World's oldest rock found in W. Australia; 4.374 billion years

[Everythingg]

my point is that if your god exists, he's a hoe. people are moving farther away from believing in that bullshyt. people worship thousands of other gods and he doesnt do shyt

Free will my brethren. But in due time, all will be taken care of.

Besides dont you already see so many people have turned to the Hebrews to learn about their God just as the prophets prophesied right?

 

[Everythingg]

well idk breh, u claim to know who created it a claim thats a thousand times more outlandish

Well if you seek as you havent already, God Almighty could make Itself know to you as well. I see it as God had mercy on me to reveal things to me in my personal life though I did not deserve it. So each day I give thanks for the blessing of life though I slip up at times

 

[Everythingg]

Well, let's see what Romans 2:28-29 considers to be a jew



Romans 9:6-8



We can see this in the Tanakh as well when God healed a foreign pagan in Naaman who acknowledged him as the one, true God, yet cursed a greedy Israelite in Gehazi (2nd Kings 5) along with a ton of other references.

To summarize, a fake jew (especially within the context of revelation 2:9 and 3:9) is anyone who professes to be a jew, yet doesn't do the lord's will. In the New Testament, the Pharisees were fake jews, despite being of the natural branches.

And this goes for proselytes as well. King Herod was an Edomite convert, yet he did wickedness in the sight of the lord. He was also a fake jew. Not cause he was an Edomite, but because he was not doing the lord's will.

Many who practice rabbinic Judaism fall under that umbrella as well, along with the "Hebrew-Israelites" who kick hate on street corners.

And yet in throughout the OT, I never heard the term "fake jew". Why? I mean king after king rejected God's will to worship idols of other nations. But never were they called "fake jews" because it is a bloodline related thing. That is like saying you are fake (lineage of your dad). You're not no matter how you act. So a jew would be either an adherent to the religion of JUDAISM or from the tribe of Judah. If the latter then there is no such thing as a "fake jew" as its a bloodline related thing. If its the former, it still makes no sense since Judaism wasnt around at the time of Revelation.

Therefore, I lean to its literal people saying they are jews but are not. But actually worship Satan under the guise that they are worshiping the God of Abraham. You may be onto something though with the rabbinic jews if they're the ones that follow the talmud and kabballah

 

[Czar]

And yet in throughout the OT, I never heard the term "fake jew". Why? I mean king after king rejected God's will to worship idols of other nations. But never were they called "fake jews" because it is a bloodline related thing. That is like saying you are fake (lineage of your dad). You're not no matter how you act. So a jew would be either an adherent to the religion of JUDAISM or from the tribe of Judah. If the latter then there is no such thing as a "fake jew" as its a bloodline related thing. If its the former, it still makes no sense since Judaism wasnt around at the time of Revelation.

Therefore, I lean to its literal people saying they are jews but are not. But actually worship Satan under the guise that they are worshiping the God of Abraham. You may be onto something though with the rabbinic jews if they're the ones that follow the talmud and kabballah

Being a Jew and being an adherent of Judaism were mutually exclusive in the Old Testament. 2nd Maccabees 2:21 verifies that.

Once you became a proselyte you were held accountable just as the rest of Judah and the other tribes to keep Torah.

Then again, Israel, Judah and their Kings after David were either cut off of completely destroyed due to their disobedience.

Would you say that Saul, the 1st king of Israel, was a good king who won favor with the Most High? Despite being rejected by him for his wicked ways and killing himself?

Another thing, becoming a Jew or Israelite wasn't and still isn't exclusive to bloodline. If that were the case the Hasmoneans woulda never made the Edomites converts. The Persians wouldn't have become Jews either in Esther 8:15-17. Nor would the Egyptians have joined with Israel during their Exodus of Egypt and been counted as Israelites. In fact, Sheshan of the tribe of Judah wouldn't have picked Jahra, his Egyptian servant, to help continue the line through Ahlai, his daughter in 1st Chron 2:31, 34-35.

By contrast, didn't the Benjaminites go to war with the others tribes and lose tons of men in the book of Judges due to their wickedness?

And Rabbinic Jews created many of the false teachings used by jews today. Rabbinic Judaism IS Pharisaic Judaism. Think about that for a second. The Pharisee's "oral tradition" states that black skin was a curse on Ham. This means that the Jews weren't ALL black, considering these men who were of the natural branches were flat out placing black skin into the box of a curse. This is why the Sadducees and Essenes always rejected their teachings.

