EZEKIEL

 

and YHWH’s

 

 Judgment

 

 

for the

 

Good News

 

PEOPLE

 

 

 

VOLUME IV

 

The Great Commission

 

 

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

 

 

Judgment for the

 

 

 Good News People

 

 

 

 

Volume IV--The Great Commission

 

 

 

 

 

by

 

an unworthy servant

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you shall know the truth,

 

and the truth will make you free.

 

(John 8:32)

 

 

Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho.  The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States.  Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.age-end.com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

 

Volume IV--The Great Commission 

 

 

CHAPTER                                                                              PAGE

 

 

      -                  Cover Page                                                                                                         1

 

      -                  Title Page                                                                                                             2

 

      -                  Contents                                                                                                              3

 

      -                  Publisher’s Preface                                                                                           5

 

 

Part M--The True Recipients of the Good News

 

      46               The Real Commission                                                                                       6

 

      47               Yisrael in the Diaspora                                                                                    13

 

      48               The Publicized Great Commission                                                               28

 

      49               The New Testament Writers Wrote                                                               43

 

      50               Shaul In More Detail                                                                                        57

 

      51               The New Covenant                                                                                          73

 

      52               Still More on Shaul                                                                                          85

 

      53               More Relevant Scriptures                                                                               92

 

      54               The Scriptures are for Yisrael                                                                      106

 

 

Part N--YHWH Chose Yisrael 

 

      55               A Particular People                                                                                        122

 

      56               YHWH Selects for His Kingdom                                                                  127

 

      57               Numbering the Election                                                                                143

 

      58               Qara-Hineni-Berit Hadashah-Hesed                                                          156

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

 

 

Publisher’s Preface

 

Greetings!  The following presentation is volume four of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.age-end.com web site. 

 

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world.  In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one. 

 

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material.  It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message! 

 

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1.  It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins:  left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers). 

 

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope. 

 

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers.  May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him.  Shalom (peace) to you and yours! 

 

an unworthy servant, Sukkot 2005 CE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 46--The Real Commission

 

 

The Backdrop 

 

Before even looking at the commission given YESHUA and the New Testament Apostolic Assembly, it is imperative to take a brief look at a few facts which are crucial to appreciate to ever begin to understand the so-called “Great Commission” that Christians preach and teach so much about. 

 

In the historic past, in the land of Canaan, the nation of Yisrael became divided into two parts--the House of Yisrael and the House of Yehudah.  They co-existed together for about 250 years in the form of the Scripturally discussed divided kingdom days in the books of I and II Kings.  From the point of their separation, it is incorrect to try to mix these two peoples and nations.  There were two of them and they were different. 

 

Another very cogent fact from history is that they both were extremely rebellious and evil.  The MOST HIGH became so angry over their wickedness that He took action to impose the national end of both kingdoms.  In taking action against Yisrael, He actually went through the process of divorcing her since she was symbolically married to Him in the Old Testament covenant relationship.  She became divorced and lost Yisrael. 

 

With Yehudah, He also took action against her by imposing a captivity and servitude for seventy years in which Yehudah was expelled from Canaan land.  But He never divorced Yehudah, per se.  Thus, YHWH’s covenant with Yehudah continued to the first century CE. 

 

But possibly, with the Jewish involvement in the death of YESHUA, it might be possible to conclude that their role constituted their abolishment of the then OT covenant. 

 

As will be assessed in subsequent chapters, there are references to a coming new or renewed covenant with both the House of Yisrael and the House of Yehudah.  This fact alone is sufficient to suggest that both houses lost their covenanted relationship with The ELOHIM by the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70 CE. 

 

The histories of both Yehudah and Yisrael and where their modern peoples can be found in the world today will be forthcoming in later chapters herein.  There is no need to even begin to cover that theme now.  Suffice to say, Yisrael became lost Yisrael or the lost tribes of Yisrael.  That fact alone has enormous impact on the real commission granted to YESHUA and the Apostolic Assembly. 

 

 

The Work of Yohanan

 

Turning now to the subject at hand, and it in terms of the New Testament focus, the first clue of a preaching commission surfaces at Elisheva's conception of Yohanan the Baptist.  When the news of this child was broke to Zekharyah (the father), the messenger was careful to say that Yohanan's mission was to turn the "children of Yisrael" to The MOST HIGH (Lu 1:16). 

 

Consequently, when Yohanan was born, his father declared that he was to give knowledge of salvation to "his people" (Yisrael--Lu 1: 77).  Not long after this event, the world was faced with the real advent of salvation with the birth of The SON OF ADAM.

 

He was named YESHUA (His proper, given, Hebrew name which means "salvation"), as He was destined to save "His people Yisrael" from their sins (Matt 1: 21).  He was The PROMISED DELIVERER of the seed of Avraham (Heb 2:16).  From His birth, He also was to be The SHEPHERD, RULER and KING over the people (sheep) of Yisrael (Matt 2:6; 27:42; Mk 15:32; Lu 1:33; 54; John 1:49; 10:2, 11). 

 

In time, This Same DELIVERER YESHUA came into contact with the messenger Yohanan (the Baptist), as Yohanan was baptizing near Bethany (Bethabara) at the Jordan River crossing.  There, at this very early time, Yohanan recognized that YESHUA was to “be made manifest and be revealed to Yisrael” (Jo 1:31, per “The Amplified Bible”). 

 

 

The Commission 

 

The next statement on mission came when The MESSIAH called His twelve disciples together for their formal commission and grant of authority (Matt 10:1-42;  Mk 3:14-19;  6:7-11;  Lu 9:1-6).  The ANOINTED ONE was careful to point out that they were not to go to the collective nations; but rather, only to the "lost sheep of the house of Yisrael" (Matt 10: 5-6). 

 

First, this discussion with the twelve took place in Canaan among at least religious Jews (perhaps mainly from the tribes of Binyamin, Levi and Yehudah, which then lived in the land as the remnant of the former House of Yehudah). 

 

 

The Lost Sheep of Yisrael 

 

Next, the reader at once must be struck with the familiarity of the wording of this charge, in comparison with Yechezkel's writings of some 600 years earlier where he wrote at length about the then divorced House of Yisrael.  Yechezkel spoke of them in the context of being "lost sheep," who will be sought out and gathered by The ELOHIM in a future time period.  And then, they will become YAH’s people (Ezek 34:2-16, 30). 

 

Yeshayahu the prophet likewise had some perceptive comments on the reality of “lost” Yisrael.  He correctly observed that in a future day of YHWH, lost Yisrael would be gathered from the land of Assyria (Isa 27:12-13--here, the KJV incorrectly translates the Hebrew “ahvad,” meaning lost, to perish).  In another instance, Yeshayahu followed up with a similar message (Isa 49:5, 20-22). 

 

The prophet Yirmeyahu also perceived Israelites as “lost sheep” gone astray because of false shepherds (Christian preachers?) who had deceived and misled them (Jer 50:6).  In this context, Yirmeyahu additionally saw an eventual future reunification of the children of the Houses of Yehudah and Yisrael (Jer 50:4). 

 

Furthermore, the fact that The MESSIAH singled out the "lost" sheep of the House of Yisrael also may be significant beyond the remarks of the Old Testament prophets because His purpose was specifically to save the "lost" (Matt 18:11).  While one often tends to think of the lost in terms of all of so-called humanity, the wording of this commission makes it clear that the issue was the "lost" House of Yisrael. 

 

 

To the Poor 

 

There are also a couple of references to the effect that YESHUA was anointed "to preach the gospel to the poor" (Lu 4:18, 7:22).  Allegorically, the Jews in Jerusalem were rich since they possessed the Temple, the priesthood, the ritual and the center of worship.  In allegory, it was the other tribes who were the poor since they did not have the riches of the Jews. 

 

 

Go To Yisrael! 

 

The SON OF ADAM followed up His commission and charge to the twelve by directing them to go to the cities of Yisrael (Matt 10:23)--obviously, the cities that contained the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael.  That the disciples were to go to the tribes of Yisrael (in their cities) is relevant since it was to be their destiny to rule over and judge the twelve tribes of Yisrael. 

