are misinformation and lies!

And don't post me about the Assyrian record that has the Israelites in Northern Assyria and having on the garb of the Priesthood.

I want the location of the record that states that the Israelites left the area.

What is littered throughout history are frauds and liars like yourself, who make claims without any actual facts to back them up and then rewrite history to make it fit their own warped, distorted view of it.

677 posted on 08/31/2007 5:49:04 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

To: William Terrell

Regarding your assertion regarding any evidence that the 10 tribes left Assyria and that is in their records,

It is noteworthy that the Israelites taken by the Assyrians from Samaria to the Habur district of north-west Mesopotamia and to north-west Iran (the cities of the Medes) (2Ki.17:6) appear to have been assimilated completely since we hear no more of them. (The Might that Was Assyria, H.W.F. Saggs. (1984), pg.263).

So, stop spreading misinformation by saying that there any Assyrian tablets saying that the Israelites migrated anywhere.

You know there aren't.

678 posted on 08/31/2007 6:45:25 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

British Israelism: A Mirage

by R.P. Nettelhorst

ITS FOUNDATION AND EDIFICE

British Israelites make a number of claims and offer a substantial amount of “proof” for them. The foundation of their belief is found in their insistence that Israel was removed from the land in 721 B.C.; that only the tribe of Judah—the Jews—was left. However, we find that the Biblical record precludes any possibility of the other tribes being lost. Thus a close examination will reveal their beliefs to be without basis.

Where Are the Ten Tribes?
A Scripture often used by British Israelites to support their claim that all Israel was taken captive is 2 Kings 17:18: “Therefore the Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only.” At first glance, this plain statement of Scripture might indeed seem to indicate that no one was left except the tribe of Judah. However, it must be remembered that Levi and Benjamin were also left behind, as clearly indicated by such passages as 2 Chron. 34:30,32. Even some British Israelites admit to this fact. Therefore, 2 Kings 17:18 must be interpreted as referring to Judah as a kingdom and to the end of the Northern Kingdom as a separate entity.

Scripture refutations: The end of the Northern Kingdom did not mean an end to the ten tribes, as a brief review of Israel’s history will show. In the ninth year of Hoshea’s reign the people of Israel were exiled to Assyria (2 Kings 17:6). This corresponds to the sixth year of the reign of Judah’s King Hezekiah (18:9-11). Hezekiah was then followed by Manasseh (20:21-21:18), Amon (21:19-23) and Josiah (21:24).
Beginning in the twelfth year of Josiah’s reign, the Bible records the following: “And he [Josiah] burned the bones of the priests upon their altars, and cleansed Judah and Jerusalem. And so did he in the cities of Manasseh, and Ephraim, and Simeon, even unto Naphtali, with their mattocks [in their ruins] round about. . . . Now in the eighteenth year of his reign ... he sent Shaphan . . . Maaseiah . . . and Joah. . . . They delivered the money that was brought into the house of God, which the Levites that kept the doors had gathered of the hand of Manasseh and Ephraim, and of all the remnant of Israel, and of all Judah and Benjamin; and they returned to Jerusalem” (2 Chron. 34:5-9). It is very clear from this passage that Judah was not alone. Here, more than ninety years after the fall of the Northern Kingdom, the Levites were able to collect money from Manasseh, Ephraim and the remnant of Israel.
King Josiah was determined to keep the Passover as it should be kept. In 35:18 we are told that “Neither did all the kings of Israel keep such a Passover as Josiah kept, and the priests, and the Levites, and all Judah and Israel that were present, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” Obviously, then, Judah was not alone in keeping the Passover either. People from the Northern Kingdom kept it as well. Historical records from the time also indicate a large number of the ten tribes remained in the land.

In ancient Near-Eastern texts Sargon’s record of the conquest of Samaria makes it clear that most of the Israelite people were not taken to Assyria: “I besieged and conquered Samaria [Sa-me-ri-na], led away as booty 27,290 inhabitants of it. I formed from among them a contingent of fifty chariots and made remaining [inhabitants] assume their [social] positions.”

Archaeological evidence indicates that the “remnant” mentioned in 2 Chron. 34:9 was not a small group. According to recent archaeological findings, as the Northern Kingdom fell, thousands of refugees fled south to Judah in order to escape the Assyrians. From the death of Solomon until the end of the eighth century B.C. the city of Jerusalem grew very little. But suddenly, around the end of the eighth century, the population exploded, expanding three or four times its original size, growing from 7,500 to about 24,000. The evidence for an influx of refugees is not confined to Jerusalem. Numerous settlements in the Judean hills around Jerusalem, in the Negev, in the Judean desert and along the Dead Sea were heavily settled for the first time in the eighth century B.C. Therefore the lost tribes are found where the Assyrians left them: in the land of Palestine.

Appealing in the Worst Sense
The tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel were never lost to begin with, so the whole foundation of British Israelism is removed. But then, when examination is made of the system constructed upon this nonexistent base—whether history, philology, the Bible or science is researched -—nothing is found to support British Israelism and everything is found to be against it. Though it is easy to laugh at this belief system, it must never be forgotten that a very ugly and a very dangerous thing can grow from it. British Israelism often appeals to those who wish some justification for their racial prejudice; and when it comes to prejudice, facts do not seem to matter at all.

http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume4/BritishIsraelism.htm

679 posted on 08/31/2007 7:15:04 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

Regarding Hosea 1:10-11,

Lest there be any question as to the greater covenant of God to Israel, He now fortells their future restoration and blessing. Though the northern kingdom was about to be removed from their land, yet the day was coming (in the Millennium) when their prosperity would be numberless. That undoubtedly refers to the greater posterity of Israel in Christ. Though God would temporarily disown Israel because of their sin, the day would come when they again would be called sons of God....In the coming restoration and regathering of Israel, both divisions thereof-Judah and the northern kingdom-will be reunited as one nation. They will have as their head, their Messiah, Jesus Christ....that day is yet to come. (Understanding the Bible, David H.Sorenson, Minor Prophets, pg.154)

The Ryrie Study bible writes in its footnote,

Having predicted judgment, Hosea assured the people of their ultimate restoration, numerically and spiritually. Jezreel, a place of judgment in verse 4, is viewed in verse 11 as place where God will bless Israel during the Kingdom age.

Bullinger writes in his footnote,

children-not fulfilled in any other People, now, but will yet be in the future of Israel

Hosea 1:10-11 refer to the future regathering and repopulation of both Houses, the House of Israel and the House of Judah

EZEK 37:15 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,

EZEK 37:16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim and for all the house of Israel his companions:

EZEK 37:17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.

EZEK 37:18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these?

EZEK 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

EZEK 37:20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes.

EZEK 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:

EZEK 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.

EZEK 37:23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.

EZEK 37:24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.

EZEK 37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

EZEK 37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.

EZEK 37:27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

EZEK 37:28 And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.

680 posted on 08/31/2007 9:02:25 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (We must beat the Democrats or the country will be ruined! - Lincoln)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794