Those Pharisaic teachings would later become the basis for Muslims and Catholics to enslave brothers and sisters in Africa and.... you know the rest.

To me, that more than anything defines a fake jew or israelite. One who doesn't respect his fellow man and judges people by their outward appearance, when the Most High said it himself in 1st Samuel 16:7

But the Lord said to Samuel, “Don’t judge by his appearance or height, for I have rejected him. The Lord doesn’t see things the way you see them. People judge by outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.

 

[Everythingg]

Being a Jew and being an adherent of Judaism were mutually exclusive in the Old Testament. 2nd Maccabees 2:21 verifies that.

Once you became a proselyte you were held accountable just as the rest of Judah and the other tribes to keep Torah.

Then again, Israel, Judah and their Kings after David were either cut off of completely destroyed due to their disobedience.

2nd maccabees isnt scripture and even if it was considered so, it doesnt hold precedence over the law.

Would you say that Saul, the 1st king of Israel, was a good king who won favor with the Most High? Despite being rejected by him for his wicked ways and killing himself?

Another thing, becoming a Jew or Israelite wasn't and still isn't exclusive to bloodline. If that were the case the Hasmoneans woulda never made the Edomites converts. The Persians wouldn't have become Jews either in Esther 8:15-17. Nor would the Egyptians have joined with Israel during their Exodus of Egypt and been counted as Israelites.

I dont know what Saul has to do with the conversation.

Esther wasnt in the dead sea scrolls and is the only book in the OT that wasnt found in with the dead scrolls Even if this wasnt so, do you think this holds precedence over the law? Can you go to the law and show what it says of foreign born vs Israelite people?

By contrast, didn't the Benjaminites go to war with the others tribes and lose tons of men in the book of Judges due to their wickedness?

And Rabbinic Jews created many of the false teachings used by jews today. Rabbinic Judaism IS Pharisaic Judaism. Think about that for a second. The Pharisee's "oral tradition" states that black skin was a curse on Ham. This means that the Jews weren't ALL black, considering these men who were of the natural branches were flat out placing black skin into the box of a curse. This is why the Sadducees and Essenes always rejected their teachings.

Those Pharisaic teachings would later become the basis for Muslims and Catholics to enslave brothers and sisters in Africa and.... you know the rest.

To me, that more than anything defines a fake jew or israelite. One who doesn't respect his fellow man and judges people by their outward appearance, when the Most High said it himself in 1st Samuel 16:7

Breh all you're doing is conjecture. The FACT is that a "Jew" is either an adherent of the religion JUDAISM (which wasnt given to Israel during Moses' days) or a descendant of the tribe of Judah. You cant be a "fake descendant" of the tribe of Judah unless you're lying about being a descendant. So one can be a "fake" descendant" of one's father (Judah) when one is lying about him being their father. But not simply by misbehaving. I mean you can look at it that way, but you dont have much to back it up. But one can be a "fake" adherent of the religion Judaism. Then again, Judaism wasnt around when the one that was in Revelation spoke of fake jews.

I must say though you did teach me something about where that black skin curse came from though.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Let me ask though. You're not saying we are going to communicate wit these (demonic) beings using math right? If not then how is that the universal language?

Here's just one way:



Go to 5:00.​

 

[Czar]

2nd maccabees isnt scripture and even if it was considered so, it doesnt hold precedence over the law.

What is scripture may I ask? We have 3 Hebrew versions of the Tanakh. The Masortes, the Dead sea scrolls and the Septuagint.

If the age of text is the argument here, the Septuagint or Greek translation was actually created from some of the oldest Hebrew scrolls at the time.

Moreover...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Hebrew_Bible_canon

There is no scholarly consensus as to when the Hebrew Bible canon was fixed: some scholars argue that it was fixed by the Hasmonean dynasty,[4] while others argue it was not fixed until the second century CE or even later.[5]

I dont know what Saul has to do with the conversation.

You DO know I was making a contrast, right?

Esther wasnt in the dead sea scrolls and is the only book in the OT that wasnt found in with the dead scrolls Even if this wasnt so, do you think this holds precedence over the law? Can you go to the law and show what it says of foreign born vs Israelite people?

Yet Esther is in the Septuagint, which was translated from older scrolls than the ones found in the Dead Sea.

And who said anythign about holding precedence over the Law? If anything, It's verifying what the Law states.


Leviticus 19:33-34

“‘When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

The Most High himself said the following in Ezekiel 44:9 and 47:22-23

This is what the Sovereign Lord says: No foreigner uncircumcised in heart and flesh is to enter my sanctuary, not even the foreigners who live among the Israelites.