 

Please note, too, that in going to Israelite cities, the disciples incidentally and unavoidably would come into some contact on occasion with "ger" aliens residing there, who automatically by law (Ex 12:48-49, to be discussed later) could become full fledged members of the Congregation of Yisrael upon conversion. 

 

Following His appointment of the twelve, The ANOINTED ONE next addressed 70 others whom He commanded to go forth and preach (Lu 10: 1-20).  However, this dialogue, as recorded by Luke, does not seem to specify exactly who the 70 were to preach to geographically. 

 

The fact that the parties were in the Middle East and that the 70 did go out and return soon with a report on what they had done in that immediate geographical area (of Galilee and Judaea) would suggest that the 70 probably went to Israelite persons in the Palestine area at that time. 

 

 

Eric V. Snow, Revisited 

 

The previously quoted Eric V. Snow assessed this great commission question and concluded that “it’s patently absurd to read Jesus’ statement Matt. 10:5 as anything more than a one-time temporary command” and “how absurd it is to assume the disciples’ mission described in Matt. 10 involved permanently binding commands” (“Is Christianity a Fraud? Round Two,” p. 38). 

 

Any person wanting to believe and accept this Snow nonsense probably should not waste any time in Scriptural study.  All they would need to do is to be good dumb sheep and go and listen to their Christian pastor teach them some lies and rebellion. 

 

Nevertheless, Snow’s remark is presented herein for consideration.  In later presentations, his conclusions will be shown to be utterly inconsistent and in conflict with an abundance of material from throughout the New Testament which conclusively proves that Matthew 10:5 was not a one time aberration.  It was a permanent command of profound importance! 

 

 

Did He Change? 

 

Despite The MESSIAH's goal in presenting the Good News of His coming kingdom to Yisrael only, it is worth noting that the Scriptures describe a couple of events that surfaced which would have given Him some latitude to expand His mission to all kinds of non-Israelite peoples, if that was His purpose and objective. 

 

In the first instance, He met the previously described Samaritan woman at Yakov's well (John 4:7-28). 

 

And while one might not be absolutely certain of the racial makeup of all of the Samaritans in the first century (whether nokri/nekar or ger strangers eligible for conversion to Yisrael, as will be later discussed), one can be sure that they were not all or generally not Israelites (according to the Scriptures, as established in commentary elsewhere herein). 

 

In YESHUA's conversation with the woman, mention was made of the water that gives life (salvation--verse 14).  She then proceeded to ask Him for this water of salvation (verse 15).  Yet, there is nothing in the dialogue to suggest that He offered salvation to her or that she would ever receive it. 

 

 

The Syro-Phoenician Woman 

 

The second situation arose when The MESSIAH encountered the Syro-Phoenician woman whose young daughter had a bad spirit (Matt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30).  She besought Him to come and cast the demon out. 

 

Thereupon, He clearly referred to her as a “dog” and told her that He had been sent only to "the lost sheep of the house of Yisrael" (Matt 15:24).  She pleaded that even the dogs (she correctly noted that her status was as a dog, as Arthur Briggs of Naples, ID once pointed out to me) could eat of the crumbs from the master's table (Matt 15:27). 

 

With no change or deviation whatsoever in His mission and purpose, He appreciated her faith and made an exception by granting her request (Matt 15:28).  Incidentally, on this key reference in Matthew 15:24, Richard Francis Weymouth, in his "The New Testament in Modern Speech," translates this verse with YESHUA as saying "I have no commission except to the lost sheep of the house of Yisrael." 

 

Of course, this message gets right to the point and leaves little room for doubt or speculation about "why" The MESSIAH came as He did. 

 

Before leaving this mention of certain humanoids (this word will be defined and described in a later chapter herein) being called “dogs” in the Scriptures, it would be well to look at still some more texts on this theme.  In Revelation 22:15, the writer Yohanan puts dogs into named classes of sinners--along with liars, murderers, idolaters, etc. 

 

Unquestionably, the dogs and sinners cited here have to be humans/humanoids.  There is just no other way!  The point in this reference is that these dogs and sinners will not have access to the tree of life or to the gates of New Jerusalem (Rev 22:14-15), at least in the dispensation then underway.  Will they ever have or be eligible for salvation in a future age?  The reader can draw his/her own conclusion on this matter. 

 

The NT’s Syro-Phoenician woman was linked to the Greek kunarion (a small, house dog) in contrast to the kuon (wild street dogs), used elsewhere in the NT (“Jewish New Testament Commentary,” p. 53). 

 

The distinction may be unimportant beyond showing the woman’s humility and disciplined nature versus other racial dogs.  Both types are dogs.  But one is house tamed and trained, while the other one runs wild in the streets. 

 

In the Hebrew Tanakh, the word “keleb” (translated as dog into English) was often used allegorically for specific humans/humanoids.  Certainly, David placed certain non-Israelite humanoids in the category of bad or evil dogs (I Sam 25:22; Ps 22:16, 20; 59:6).  The prophet Yeshayahu also placed particular peoples into the category of being dumb and greedy dogs (Isa 56:10-11).  These texts will be addressed in later chapters. 

 

 

An Israelite Woman? 

 

This initial rebuff and refusal by The ANOINTED ONE to even address the needs of the just discussed Syro-Phoenician woman is perhaps relevant also to consider because the Scriptures bring out another situation where a woman, likewise in need, came into contact with Him in a way which was to alter her future forever. 

 

It happened one Sabbath when YESHUA was teaching in a synagogue and she was present, crippled for 18 years by an evil spirit.  He saw her in her pitiful, pathetic and hurting condition (Lu 13:10-12).  With obvious mercy and compassion, He elected to immediately set her free of the infirmity (Lu 13:12-13). 

 

This act, by The SON OF ADAM on the Sabbath day, met with some strong dissatisfaction and hard feelings from some of the people present.  Thereupon, His response noted that she was a "daughter of Avraham," and should be freed even on the Sabbath (Lu 13:16). 

 

 

YESHUA Obeyed the Law 

 

Many Christians know so little about this event in the Scriptures that they erroneously presume that The MESSIAH purposely violated YHWH's mitzwot regarding the Sabbath, as stated in the Hebrew Tanakh.  Of course, if He did, He would have immediately become a sinner (I Jo 3:4), and could never have later qualified as a "spotless" sacrifice for the sins of others. 

 

If He would have violated even one mitzwah from YHWH's Word, and regardless of how little and of no importance heathen Christians may suppose it to be, He, Himself, would need a savior along with all of the other people living throughout history.  We can be absolutely assured that He never violated any of YHWH's mitzwot on any subject, to include the Sabbath.  He obeyed them all! 

 

But in this context, He did disobey some of the traditions of the elders as He did on other occasions (Matt 15:2-6; Mk 7:5-13).  In His day, these works of men were transmitted orally from generation to generation; and were, hence, called the "Oral Law." 

 

In later times, these so-called oral laws were codified and reduced to writings in the forms of the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud (as will be described and elaborated upon in more detail in subsequent chapters). 

 

 

She Must Have Been An Israelite 

 

Vividly, this on-going Sabbath meeting was at a synagogue of the Jews.  And since the crippled woman was worshipping in this synagogue on the Sabbath day, and since YESHUA addressed her needs, one can be fairly confident that, in addition to being a descendant of Avraham, she surely was an Israelite racially. 

 

When a modern observer looks at this healing of a daughter of Avraham and (evidently) Yakov, a question can surface over why The SON OF ADAM would willingly display care, concern and mercy over her plight--all the time that in a seemingly similar situation, involving the Syro-Phoenician woman, He initially said "no." 

 

Certainly, by Christendom's (wrong) standards and concepts of truth, justice and righteousness, one would conclude that SALVATION was practicing "gross racial discrimination" toward the foreigner--who He, Himself, even called a "dog," as noted above (Matt 15:26). 

 

 

YHWH Makes His Own Choices 

 

Paradoxically, and contrary to Churchianity's false ideas of humanism, the truth is quite poignant and cannot be dismissed.  His commission was to the House of Yisrael and not to every and all kinds and classes of humans/humanoids and regardless of how one may wish to feel about this event or to judge Him and His work. 

