It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by BIHOTZ
No. Please read a little more.
Jesus was brown.
Originally posted by Merriman Weir
"British Israelism" is no more nuts that an Iron Age, desert-based, sky god suddenly deciding he likes the U.S. of A better than anywhere else the minute white people turn-up there in any great numbers.
Hundreds and hundreds of years of devotees, martyrs and spreading of The Word and desert sky god was just thinking "I can't wait to get out of this dump, I fancy moving to a place with guns and casinos!" all that time!
Originally posted by WhoKnows100
The ten tribes headed by Joseph were dispersed around 700BC, having been divorced by God Himself for breaking His Covenant.
The two tribes headed by Judah remained in the covenant so that the Saviour of the world could be born. Jesus was the king of Judah, and salvation cometh out of Judah.
We see throughout the gospels that Jesus came to His Own, but that most rejected Him. He stated that, however, He had come for the lost sheep of the House of Israel. The Samaritan woman at the well was not a Judahite, but rather a divorced Israite descended from Jacob. We see that many of the Roman soldiers fell to their knees in knowledge of who He was, and that that the "Greeks" came seeking Him. The leaders and teachers of the law wanted His death out of envy, knowing that He had declared that the Kingdom was being taken from them and given to those whom would produce good fruit. Joseph's son Ephraim was prophecied to become a "multitude of nations", and that "Gentiles" were to become the "fullness of the Gentiles". These are the same as "Gentiles" simply means "nations" of a similar race/ethniticity. Substitute the correct word "nations" for "Gentiles", and it becomes clear that Jesus came for the remnant of all of Israel from both Houses, through faith.
Jesus is the stick by which the two Houses of Israel were to be reunited. Thousands of Judahites accepted their Messiah, which flies in the face of British Israelism teachings which state that the "Jews" are still awaiting the acceptance of Jesus. But Paul clearly explained that many didn't believe "For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel" - that not all of those descended from Jacob are the Israel of God (the remnant). Any of us can clearly see the locations of Christians throughout the world and throughout history. There are no large pockets of professing Christians in Asia, India, Japan, Africa, China and the Middle East. Why not? It is God who calls, and Israel (the people) were, and are, His Portion in this world through which He is effecting salvation. The remnant have always put their trust and faith in Him through His chosen branch, the Messiah. Looking at the world today, it is clear that only the populations of the western nations are the ones being actively encouraged to forsake the God of their forefathers - the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is only the populations of the western nations whom are being encouraged to accept occultism and the beliefs of others, to go astray through the love of sin and immorality. It is Satan that chases Israel, and therefore he has no need to further deceive populations that he already controls through other false religions. It is the descendants of the woman (Israel) that he is actively swaying away from their Saviour, Christ Jesus, and as shown through the history of Israel, it is through the love of sin and sexual immorality that he does it. Nothing new under the sun, what was will be again.
Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by GBP/JPY
Ithink britain is ephraim, america manasseh
The claim that the British or any other European people are descended from the Israelites is not backed up by anything. I will never understand why people, with their own unique culture insist on identifying themselves as somebody else.
Originally posted by Awen24
for the love of crap. Some people buy the most ridiculous rubbish (not referring to you, OP). Replies below:
Mickierocksman asks?
1. Jesus was of the linage of David & caucasion?
Originally posted by Awen24
The first half of this sentence is fact. The second half is pretty clearly fiction. Jesus was born to Mary, a Jewess. .................. this also means that anyone AFTER 70ad has no basis on which to claim that they are the Messiah from the line of David... because such a claim cannot be proven.
Mickierocksman asks?
2. This linage populated Britain. (Dispersement of the ten tribes?)
Originally posted by Awen24
This is called "British Israelism".
It is based upon a particularly horrific interpretation of both Scripture and history, and has no validity. I'll allow you to do your own research on this one, as it's not even worth addressing, in all honesty.
Mickierocksman asks?
3.Should christians help all people in need or only the chosen ones of the right race, religion and colour of skin?
Originally posted by Awen24
I'm not entirely sure how this question fits in with the first two.... or how it fits in at all.
I can see two possible threads that might lead to this line of thought:
1) Israel are God's chosen people
Isaiah 19:25 Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.
Originally posted by Awen24
2) For a time ("the time of the gentiles"), Israel has suffered God's rejection... and the church, "as one grafted in to the vine", receives this same blessing.
Nowhere in Scripture are these two facts used as a basis for discrimination against anyone. Even in Scripture, the fact that Israel & the Church are "chosen" is purely and simply for the fact that they are the vehicle by which God is unveiling His plan of redemption for ALL of mankind.
Israel was chosen because she was to be the heritage and lineage of the Messiah.
Originally posted by Awen24
....................... and God is an amazing artist.
Well, that isn't quite right.