It shall be that you will divide it by lot as an inheritance for yourselves, and for the strangers who dwell among you and who bear children among you. They shall be to you as native-born among the children of Israel; they shall have an inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel. And it shall be that in whatever tribe the stranger dwells, there you shall give him his inheritance,” says the Lord God.

So were the Egyptians who left Egypt with the Israelites NOT considered Israelites in Exodus 12:37-38?

Even though the Most High said the following...

Exodus 12:41-50

And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt. 42 It is a night to be much observed unto the Lord for bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this is that night of the Lord to be observed of all the children of Israel in their generations.

More commandments from Adonai.

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “These are the regulations for the Passover meal:
“No foreigner may eat it. 44 Any slave you have bought may eat it after you have circumcised him, 45 but a temporary resident or a hired worker may not eat it.

46 “It must be eaten inside the house; take none of the meat outside the house. Do not break any of the bones. 47 The whole community of Israel must celebrate it.

48 “A foreigner residing among you who wants to celebrate the Lord’s Passover must have all the males in his household circumcised; then he may take part like one born in the land. No uncircumcised male may eat it. 49 The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you.”

50 All the Israelites did just what the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron. 51 And on that very day the Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt by their divisions.

Notice a pattern? These strangers/foreigners had to become circumcised in order to be amongst the Israelites and partake with them, even during Pesach.

Breh all you're doing is conjecture. The FACT is that a "Jew" is either an adherent of the religion JUDAISM (which wasnt given to Israel during Moses' days) or a descendant of the tribe of Judah. You cant be a "fake descendant" of the tribe of Judah unless you're lying about being a descendant. So one can be a "fake" descendant" of one's father (Judah) when one is lying about him being their father. But not simply by misbehaving. I mean you can look at it that way, but you dont have much to back it up. But one can be a "fake" adherent of the religion Judaism. Then again, Judaism wasnt around when the one that was in Revelation spoke of fake jews.

I must say though you did teach me something about where that black skin curse came from though.

Lol i've been hitting you with rock solid proof straight from scripture AND history.

Yet ironically, you're using conjecture to deflect what I'm showing you. Again, one has to acknowledge that Judah was the most imporant tribe the Most High created. Considering he spared them longer than the Northern kingdom, placed the temple and holy city within the kingdom of Judah, gave them possession of Benjamin AND the Levites (who had no land anyways), allowed them to return to the promised land and rename it Yehuda, made them the tribe of the Messiah while established David's throne eternally through them etc.

And Judaism wasn't around during the writing of Revelation??? Lol! 2nd Maccabees alone in which the term Ioudaismos (literally Judaism) appears was written BEFORE even one scroll of the New Testament ever existed.

 

[Czar]

But since you missed my edit and bloodline seems to be one of your biggest issues here @King-Over-Kingz

In fact, Sheshan of the tribe of Judah wouldn't have picked Jahra, his Egyptian servant, to help continue the line through Ahlai, his daughter in 1st Chron 2:31, 34-35.

Care to explain this?

 

[Everythingg]

What is scripture may I ask? We have 3 Hebrew versions of the Tanakh. The Masortes, the Dead sea scrolls and the Septuagint.

If age is the argument here, the Septuagint or Greek translation was actually created from some of the oldest writing of the Hebrew Tanakh at the time.

Moreover...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Hebrew_Bible_canon

One isnt going to take the greek version of the Hebrew version. The tanakh doesnt have it and the dead sea scrolls doesnt have it. Not to mention that its not the law

You DO know I was making a contrast, right?

Did this contrast have anything to do with Saul being called a fake jew? Because I dont remember that part in there but maybe you can make your contrast more clearer?

Yet Esther is in the Septuagint, which was translated from older scrolls than the ones found in the Dead Sea.

And who said anythign about holding precedence over the Law? If anything, It's verifying what the Law states.


Leviticus 19:33-34

Esther is not in the dead sea scrolls which was a group of people from the house of Israel. Thus they were following every book we have in the OT except Esther for some reason. Not to mention that it doesnt hold precedence over the law

Oh and does Leviticus 19:33-34 say the foreigner is now an Israelite? Or does it say that the foreigner would be treated in the same way as an Israelite? Because these are two different things of course.

The Most High himself said the following in Ezekiel 44:9 and 47:22-23

Ezekiel 44:9 mentions foreigners

Ezekiel 47 mentions foreigners as well as treating them the same as an Israelite born It doesnt say they become Israelites especially since it continues to call them foreigners

So were the Egyptians who left Egypt with the Israelites NOT considered Israelites in Exodus 12:37-38?