 

Now, if Christians don’t like this assertion, then they should read Moshe's words about YHWH specifically choosing the people He wants to show loyalty and loving kindness to (Ex 33:19).  Shaul echoed this same classic statement (Rom 9:15) and went on further to reflect that The POTTER certainly has power and authority over the clay to do as He wishes whether any of us like it or not (Rom 9:21-23). 

 

 

No Question Over Who! 

 

Consequently, there can be doubt or grounds to argue over the issue of "who" is under discussion in the so-called Gospels. 

 

Clearly, the recipients of the Good News were and are to be the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael (which really consisted of most of all of the thirteen tribes, including some from Yehudah, as will be discussed at length later in this paper) who had long since been removed from the Palestine area when YESHUA spoke. 

 

By then, the lost tribes of Yisrael were seemingly to the North in Asia, Asia Minor and/or Europe (evidently to even include Rome--per Rom 4:1; 9:3-6).  And surely, we must allow that The SON OF ADAM knew what he was talking about. 

 

The MESSIAH was not stupid, but certainly knew the differences between the Houses of Yehudah and Yisrael--after all, He was The AUTHOR of the Old Testament.  He assuredly knew which one was "lost" (publicly unrecognized and unknown as to identity). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 47--Yisrael in the Diaspora

 

 

To The Greeks? 

 

Just like modern peoples today ponder about YESHUA's real mission, the Jews in His day likewise had questions when they wondered if "He would go unto the dispersed among the Greeks, to teach the Greeks" (John 7:35--the “King James Version” incorrectly translates the object to Gentiles, rather than to Greeks). 

 

Some readers of this text by the beloved Yohanan may wish to believe that the concern here was over preaching to racial or ethnic Greeks.  But this reasoning may not be the truth at all.  In fact, and on this, the key word in the text is "dispersed" which is from the Greek "diaspora."

 

The "New Jewish Encyclopedia," edited by David Bridger, notes that the word Diaspora is a "Greek term meaning ‘scattering,' generally referring to the dispersion of the Israelite peoples outside Yisrael."  In the Hebrew, the word is “galut” and it does technically refer to Israelites in the generic sense and not just singularly to some portion of them (like the Jews).   

 

As a matter of information, this word “Diaspora” has been a common word of description by the Jews to describe their plight of exile from Palestine for the last 2,000 years.  In fact, even today, Jews in the state of Israel speak of Jews outside Palestine by use of that same precise definition.  Thus, there are Jews in the state of Israel, and Jews outside Palestine today in the Diaspora.  

 

 

At Least Three Major Scatterings 

 

Actually, from the land of Canaan, Yisrael by the first century CE had faced at least three “major” scatterings or dispersions, as amply described and discussed in the Scriptures and in history (Ezek 11:17; 34:5-6, 11-13; Jo 11:52). 

 

These scatterings or dispersals from Canaan land will be addressed and described in some detail in later chapters herein.  Suffice to say, there were huge numbers of Israelites away from and outside the land of Palestine in the first century CE.  Actually, it has been possible to say this same thing for long centuries, both before and after the first century CE. 

 

Around 700 BCE, the House of Yisrael and even part of the House of Yehudah were scattered first to Asia and later to Europe and were "lost" in terms of their identity as Israelites, as will be hereafter described (Isa 28:11; 42:16-19; 62:2; 65:15; Jer 3:8; Rom 11:25). 

 

Subsequently, by 554 BCE or so, the remaining Jews in the House of Yehudah were scattered abroad.  Finally, in 70 CE, the surviving Jews in Palestine also were deported and scattered by the Romans, following the Roman conquest of Jerusalem. 

 

 

Other Dispersions As Well 

 

Aside from these three highly visible and significant scatterings from Canaan land, there are some allusions, evidence and clouded references which might likewise lead a student of the Book to believe that there were several other dispersions of Israelites into foreign countries over the years. 

 

This likely condition of several scatterings is plainly suggested when one looks at the situation in Canaan land, as the different armies came against it in stages over many, many years--which allowed numerous Israelites to escape abroad before they were killed or captured by the invading armies. 

 

Beyond these obvious scatterings of Israelites from Canaan land, because of the intelligence and mental capabilities of different individuals to perceive the danger and threat of an invading army, there seems to be a number of other Scriptural references which would allow that various Israelites just up and left the land and/or the collective nation(s) on their own for any number of different reasons. 

 

Some students of the Word have even been suspicious that some Israelites may have broken off from their national congregation, starting as early as the Exodus and the wilderness wanderings.  Similar beliefs have surfaced in connection with the time of the later Judges. 

 

Scholarly arguments have been advanced that some part of the Southern portion of the tribe of Dan (where Samson lived in the area adjacent to the Philistines) packed up and left Yisrael at a very early time. 

 

There is also even more evidence that part of Dan in the North left Canaan very early (to be described at some length in a later chapter) and on and on in terms of Israelite removals from the land. 

 

The May-Jun 1998 “America’s Promise Newsletter” quoted the “Dictionary of Christ & The Gospel” (v. 1, p. 692) as saying that “Large numbers of Israelites had been carried away captive by the Assyrians and Babylonians... But a much larger dispersion was due to voluntary emigration.”  This assessment is assuredly the truth.  

 

 

Possibly Significant Numbers Involved 

 

The prophetic future of Yisrael was always couched in the context that the people of Yisrael would become, over time, a vast host of personnel that are essentially innumerable to count in the practical sense.  One sees this reality from the very beginnings of the promises to Avraham when The ELOHIM told him of the many nations and peoples which would come from his body.  

 

In particular, YHWH told him that his descendants would be as the stars in the heavens which are quite profound and extensive (Gen 15:5; 22:17).  In another statement of the promise, the seedline of Avraham, Yitzhak and Yakov Yisrael was alluded to as being like or comparable to the sand of the seashore (Gen 22:17; Jer 33:22; Hos 1:10; Rom 9:27). 

 

The importance of this promise surfaces in at least three profound aspects.  First, this promise was unconditional in terms of the descendants of Avraham.  It was given to Avraham (later given to Yitzhak and Yakov--per Gen 26:4; Ex 32:13) on the basis of his obedience of The MOST HIGH’s laws.  Nothing further had to be done by any of Avraham’s descendants for this promise to become fulfilled. 

 

Secondly, the issue was always of the physical seedline of Avraham with no possible reference or implication of “spiritual” children.  Manifestly, the promise was about the physical descendants of Avraham.  A future chapter in this production will discuss this condition in some detail. 

 

Not only was the scattering of Yisrael substantial in the Diaspora, but even the scattering of just the Jews was enormous in its own right. 

 

Using various historical records, the previously cited Emil Schurer said that there were numerous Jews in the Diaspora in the first century CE (“A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ,” v. ii, division 2, p. 220-229).  He put over one million in Egypt alone. 

 

 

Not Fulfilled in Canaan! 

 

Finally, the Israelite descendants of Avraham never reached the fantastic vastness and sheer numbers encompassed in this Avrahamic promise in the land of Canaan, nor have the Jews ever began to fulfill that promise.  Actually, the Jews have never numbered more than several million in their entire recorded history. 

 

So the ultimate fulfillment of this wonderful and unconditional promise to Avraham must be sought for in the subsequent history of the House of Yisrael, after she left Canaan for the Diaspora.  In other words, that promise has to have a fulfillment and the Scriptural and historical records reflect that it must have that fulfillment in the context of the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

While Yisrael never really began to reach those numbers demanded in the Avrahamic promise in Canaan land, they were extremely fruitful, as is very clear from the various census and numbering efforts outlined in YHWH’s Word. 

 

 

Specific Census Records 

 

The first year of the Exodus, the fighting men of Yisrael (age 20 and over) were numbered at 603,550 (Num 1:46).  This growth alone is quite significant in view of the fact that just 70 Israelite males went initially to Egypt less than 300 years earlier in the days of Yosef and Yakov Yisrael (Gen 46:26).  This number is quite relevant for a lot of reasons which will be analyzed in a later chapter. 

 

In the plains of Moab, some forty years following the Exodus (and just before Yisrael was to enter the land under Yehoshua), another census was taken which put the number of men age 20 and over at 601,730 (Num 26:51).  So there was not much of a change in the population in the wilderness wanderings. 