Isaiah 19:25 Whom the Lord of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.
Israel was the Inheritor of GOD's Land, The Holy Land. Does this denote being chosen, possibly, but not specifically, as verse 25 shows. Egypt is GOD's People. GO FIGURE.
Judah is of Abraham's Lineage and is Caucasion.
Traditionally, Japheth has been believed by some to be the progenitor of the peoples of Europe. Thus "Japhetic" came to be used as a synonym for Europeans, as well as Asians. In medieval Europe, the world was believed to have been divided into three large-scale racial groupings. In addition to the Japhetic peoples of Europe, the Semitic peoples were equated with all Middle-easterners, Arabs and Israelites, and Hamitic peoples with Africans.
l. The fake ‘midrashic’ (i.e. haggadic = legendary) 14-set genealogy of ‘Iesous’ in the 1st canonical Greek gospel ‘according to Matthew’ (whoever he was) skips over a number of Judaean kings (who reigned between c. 680 BCE and 621 BCE) in order to keep his fake sets of 14 going (D-V-D = i.e. 4 + 6 + 4 = the gemmatrial number for the Messiah based on the ‘number’ for the name ‘David’) –
Yet ‘Matthew’ adds FIVE whorish (sexually compromised) women to the set (odd for a genealogy for the Messiah) including Rachab the Harlot, Tamar (raped by her brother Yehudah), Ruth (who threw herself sexually at her late husband’s cousin Boaz, then lived (possibly as a lesbian?) with Naomi her mother in law) , then there’s the promiscuous Jebusite princess Bath-Shebiti (‘Bath-sheba’ lit. ‘daughter of the 7’ i.e. gods) who married to Uriah the Hittite commited Adultery with ‘David’ to produce the (illegitimate) clan chieftan Jedediah (i.e. ‘Sholomon’, lit. ‘peaceful’) – then Miryam of Galilee, the 5th in a long line of whores….or as AMADEUS asks (quoting C.K. Barrett) ‘what exactly was ‘Matthew’ trying to tell us about her character?’
2. The so-called ‘Magnificat’ poem of ‘Mary’ in the 3rd canonical council approved Greek gospel (‘according to Luke’ whoever he was) includes phrases like ‘blessed be YHWH, who has looked favourably upon the ‘gross-defilement’ of his handmaiden…’ –
Now if Miryam of Galilee was an old woman at the time, post menopausal, her ‘gross-defilement’ i.e. ‘sexual humiliation’ would naturally (for a middle eastern woman of the time) be barreness (=biological inability to produce ‘sons’)) – but since she was supposed to be young at the time, the ‘gross defilement ’ (in its CONTEXT) that ‘Luke’ mentions in his Greek (‘TAPEINWSIN’) can only mean RAPE (or possibly ‘seduction’ i.e. date-rape).
3. The weird bastardy (i.e. MAMZER) echoes in the 4th council approved Greek Canonical Gospel ‘according to John’ whoever he was) about ‘WE (in the Greek intensive) were NOT born of fornication:
John 8:41 “WE (in the Greek intensive) know who OUR father is !’
(the Greek intensive for WE in this pejorative sneer could be better rendered into modern English as something like ‘At least WE ourselves know who OUR OWN Father is…”) – which carries a kind of double-entendre underneath it.
At any rate the ‘sneer’ (C. K. Barrett) seems to indicate that there was some kind of bastardy insult hurling going on in the scene – although admittedly, these are not recorded historical literal word for word notes being taken here – and the pejorative language (being hurled at R. Yehoshua’s parentage may well be more general against all Galileans whom the Judaeans (at least in the 4th ‘gospel’ !) apparently equated with “Sammaritans” (i.e. half-breeds) e.g. John 9:34
‘You were steeped in defilement from the day of your sinful birth (i.e. bastardy), and do you dare to teach US? Then they threw him out of the hall….’
John 8:48 ‘Are we not absolutely right in labeling you a Samaritan, and one possessed of Belial?’
4. The rough Hebrew idea of a MAMZER (i.e. bastard or ‘one born of illicit union’) could mean a legitimate child who was conceived during menstruation, or one conceived out of wedlock, or could refer to two tribal blood lines illegally ‘mingling’ such as a member of the ‘priestly’ tribe of LEVI ‘sexually squeezing’ (‘to form one bone’ with) a member of e.g. the tribe of JUDAH – the birth legally timed within marriage or not…
So one does NOT really know what ‘kind’ of MAMZER is meant, although the Talmud mentions c. 400 CE that ‘he who must never be named’ (i.e. Yeshu) was conceived during the time of menstrual uncleanliness as being the reason why he was popularly known as a MAMZER (‘born of illicit union’ i.e. a bastard).
The large question of course is : Are all the MAMZER accusations in the gospels the REASON why the virgin birth stories were concocted