No they were not. Thats why in verse 38 it differentiates them by saying "MANY OTHER PEOPLE WENT UP WITH THEM.... In each of your verses that are supposed to be supporting your stance, its differentiating Israelite from foreigner. Not in the way they're treated, but just the bloodline. Not everyone is a son of Jacob friend.

Even though the Most High said the following...

Exodus 12:41-50

Nowhere does it say they become Israelites. Just that they are one in the same (in treatment) as Israel. But Israelite refers to a PHYSICAL son of Jacob. That doesnt mean that a person cannot come and be as an Israelite abiding by the God of their ancestors(Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). What Im referring to is that they're not a son of Jacob.

More commandments from Adonai.



Notice a pattern? These strangers/foreigners had to become circumcised in order to be amongst the Israelites and partake with them, even during Pesach.

The pattern I notice is that all your passages differentiate ISRAELITE (son of Jacob) from foreigner (not son of Jacob). Not that these people live by a different law when worshiping the Almighty of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Not that these people are considered less important than the sons of Jacob. Not that these people will be rejected for not being sons of Jacob. Just that they are not sons of Jacob. And each one of your passages made it abundantly clear by differentiating them by calling one set "foreigner" and the other set "native born" or "Israelite".

Lol i've been hitting you with rock solid proof straight from scripture AND history.

I wouldnt call you telling me that the same law applying to the foreigner and Israelite means that the foreigner is all of a sudden an Israelite as "rock solid proof". I also wouldnt call quoting Maccabees and Esther as "rock solid proof" either. But all in all an Israelite is a son of Jacob. I dont get whats so hard to understand about it but I guess if you want to make it harder than it has to be, go with your THEORY.

Yet, you're using conjecture to deflect what I'm showing you. Again, one has to acknowledge that Judah was the most imporant tribe the Most High created. Considering he spared them longer than the Northern kingdom, placed the temple and holy city within the kingdom of Judah, gave them possession of Benjamin AND the Levites (who had no land anyways), allowed them to return to the promised land and rename it Yehuda, made them the tribe of the Messiah while established David's throne eternally through them etc.

And yet nowhere in the OT is one called a "Fake" for not following the law of God Almighty despite many instances where it could have happened. None of what you said here changes this fact and the fact that nowhere in the law or the prophets does it say foreigners will become sons of Jacob. What it does say is that they will become AS the Israelite. But that is in treatment and responsibility that comes with worshiping the God of Abraham. This is open to people of all backgrounds. But they wont just hop up and become sons of Jacob without the bloodline.

And Judaism wasn't around during the writing of Revelation??? Lol! 2nd Maccabees alone in which the term Ioudaismos (literally Judaism) appears was written BEFORE even one scroll of the New Testament ever existed.

Well that word is not "literally Judaism". What it is referring to is the way that the jews followed. This way was not Judaism. Nowhere did Moses instruct Israel to follow Judaism. Nowhere did Abraham instruct Isaac to follow Judaism. Same with the prophets and the instructions they gave on the behalf of their God.

So try again friend. If you're going to give it another go, go ahead and go the law and exemplify where Moses instructed the house of Israel to follow Judaism. If you cant, well my point is proven.

 

[Everythingg]

Here's just one way:



Go to 5:00.​

This is not math friend.

And its fiction.

So I dont know what you're getting at

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

This is not math friend.

Mathematics is the basis of sound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_acoustics​

 

[Everythingg]

But since you missed my edit and bloodline seems to be one of your biggest issues here @King-Over-Kingz



Care to explain this?

Theres not much to explain. Clearly it calls my human brethren Jarha an Egyptian which clearly differentiates him from an Israelite.

Are you trying to prove my point yourself?

 

[Everythingg]

Mathematics is the basis of sound.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_acoustics​

But you know none of your fellow brethren thought music was the universal language right?

Not to mention what you brought forth was fiction. How can you say musical notes are the universal language? Im sure you wouldnt go there, but if you want to I'll let you do it yourself.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

But you know none of your fellow brethren thought music was the universal language right?

Not to mention what you brought forth was fiction. How can you say musical notes are the universal language? Im sure you wouldnt go there, but if you want to I'll let you do it yourself.

Music IS a 'universal language'. I used fiction to demonstrate a scientific/mathematical fact known as 'rhythmic structure'. Without it, music is impossible.
​

 

[Everythingg]

Music IS a 'universal language'.​

How so?