 

Of course, in a normal forty years span of time, it would seem highly likely that a given population would have increased appreciably (which apparently did not happen with Yisrael in the wilderness).  Perhaps the rigors of nomadic, wilderness living may have accounted for the slight decline. 

 

Furthermore, there were some catastrophic losses of people--like during Korah’s rebellion (totaling 14,700--Num 16:49) and over the fornication with the Moabite women (totaling 24,000--Num 25:9). 

 

And as just noted above in this section, it might be possible that some few Israelite clans and groups did leave the congregation of Yisrael during her sojourn in the wilderness and migrate to other lands.  Thus, all types of explanations exist to explain why Yisrael did not increase in the wilderness wanderings. 

 

 

Entering Canaan 

 

Regardless, Yisrael entered the land with 601,730 fighting men.  To get some perspective of the total population, these numbers would obviously have to be doubled to take in all of the males in the population (by adding in the infirm and male children under age 20).  Another doubling would be required to account for the females.

 

Conservatively speaking, the number of fighting men over 20 is probably about 25% of the total population.  Consequently, the total population would have been around 2.4 million on entering the land (and this would have been a conservative reckoning because some scholars have argued for even a higher figure). 

 

The next important census was taken by David some 450 years later (made at the instigation of Satan).  This one put the number of fighting men at 470,000 in Yehudah and 1.1 million in the Northern tribes--less Levi and Binyamin, who were not included (I Chron 21:5-6). 

 

II Samuel 24:9 and 15 offer another count on this census as 800,000 in Yisrael and 500,000 in Yehudah with some 70,000 being slain a few days later.  It is unclear how many of these slain came from Yehudah as opposed to Yisrael.  But it is possible that 30,000 came from Yehudah which would leave the 470,000 as mentioned in I Chronicles. 

 

In attempting to reconcile the difference, the “Soncino Books of the Bible” (Chronicles, p. 115) notes that the wording in the two texts is somewhat different.  Possibly, the text in Chronicles is all inclusive with the qualification of those that drew the sword while Shmuel’s report is limited with the reference to valiant men. 

 

Again, conservatively speaking, one could justify a belief that greater Yisrael probably numbered something over 6 million people (4.4 million in the North and less than 2 million in the South) at the time of this census (around 1000 BCE). 

 

But even by this time, under David, there was a presence of reasons suggesting that already some Israelites may have migrated from the land, as noted above. 

 

 

Numbering the Deportations 

 

Actually, it appears virtually impossible to get some perspective on the numbers of House of Yisrael persons who died from the war, famine and other conditions which existed in the North during the decline and fall of that nation to the Assyrians in their four invasions.  Assuredly, many did perish in those deprivations. 

 

However, in regards to the Assyrian captivity, there was one record made in secular history by the Assyrians which put the number of captives at the fall of Samaria at 27,290 (per the Khorsabad annals, “Old Testament Times,” p. 230, by R. K. Harrison).  But this 27,290 did not represent the totality of the conquest and enslavement by the Assyrians (against Samaria). 

 

In “Lost Israelite Identity” (p. 18-19, 39), Yair Davidy explains this 27,290 remark by Sargon as being that the Assyrians took this number of Israelites for their own military purposes (either to serve as soldiers or field workers supporting the Assyrian army).  As Sargon noted, the rest of the Israelite captives were settled in Assyria.  

 

Certainly, the Assyrians took huge quantities of Israelites in their several invasions of Canaan.  So it’s a little hard to be sure of what the total numbers were.  In the Assyrian campaigns against Yehudah, Sennacherib claimed some 200,000 captives alone (“Lost Israelite Identity,” p. 19).  Obviously, more captives came from the Northern kingdom. 

 

By the first century CE, Jewish historian and priest Josephus asserted that by that time the far away House of Yisrael peoples were “an immense multitude and not to be estimated by numbers” (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book XI, chapter 5, verse 2). 

 

In other words, Josephus was effectively saying that the House of Yisrael peoples had become quite large and virtually innumerable by his day.  Regardless, the available evidence is such that will allow some significant Israelite removals from the land, besides the actual enslavements by the Assyrians. 

 

Obviously, the House of Yisrael peoples have become numerous over time to comply with The ELOHIM’s promise to Avraham of his descendants being like the stars in heaven. 

 

 

Jewish Removals 

 

II Kings 24:14 gives the Babylonian captivity of Jerusalem as 10,000 men.  Yet, Yirmeyahu gives the captivity from the House of Yehudah at 4,600 from the three deportations, which must be men only (Jer 52:30). 

 

An article by Ernestine Young in the Apr 2002 “Kingdom Digest” (p. 47) adds these two figures together and arrives at a total of 14,600 men/males, which seems likely.   

 

Also, it seems plausible that numbers of people voluntarily left Judea on their own during the several years that Yehudah was in conflict with the Babylonians.  Many of these people probably also went to Babylon; or at least, to some place under Babylonian control (since Babylon effectively ruled the civilized world at that time). 

 

In the 70 years or so of Jewish captivity, this 14,600, or however more that could have gone to Babylon, apparently grew to the 42,360 (evidently men)--as was outlined in the Jewish return from Babylon (discussed earlier) during the time of Ezra, Nechemyah and the others (Ezra 2:1, 64-65). 

 

In 70-73 CE, at the fall of the Second Temple and Masada to the Romans, the Jewish population in Palestine had grown considerably because Josephus estimated that some 1.1 million Jews had died in the Roman wars--not counting the numbers which were enslaved (per an article on “The Real Diaspora,” by J. S. Brooks, in the Feb 1997 “New Beginnings,” p. 4). 

 

The Jan-Mar 2002 “Petah Tikvah” (p. 4) had a quotation from an article on “population” in “Encyclopaedia Judaica” which reported upon a census conducted by the Roman Emperor Claudius in 48 CE.  It found 6,944,000 Jews in the Roman Empire that year. 

 

 

Some Tentative Conclusions 

 

From this just outlined statistical data, some worthwhile conclusions can be inferred.  First, the Israelites were typically quite proliferate, growing rapidly in population numbers and regardless of what their status might have been at a given point in time. 

 

Secondly, the huge numbers of people in the land (certainly, at the time of David’s census) in comparison with the smaller quantities of people in the various exiles and enslavements by the Assyrians and the Babylonians would suggest that indeed vast numbers of Israelites did escape the pending invasions or otherwise left the land to go to other geographical areas. 

 

Like prophecy says, Yisrael would expand in all directions (to be proven later herein). 

 

Thirdly, it is quite manifest that “most” of the vast numbers of Israelite peoples (certainly, from the House of Yisrael generally and even from the House of Yehudah to some extent) never returned to Palestine in Second Temple days.  That return of 42,360 persons (identified as being from the Babylonian captivity) was a very small part of the total number of Israelites out in the Diaspora. 

 

Incidentally, on this question of the Israelite return from the scatterings, John McClintock and James Strong, in their “Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature” (v. II, p. 111), conclude essentially the same thing in saying that “The great mass of the Israelite race nevertheless remained in the lands to which they had been scattered.” 

 

Dr Alfred M. Lilienthal, the Jewish scholar and author quoted earlier, concluded that “Twelve tribes started in Canaan about thirty-five centuries ago; and not only that ten of them disappeared--more than half of the members of the remaining two tribes never returned from their ‘exile’ in Babylon” (“What Price Israel,” p. 215-216). 

 

 

Many Israelites Did Not Return 

 

Thus, while some of these Babylonian dispersed Jews (to include a few persons from the other tribes who had moved to the Jerusalem area in the 10th to the 8th centuries BCE, after the division of the kingdom) did return to Galilee and Judaea under Ezra and Nechemyah, as just noted, many did not.  So, in the Diaspora, there were Israelite Jews who were recognized and known as Israelites and Jews. 

 

But also, there were vast numbers of House of Yisrael Israelites, from most of the earlier deportations and removals, who were not known or even readily thought of as being of Yisrael.  One should remember that on leaving Canaan land, Yisrael was to be called by a new name (Isa 62:2; 65:15; Hos 10:9).  It is essentially these unrecognized Israelites who were truly the "lost" sheep of the House of Yisrael.

