The 144,000 And Mount Zion
- Thread starter guysmith
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You do too, since you clearly don't understand that not all who came out of Egypt in Israel were of God.
Kim
Kim
She is Hebrew (Israel). Again, not all Tribes are Jewish (Judah). I am of the Tribes of Israel but not necessarily Jewish. Because of my Scottish heritage I might have some of the Tribe of Judah in me.
precepts
Member
- Feb 24, 2008
- 180
- 0
- 16
- 57
What was it , numbered with Israel or not number with Israel? You guys really freak me out how you try to drag things out by changing subjects, now blogs!
If you can't accept the facts, then you must have another agenda, like in the days of Christ. Some didn't recieve christ because they didn't believe, it was because they had committed the unpardonable sin!
Not all are innocent! In the days of Noah only 8 souls were considered innocent. :mellow:
If you can't accept the facts, then you must have another agenda, like in the days of Christ. Some didn't recieve christ because they didn't believe, it was because they had committed the unpardonable sin!
Not all are innocent! In the days of Noah only 8 souls were considered innocent. :mellow:
Many in the Church don't understand about the term 'Jew', and where it came from.
The Jewish historian Josephus said that title of Jew first began to be used by the small remnant of Israelites that returned to Jerusalem after the 70 years Babylon captivity. He said it originated from the tribe of Judah. Per the Book of Ezra, that returning remnant was only a portion of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. And he said all that lived in the land began to use that title also. That included non-Israelite among them that took the name Jew. It did not include the ten tribes that were removed out of the holy land prior to Judah going into the 70 years Babylon captivity. The ten tribes were scattered around 120 years prior to Judah's captivity to Babylon.
This is why Apostle Paul often used the title of Jew about his brethren that were in Jerusalem in his day. All those at that time were Jews, simply because they were the descendents of that returning remnant from Babylon. But as Ezra also showed, not all that returned from Babylon were Israelites. The priests, and Nethinims which returned with Judah were not of Israel, yet they took the name Jew also.
Then there's the matter of the Samaritans in the northern lands of Israel. The Samaritans were not Israelites at all, for they were placed in the northern lands of Israel by the king of Assyria after he had first removed all the ten tribes captive to the land of the Medes. The Samaritans were from five provinces in Babylon. After Judah's return, when things were going well with them, lot of the Samaritans would also claim they were brethren of Israel. This can be seen in John 4 about the Samaritan woman that met our Lord Jesus at the well.
None of that history about the Jews involved the ten tribes of Israel, for the ten tribes were still scattered abroad at that time of Judah's return to Jerusalem. Per Josephus, the ten tribes were still scattered abroad in his day of 100 A.D., even after Christ's crucifixion. The matter of the ten lost tribes of Israel is history. It is not some myth some try to claim.
The Jewish historian Josephus said that title of Jew first began to be used by the small remnant of Israelites that returned to Jerusalem after the 70 years Babylon captivity. He said it originated from the tribe of Judah. Per the Book of Ezra, that returning remnant was only a portion of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. And he said all that lived in the land began to use that title also. That included non-Israelite among them that took the name Jew. It did not include the ten tribes that were removed out of the holy land prior to Judah going into the 70 years Babylon captivity. The ten tribes were scattered around 120 years prior to Judah's captivity to Babylon.
This is why Apostle Paul often used the title of Jew about his brethren that were in Jerusalem in his day. All those at that time were Jews, simply because they were the descendents of that returning remnant from Babylon. But as Ezra also showed, not all that returned from Babylon were Israelites. The priests, and Nethinims which returned with Judah were not of Israel, yet they took the name Jew also.
Then there's the matter of the Samaritans in the northern lands of Israel. The Samaritans were not Israelites at all, for they were placed in the northern lands of Israel by the king of Assyria after he had first removed all the ten tribes captive to the land of the Medes. The Samaritans were from five provinces in Babylon. After Judah's return, when things were going well with them, lot of the Samaritans would also claim they were brethren of Israel. This can be seen in John 4 about the Samaritan woman that met our Lord Jesus at the well.
None of that history about the Jews involved the ten tribes of Israel, for the ten tribes were still scattered abroad at that time of Judah's return to Jerusalem. Per Josephus, the ten tribes were still scattered abroad in his day of 100 A.D., even after Christ's crucifixion. The matter of the ten lost tribes of Israel is history. It is not some myth some try to claim.
I know because the "unpardonable sin" can only be committed at the end by certain people and we are not there yet.
precepts
Member
- Feb 24, 2008
- 180
- 0
- 16
- 57
Veteran's
The Egyptians, as well as other pagan religions, were about causing either the dead or a statue to come to life. Study the religion of the 4/5 beast kingdoms, that's how I got to understand the bible. You'll be surprise at what you find! :mellow:
I don't think the origin of the word Jew has anything to do with anything. :mellow:
Sounds like a decree, do you have any knowledge as to what the unpardonable sin is? The bible states in Revelation, the Beast's kingdom was filled with darkness when the 5th vial was poured out which corresponds to the Egyptian black out. The river Euphrates dried up at the pouring out of the 6th vial and at the time Cyrus conquered Babylon, leaving the river beds dry enought for Cyrus' troop to invade the city. The 11 Roman emperor only institutionalize the mark, the mark is what the kings of the earth receive in order to "jump" the wall into the eternal city, the kings of the earth that attacks the heavenly Jerusalem with the Beast and false prophet. The Mark has always been the Egyptian "Openning of the Mouth" ceremony, ancestor worship, the practice of raising the dead whether physically of spiritually.
The Egyptians, as well as other pagan religions, were about causing either the dead or a statue to come to life. Study the religion of the 4/5 beast kingdoms, that's how I got to understand the bible. You'll be surprise at what you find! :mellow:
The 5th vial hasn't even happened yet! It definitely didn't happen in Cyrus' time. Are you the kind of person that says everything has happened already?
Kim
Yes, I know what the unpardonable sin is. It is refusing to let the Holy Spirit speak through you when you are delivered up, and it can only be committed by those that are delivered up. It's all part of "rightly dividing" the Word of God: times, dispensations, etc.
As far as the rest of your timeline goes ... you are in error!
precepts
Member
- Feb 24, 2008
- 180
- 0
- 16
- 57
Omni's
Why not ask me what I know? Do you know what I know?
Paul's
I thought you said you hadn't interpreted Revelation as yet? How can you be so sure? If you haven't interpreted Revelation as yet, how can you argue and deny anything. Revelation's not interpreted yet you set boundaries and adhere to your bias opinion and teachings.
Why not ask me what I know? Do you know what I know?Paul's
So the unforgivable sin is no longer the mark of the beast? :huh:
You have all ready shown what you think you know, and much of it is in error.
The unforgivable sin has never been the mark of the beast.
...
Paul's
Then I must assume the mark is forgivable.
No, if someone bows a knee to antichrist and discovers they have been deceived in time and repent, they can be forgiven. But we are talking about a time when we are moving from the Dispensation of Grace into the Dispensation of Judgment.
precepts
Member
- Feb 24, 2008
- 180
- 0
- 16
- 57
Verses please! :mellow:Paul's
precepts'
Then I must assume the mark is forgivable.
No, if someone bows a knee to antichrist and discovers they have been deceived in time and repent, they can be forgiven. But we are talking about a time when we are moving from the Dispensation of Grace into the Dispensation of Judgment.
Similar threads