 

However, in both cases, the recognized and unrecognized Israelites were abroad in other lands--with other citizenships, residences, nationalities and often even other religions and languages (at least, in terms of the House of Yisrael).  Students of truth may recall that the Apostle Shaul was both a Jew and a Roman (Acts 22:27). 

 

 

Proof of This Distinction In Other Scriptures 

 

Actually, this distinction between racial identifications and residency/nationality identifications was brought out substantially earlier in the Scriptures when the status of Moshe was revealed in the book of Exodus (when Moshe drew water from a well for the daughters of Reuel, a priest of Midian). 

 

While Moshe could be correctly called an “Egyptian,” because of his former geographical residence and/or nationality (Ex 2:19), he also was very clearly an Israelite of the tribe of Levi from a racial or ethnic perspective (Ex 2:1-10). 

 

The Scriptures (Ezra, Nehemiah, etc) imply and suggest certainly that numbers of racial and religious Jews had residences and sometimes citizenships in Babylonian and Medeo Persian lands from the exile and on forward.  Thus, many were both Babylonians and Israelites/Jews and Persians and Israelites/Jews. 

 

Of course, this double status continued from Alexander’s conquests of the East on to Roman times. 

 

Therefore, this dual representation and identification surfaced in Acts early on in the initial baptism of The RUACH HA KODESH on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:5-10).  Please note that these Jews and proselytes (which will be later assessed) mentioned were also Galileans, Parthians, Medes, Elamites and Romans as well. 

 

 

The Language Distinctions 

 

Beyond the nationality and citizenship identifications, one must not lose sight of the language factor.  As is described elsewhere herein, the word “Semite” is to be properly associated with languages, like Hebrew, as spoken by numbers of peoples in the Middle East in OT days, while the word Shemite represents racial descendants of the man Shem. 

 

Consequently, in the dispersion, much or all of the House of Yisrael peoples remained Shemites.  But with the loss of the Hebrew language and/or any other Semitic languages, they could not properly be called Semites. 

 

 

Israelites Known as Greeks in Other Lands 

 

Surely, in the first century CE, many Israelites were in the Diaspora in Greek lands, living as Greek residents and nationals (the Dorian Greeks, which settled Southeast Greece in the 8th century BCE, were thought to be Israelites from the House of Yisrael, as will be discussed in later chapters.  The same may be true with the settlers of ancient Troy in Northwest Asia Minor in the 14th-13th centuries BCE). 

 

Evidently, in John 7:35, the Jews were wondering if YESHUA would go to these Israelites abroad (obviously, many of them were living as Greeks). 

 

In John 11:52, a similar situation came up when the high priest referred to the gathering together of the children of The ELOHIM then in the Diaspora.  This coming regathering of Yisrael (including both the House of Yehudah and the House of Yisrael) was thoroughly mentioned by the OT prophets (as will be covered in later chapters). 

 

In addition to Greek citizenship, residency and/or nationality, it should be noted also that there was the Greek religion and its polytheistic gods.  In terms of personal identification, Mark 7:26 notes that the racial Syro-Phoenician woman, previously discussed, was actually a Greek in religion.  Clearly, many Israelites in the Diaspora were Greeks in religion. 

 

 

Dr Cyrus Gordon 

 

Perhaps here is the place where reference should be made to a statement this writer once heard on an audio tape by Dr Cyrus Gordon from the Fifth National Conference on the "Foundations of Our Faith," previously mentioned, held at Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma on October 9-12, 1991. 

 

The value of this statement probably gains considerable credence when one focuses in on the background of Dr Gordon.  Cyrus Gordon was a Jew who was born in 1908 and spent portions of his long life in archeological work in the Middle East--at one time a contemporary and colleague of the imminent savants William F. Albright and Ken Darby. 

 

In addition, Dr Gordon was a proficient scholar in Hebrew and certain other Semitic languages--which served him appropriately in his numerous writings (over 600 professional publications, including some 20 books) and his respected tenures as a professor of Hebrew and Assyriology at several recognized universities. 

 

But more importantly, Dr Gordon was an early leader in directing attention to the need for Christians to have some perspective of the Hebrew language and the Jewish religion and culture--particularly, of Second Temple times. 

 

Today, here in the early 21st century, many of the scholars and leaders active in this marvelous field of study (of the language, religion and culture of Second Temple Judaism) were once either students of Cyrus Gordon or were motivated directly by him and his work of over 60 years.  

 

Certainly, the student of truth must realize and appreciate the fact that the existing social and religious culture and environment of YESHUA, all of the disciples, the Apostolic Assembly and the entire New Testament was Second Temple Judaism (which Gordon has advocated and taught over his productive life). 

 

In this intriguing talk at ORU, by this extraordinary man, mention was made of the Jewish community in Alexandria, Egypt in the second century BCE and especially during the age of the translation of the Hebrew Old Testament to the Greek to produce the Septuagint (or at least, some part of it--ed).  At one point in time, the professor made a remark which affords much light on the topic at hand. 

 

 

Greek Jews! 

 

On this, Gordon referred to the Jews of Alexandria as "Greeks" and spoke of them in that context in terms of their alleged need for the Septuagint (which was translated by Jewish and/or Christian scholars). 

 

Subsequent to this fantastic statement, Cyrus Gordon went on to qualify his remarks slightly for his audience when he explained that those Jews in Egypt were correctly Greeks--culturally. 

 

The essence of this report is that in a conversation with others, a Jewish savant (of some station and language authority) referred to other Jews as "Greeks" and never batted an eye or showed any hesitancy in his comments.     

 

Obviously, the very thing Gordon had done is something which anyone could do, simply because the word involved can be used for a person for any good reason--such as philosophy, religion, culture, residency, citizenship and a lot of other things as well, besides just ethnic or racial considerations. 

 

Incidentally, Dr Emil Schurer, previously quoted, mentioned that in the Diaspora, a cultured Jew was not only a Jew, but a Greek as well in language, education and habits (“A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ,” v. ii, division 2, p. 281).  It is reasonable that anyone could refer to one of these Jews as a Greek. 

 

 

Acts 9:29 

 

Actually, one can find the exact same situation in the Scriptures.  For example, in Acts 9:29, Luke wrote about a dialogue with some “Grecians.”  “The American Standard Version Translation” and others correctly render that word as “Grecian Jews” (per “The New Testament From 26 Translations”). 

 

Undoubtedly, many of the people of the lost tribes of Yisrael were Greeks in religion in the first century--just as they still are today (since Christendom theologically is a Greek religion for all purposes).  Consequently, a reference to a "Greek" could be to a Greek racially, ethnically, religiously, culturally, nationally or by citizenship. 

 

 

Who Is A Jew? 

 

The Apostle Shaul, mentioned above as a Jew and Roman, was more precisely an Israelite racially (Rom 11:1), a Jew religiously (Gal 2:15) and a Roman by citizenship (Acts 22:27).  His status covered the gauntlet in definitions.  The linkage of the word “Jew” to the Jewish religion is a most important feature of this present discussion. 

 

Although the term “Jew” would theoretically be derived from racial factors (from Yehudah), it carried a largely national connotation in its earliest use.  For example, the writer of II Kings used its plural form Yehudim (Jews) to describe the people of the House of Yehudah in their war with Syria (II Kg 16:6). 

 

After the Babylonian exile, the Jewish religion developed and the former racial and/or nationalistic definitions became a single definition relating to this group of people in Palestine. 

 

As will be shown in subsequent chapters, this Jewish religion was opened up to numbers of non-racial Jews who converted and became religious Jews.  Hence, the word Jew largely lost any relevance in terms of race. 

 

Also, in late Second Temple days, and particularly during the Roman rule, a governing geographical district was formed called Judea.  Its people were correctly called Judeans (generally Jews in English translations).  The result has been that confusion can arise whenever the term Jew comes up. 

 

 

Essentially a Religious Definition 

 

As will be later established, the term “Jew” was generally a religious definition in the first century CE.  Even today, the religious definition holds prominence, although some people try to argue that it has racial overtures since a Jewish mother has Jewish children in contemporary Judaism. 

 

But even here, it is quite manifest that the term really is one of religion.  A Jewish mother may have children who are born as Jews.  But if she abandons Judaism and converts to another religion, say Christianity, she is no longer a Jew.  She is a Christian.  Thereafter, her children are apparently born as Christians and not as Jews. 

 

Like Jewish parents, who produce Jewish children, Christian parents produce Christian children in the generic sense.  While several Christian Churches require a quick Christian christening or baptism ceremony for a new born infant, they are either born Christians (and particularly so when the parents raise them that way) or they quickly become Christians with the christening and/or baptism. 

 

Ultimately, religion is the point of definition for even modern Jews.  Any Jew who abandons Judaism to convert to any other faith (certainly the Christian and Muslim faiths) is no longer a Jew.  He immediately becomes a Christian or whatever else in terms of the new faith.  Consequently, religion becomes the factor of identification. 

 

A former Jew, now a Christian, cannot immigrate to the Israeli state under its law of return open to all Jews. This issue was settled in a case that went before the Israeli Supreme Court which ruled that an apostate from Judaism (like to Christianity) was no longer a Jew eligible for Israeli citizenship under the law of return (“Oxford Companion to the Bible,” p. 366).   

 

The reason is because the former Jew is no longer a Jew.  Accordingly, this definition reality will be elaborated upon somewhat more extensively in later comments. 

 

 

The Issue Here 

 

The essence of the above presentation is one of the most important subjects to comprehend in order to ever begin to understand and grasp the subject of identity (which is covered in this publication). 

 

Inevitably, the very mention of the word Jew or Greek makes most persons immediately think of race.  And this is a very bad conclusion (though in the beginning there were racial overtures attached to each word). 

 

In the table of nations, in Genesis 10, there was a descendant of Japheth (Yefet in the Hebrew) named Yavan in Hebrew (anglicized as Javan at Gen 10:2. 4).  In the Tanakh, these people of Yavan are called bene Ha-Yavanim in Hebrew (Joel 3:6).  These persons of Yavan eventually settled in Southeast Europe in a territory which today is called Greece and Macedonia. 

 

In their own language (which surfaced presumably at the tower of Babel incident in Gen 11:1-9), they believed that they descended from a god called Hellen.  Thus, they called their national homeland Hellas.  In English, modern Americans call this land Greece. 

 

In this land of Yavan, the people of Yavanim were known in their own language as Hellenes and Hellenists.  In English, they are called Greeks or Grecians.  Of course, the language of these persons from Babel on was certainly the Hellenes or Greek language. 

 

At a very early time, in ancient Yavan, the people adopted polytheistic sun worship as their national religion.  This Grecian sun worship became the basis of their culture and civilization--which was known as Hellenism. 

 

Originally, these Hellenes were apparently a very homogenous people.  From paintings, statutes, etc, it is quite manifest that they racially were a blond, blue-eyed, fair people (much as was true in Rome and even in Egypt).  Today, modern people would probably classify all of these ancient nations as being Nordic (in essence, the same type of people as found in Scandinavia). 

 

With the arrival of Alexander the Great, and his world conquest, the racial and genetic fiber of the Greek people began to change. 

 

Like other world rulers, the Greeks brought in slaves from all over the world and eventually freed them.  Thereupon, they began a process of integration, miscegenation and amalgamation.  Over the centuries, the once Nordic Greeks turned into the modern, dark, swarthy Greeks. 

 

Of course, with Alexander’s armies all over the civilized world, Greek people found themselves as residents in other far away lands--like Syria, Egypt and Palestine.  For some time, these Greeks retained some semblance of racial and national identification with their homeland of Greece.  But with the passing years, miscegenation, new generations, etc, this identifying link was lost.  

 

 

The Greek Religion Survived 

 

However, the situation with the Greek sun worship religion was far more successful than the racial aspects of the Greek nation.  The polytheistic Greek religion spread from Greece and infected other peoples all around the world.  Even by the time of the Roman Empire, much of the civilized world’s religion was Greek polytheism. 

 

In the Scriptures, persons in Greece or outside of Greece, who were of this Greek sun worship religion, were also known as Hellenists or Greeks.  As commented upon in previous remarks, the racial Syro-Phoenician woman was actually a Greek in religion (a Hellenis or female Greek, at Mark 7:26). 

 

As noted above, and as will be discussed in later chapters herein, there is also a cultural aspect of identification.  Usually, it is more closely associated with religion.  But sometimes, it would be fair to describe it separately.  Thus, there was the Greek culture (Hellenism) which many Jews and others adopted.  By the way, the Greek culture still prevails in the Christian West, as will be illustrated in subsequent chapters. 

 

The point here is that there once was an original Greek race or racial group of people who spoke the Greek language, practiced the Greek culture, worshipped the Greek, polytheistic gods and lived in a land territory called Greece. 

 

But these people and their culture and religion were spread abroad to other peoples in other lands.  In terms of their own land, they allowed in many diverse racial and ethnic groups which they proceeded to miscegenate and amalgamate with. 

 

For purposes of identification, all of these persons in Greece were called and could be called Greeks in the context of their language, religion, culture, nationality (citizenship) or homeland residence.  The primary definition (which once existed, but was lost over the years) was the racial definition of a pure Greek.  Were there any racial Greeks in existence 2,000 years ago?  Possibly, they were all gone--just as is true today. 

 

Incidentally, the Greek religion was the most salient of all factors that once identified the ancient Greeks.  The Greek religion spread throughout the Roman Empire and has persisted into modern times, as will be addressed in subsequent chapters. 

 

 

The Jewish Situation 

 

This background on the Greeks explains what happened with the Jews.  There were some original people who descended from Yehudah.  They were known in Hebrew as Yehudim (Yehudi in the singular).  They occupied a territory in Southern Palestine which was called Yehudah.  With the division of Yisrael (upon the death of Shlomo), the resulting nation was known in Hebrew as Beit (House) Yehudah. 

 

In English, translators have anglicized Yehudah as Judah and the word Jew was attached to a Yehudi (Jews for the plural of Yehudim).  Though there once were some racial people called Yehudim, that definition came to refer to not only them, but their national government (Beit Yehudah, which included some people of Levi and Binyamin) and their geographic homeland (in Southern Palestine). 

 

With the Jewish exile to Babylon, things were to change.  True, there was a remnant of these people who came back to Southern Palestine (around Jerusalem) and established a land territory called Judea.  But over the years, people of other nationalities and races settled in this same territory (like the Amalekites, to be later addressed).  They, too, came to be called Yehudim (Jews in English). 

 

There was, of course, the historic language of the Jews (which was known as Hebrew) and which continued.  And there were also the historic Hebrew religion and culture.  In NT days, people who followed this religion and/or culture were known as Yehudim or Jews.  In time, this religion of the Jews became known as Judaism and the culture became identified as the Jewish culture. 

 

In the Greek language, these Yehudim were known as Ioudaios.  This was a term which could be used for any of the people in the Judean territorial province (which could be ascertained usually from the context of the NT reference and especially so in the book of John, discussed elsewhere herein) or it could refer to the religion or culture of the people outside of Judea. 

 

Thus, the people of Galilee were Galileans geographically.  But they could be of the Yehudi or Greek religions or cultures (as just shown).  Presumably, even some Samaritans might have lived in Galilee with their own religion and culture.  Out in the Diaspora, there were people of the Yehudi religion and culture, who had Greek citizenship or lived in Greek lands (like Shaul the apostle). 

 

Just as Jews could convert and change to other religions, the same reality applies to people of other religions.  People of any worldly faith can and do periodically change their religious identifications to other religions.  It happens all of the time. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

The point here is that the words Greek or Jew (or even Roman, Egyptian, American and so forth) have lost all semblance of relevance as far as racial definitions.  All of these societies once had a people who were generally racially homogeneous.  But over the years, all of them (including the US) allowed in huge numbers of other racial peoples and proceeded to integrate, mix, miscegenate and amalgamate with them. 

 

Despite the loss of any relevance of these identifying terms for race, the words still have pertinence for other definitions--certainly geographical land areas (like Greece and Judea of 2,000 years ago), language and by all means, religion and culture.  In fact, today, the Greek and Jewish religions both still survive (although there is another identifying word for the Greek religion, to be covered in a later chapter). 

 

In the main, in New Testament days, the words Yehudi/Yehudim (Jew or Jews) meant either people living in the geographical area of Judea (which was determinable by the context of its use) or the persons of the Jewish religion or culture, wherever they lived.  Just as is true today, there was some effort to hold onto the Jewish identification reference, even if a racial or ethnic Jew abandoned Judaism. 

 

People like the Roosevelts, Karl Marx and the recent Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, demonstrate this reality.  The Roosevelts were once Jews, but left Judaism for Christianity.  The same is true with William Cohen.  He once was a Jew.  But now, he is a Christian. 

 

Karl Marx was supposedly born a Jew, but was converted to Christianity as a small child by his father.  On reaching adulthood, he became a professed atheist.  Not only was Karl Marx a supposed atheist, but he passionately hated Judaism above all else.  Presumably, he did not hate the Jewish people with equal passion. 

 

Technically, it would be incorrect to call any of these persons “Jews,” although there is the obvious linkage of the presence of some DNA and genes which tie some modern peoples back to certain earlier ancestor lines (which may or may not have called themselves Yehudim/Jews).  This condition will be discussed in subsequent chapters herein which focus upon the Jews in some detail. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 48--The Publicized Great Commission

 

 

Is This A Change? 

 

The so-called "great commission of taking the Gospel to all nations" (in the KJV at Matt 28:19; Mk 13:10; Lu 24:47) was a part of The MESSIAH's final instructions to the disciples. 

 

Of course, it has been principally these Scriptural references which Christians regularly seize upon to justify their worldwide evangelistic campaigns supposedly to convert all of the heathen in the world. 

 

First, there is some question about whether this reference is even in the book of at least Matthew (and perhaps the other books as well).  The previously quoted Hebrew text of Matthew from Shem Tob ben Isaac ben Shaprut does not contain the words “people of all the nations (“Jehovah’s Witnesses Defended,” p. 42). 

 

Reportedly, the early Ebionites (to be defined in a later chapter), who may have used an early Hebrew text of Matthew, rejected a belief in the conversion of “people of all the nations” (ibid, p. 42). 

 

If the words in question were not in the early Hebrew edition of Matthew, there is some possibility that they were not present elsewhere in the NT.  Maybe, they are a product of the editing done by Marcion or some other early Christian editor (as described previously herein). 

 

 

An Analysis 

 

In these texts, in the so-called Gospels, assuming that they are valid and represent truth and not the work of Marcion or some other early Christian editor, the word "nations" is from the Greek "ethne" which links to the Greek "ethnos," singular and neuter case, (ethne--nominative and accusative plural, ethnesi--dative plural, and ethnon--genitive plural, per “The Analytical Greek Lexicon”).  

 

At this juncture, some so-called Christian "experts" will jump up and down in ecstasy and enthusiastically declare that The MESSIAH has changed the definition of "who" it was to receive the Good News. 

 

Whereas, sometime earlier, YESHUA had expressly limited His commission to the House of Yisrael, these supposed "authorities" now insist on believing that later on, His message was changed to go to every and all kinds and classes of humans/humanoids across the globe. 

 

Despite this prevalent Christian thinking, did He make a change here? 

 

Since a person’s will or testament is valid and established at death and cannot be changed after his death (Heb 9:16-17, as discussed earlier), one has to stop and ponder here how it is that YESHUA would attempt to change His last testament after He had died and made it effective.  Surely, if He wanted to change it, why didn’t He do it before He died? 

 

Earlier, in this study, an array of Scriptural laws, edicts and words were cited which should conclusively establish that The HIGHEST does "not" change or advocate change and that He is immutable. 

 

Romans 11:29 was mentioned; which, in context, says that YHWH's "gifts and His call are irrevocable--He never withdraws them once they are given, and He does not change His mind about those to whom He sends His call" (Rom 11:29, “Amplified Translation”). 

 

 

Again--Two Different Deities? 

 

Moreover, here, one may bring to mind the earlier quotation of some remarks by YESHUA that His doctrines, teachings and words were not His Own; but rather, were from "He" Who sent Him (Jo 7:16; 14:24). 

 

Now, for those persons who are polytheistic and believe in two or more "gods," which they allegedly serve, these comments could suggest a conspiracy of confusion and change. 

 

Is it plausible that these two supposedly different persons (as perceived by polytheistic believers) jointly could work to stupidly contradict themselves without offering some explanations to avoid the pitfalls of outright chaos and confusion by their disciples?  Well logically, no way! 

 

Incidentally, in mentioning these texts, this writer does not wish to convey the idea that there are, in fact, two or more separate and different deities, as theorized by Christendom.  While the Scriptural citations are certainly true, there perhaps could be a different interpretation (which was broached previously in this study) than what one may initially suppose--at least, in terms of believing in two, three or more deities.

 

 

The Greek Ethnos 

 

Since The ELOHIM obviously didn't "change," let's delve into this issue of the "great commission" more carefully.  Strong's very popular and widely distributed "Greek Dictionary of the New Testament" defines the Greek ethnos as "a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; spec a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by impl. pagan):--Gentile, heathen, nation, people."

 

The comprehensive "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament," edited by Gerhard Kittel, traces "ethnos" to the Hebrew Old Testament "goy," which is the main Hebrew term for people.  In reference to the Greek New Testament, this source points out that "ethnos" probably comes from "ethos" and means "mass or host or multitude bound by the same manners, customs or other distinctive features." 

 

Applied to men, Kittel points out that ethnos "gives us the sense of people; but it can also be used of animals in the sense of 'herd' or of insects in the sense of 'swarm.'"  Obviously, by this definition, ethnos wouldn't even have to relate to people at all, per se.

 

Other dictionaries likewise have interesting views.  "The Analytical Greek Lexicon" notes that ethnos means "a multitude, a company, a nation,..."  Thayer's "Greek-English Lexicon" defines the word as "a multitude associated or living together; a company, troop, swarm, a multitude of individuals of the same nature or genue, the human race, race, nation,..."  

 

Also, "A Greek-English Lexicon" by Arndt and Gingrich, allows for "nation, people, heathen, pagans, Gentiles." 

 

Additionally, the Greek ethnos is linked to the English ethnic(s) since the two terms are related as many dictionaries so allow.  All of these definitions, and especially Strong's, clearly allow for the non-Jewish lost tribes of Yisrael, as specified in the original commission.

 

In one more related definition, “Webster's Unabridged English Dictionary” notes that "ethno" is from the Greek ethnos and means "(1) race, people, cultural group and (2) characteristic of or believed by a people, race or group." 

 

This definition by Webster’s is most interesting.  Because therein, the findings are addressing not only the physical aspects of a people, but also such intangibles as their culture, thoughts, beliefs and so forth.  This condition can be far reaching. 

 

 

E. T. Tennyson 

 

E. T. Tennyson, in his book “The Time of the End,” says that “It is from this Greek word ETHNOS that we get the word ethnic for ethnic groups, and almost all today are familiar with this term.  Webster defines ethnic (ETHNOS) as races, groups, or tribes of a nation discriminated on the basis of common traits or customs.” 

 

Tennyson goes on-- “All ethnic or ETHNOS groups in the United States are citizens of this nation and they are ethnic or ETHNOS only because of their different traits and customs.  The Chinese, for example, are not ethnic or ETHNOS when they are citizens of China, but when they become citizens of the United States they become ethnic or ETHNOS to the United States because they are citizens of the nation but with different traits and customs from the nation.” 

 

“The Time of the End” then proceeds on to conclude that the people of the scattered, lost tribes of Israel were “legally citizens of the nation of Israel,” but had “adopted the traits and customs of other nations.”  In that sense, they were “ethnic groups or ethnos tribes.” 

 

Certainly, these comments by E. T. Tennyson cannot be ignored or passed over lightly.  It is very possible that he has hit the nail on the head with his inceptive analysis.  As a minimum, this logic must be broached and considered in any discussion of the Greek “ethnos.” 

 

By the way, Messianic Jewish writer Dr Rick Chaimberlin also takes the position that the Greek ethne means more accurately-- “ethnic group” (Jul-Sep 2001 “Petah Tikvah,” p. 21). 

 

 

Thomas Jones, Revisited 

 

In a previous chapter, mention was briefly made to “The Elect:  Who Are They?” by Thomas Jones.  In that work, the author briefly discussed the presentations of the word(s) nation/nations in the King James translation of the Greek New Testament.  

 

Jones argues that of the 37 occurrences of nation/nations in the KJV text, some 26 of them have the article “the” in the Greek text.  He contends that presence of the article links the reference specifically to the lost ten tribes of Israel.  Without the article, the word involved could be to nation/nations in the broad sense. 

 

Again, as was true with Tennyson’s reflections, these conclusions by Jones cannot be ignored or passed over lightly. 

 

It is very plausible that in Second Temple days, the Hebrew ha goyim (meaning the same thing, the nations, and to be discussed shortly) specifically referred to the lost tribes of Yisrael while just the Hebrew word goyim meant other nations in general in the mind and mentality of the Jews then living in Palestine. 

 

The writer of this publication has reviewed many (not all) of the uses of the Greek ethnos (both singular and plural usages) in the Greek New Testament in an effort to verify whether the presence of the article “the” identifies the subject as lost Yisrael or not.  As Jones suggests, there is some compelling evidence making this connection. 

 

However, one interesting text does surface where the article does not appear in the Greek text (at Acts 9:15).  But yet, the verse plainly does refer to the lost House of Yisrael.  No explanation on this item will be presented at this time.  Later, this verse will be analyzed and discussed at length in another section of this study.   

 

In connection with the three NT texts under discussion on the so-called “great commission” (Matt 28:19: Mk 13:10; Lu 24:47), it is useful to note that in the Greek text, all three of these statements appear with the article (the).  Therefore, based on Jones’ conclusions, this charge concerns only the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

 

The Hebrew Goy 

 

While the focus of this study is on the New Testament and its Good News message (to the ethnos, ethne, ethnesi or ethnon), it would be well to pause here briefly to examine the Hebrew goy (plural, goyim) as related to the Greek ethnos.  Various Hebrew lexicons give meanings for "goy" --which do, of course, compare with "ethnos," as just mentioned above and as Gerhard Kittel noted earlier in this chapter.

 

For example, "The Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon," by Benjamin Davidson, in defining the word, notes that the Hebrew "goy" is "prop. a body of men, hence a people, nation..."  Also, "A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament," by Brown, Driver and Briggs, allows for "nation, people."  But this source then goes on to also suggest "community" as a meaning.

 

Gesenius' "Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures" defines "goy" as "(l) a people, prop. a confluence of men... (Prop. it would seem body, corpus, a body politic, or whole people;...) The word is general, and used of the nations at large, but also (which should not have been doubted by some interpreters) of the Israelites,..."

 

"The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament," edited by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, traces the Hebrew "goy" to the West Semitic "gayum" which means "people;...group, (work) gang."  This authoritative source quotes the Mari documents where the word has been translated as tribe and sometimes territory.

 

Botterweck and Ringgren then go on to say that while the meaning of "goy" as people is assured fully, "it remains unclear to what extent the principle of identification is based on political, territorial, or gentilic considerations, and whether some element of social status is implied."

 

At this point, it is quite evident that the Hebrew goy (plural--goyim) is a complex word which can be difficult to translate into English.  This fact alone opens the door to incorrect translations on occasion; which did happen, as we will later see after a few more comments on the Greek ethnos. 

 

 

Ethnos Is Hard To Translate 

 

In English translations, the Greek word ethnos normally is translated as Gentile, heathen, nation or people, as Strong's notes.  But some of these uses, like Gentile (which some "religious" persons automatically assume to be non-Israelites), probably are very poor or even incorrect for the Greek ethnos, as will shortly be seen.  The term ethnos can create confusion.

 

As a minimum, ethnos is probably a very broad expression which, like goy, is frequently hard to translate.  More often, the word must be determined from the context.  Clearly, English words like race, tribe, multitude, nation, people, etc. can open up all kinds of possibilities.

 

Interestingly, and in fact, a check of the usages of ethnos in the New Testament reveals that the Jews (one tribe and/or one nation) were called ethnos (singular) at Luke 7:5; 23:2; John 11:48-52; 18:35; and Acts 10:22; 24:2,10,17; 26:4; 28:19.  In regards to the reality of this truth, many Greek savants will not argue it.

 

A good example of this very thing is brought out by W. E. Vine in his "New Testament Dictionary" where he acknowledges that ethnos "is used in the singular of the Jews."  Since this fact is not in dispute, one may wonder why these same scholars do not express some concern over the theory that ethnos (in its plural forms) refers only to non-Israelite nations.

 

Likewise, in the Hebrew Old Testament, the early nation of Yisrael and the later divided Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah were all each and individually referred to as goy (singular) at numerous times as various lexicons and concordances allow.  Again, there is no contention on this assertion.

 

 

Galilee of the Ethnon 

 

Also, at Matthew 4:13-15, the lands of Zebulun (Zevulun in the Hebrew) and Naphtali (Naftali in the Hebrew), two tribes of the House of Yisrael, are called the Galilee of the ethnon (genitive plural case of ethnos, but perhaps wrongly translated as Gentiles in the KJV).  This text links to Isaiah 9:1--where the Hebrew has it as Galilee of the goyim (in the plural), which clearly does refer to Israelite tribes or nations in this context. 

 

Some so-called Bible "authorities" would try to argue that the Hebrew goyim, in the plural (and the Greek ethne, ethnesi and ethnon in the plural), never can refer to the peoples of Yisrael in any sense.  These so-called "experts" should look carefully at Genesis 35:11; 48:19; Ezekiel 2:3; 35:10, and 37:22 where the tribes and nations of Yisrael categorically are called goyim (plural). 

 

Of course, Isaiah 9:1 and Matthew 4:13-15 are also clear enough that Zevulun and Naftali (tribes of Yisrael) are both goyim and ethnon.  By the way--Gesenius; Harris, Archer & Waltke; Botterweck & Ringgren; and other Hebrew lexicographers state that goyim (plural) can refer to the peoples and nations of Yisrael. 

 

On this, some explanation is now due.  Before the division of Yisrael under Rehoboam (Rechavam in the Hebrew), the united kingdom was goy (singular).  But after the split, the divided nations and tribes of Yisrael were goyim (plural) and will remain goyim until they are reunited in the future (Ezek 37:22).

 

 

Both Goy And Goyim In Yisrael 

 

In addition, there is another aspect of this problem over defining goyim, as well as ethne, ethnesi and ethnon. 

 

Many people erroneously "assume" that the Jews (historically, as well as today) constitute the 12/13 tribes of Yisrael--despite YHWH's pledge that Yakov Yisrael would in time produce a goy (singular nation) and a company of goyim (plural nations) through the two tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen 35:11; 48:19). 

 

Of course, from the early days of the promises, the Scriptures were quite precise in stating that Avraham would become the father of many “goyim” (Gen 17:4-6) and that Sarah would be the mother of “goyim” (Gen 17:16).  In time, it was noted that Rebekah was to be the mother of two “goyim” (Gen 25:23).  

 

The promises to Yehudah (the Jews) and the other tribes (Gen 49; Deut 33) were that each of them were to become separate nations likewise (collectively goyim).  Moreover, opponents of truth can never comprehend that in the strict racial or ethnic sense, the (true) Jews (Hebrew Yehudim) were only descendants of Yehudah and historically were actually one tribe (goy-singular). 

 

Even when Binyamin was allied with the Yehudim in the House of Yehudah, the one resulting nation was still goy (singular).  And after the Babylonian exile, the returning Jews (still one people, one nation, and largely one tribe) remained goy and ethnos (singular).

 

 

The Jews Were Never Ephraim or the House of Yisrael 

 

Evidently, the Jews (singularly) were never goyim (unless from the perspective that as the House of Yehudah, they were made up of the three tribes of Yehudah, Binyamin and Levi), although Ephraim was destined to be goyim, as YHWH so states.  It patently is obvious that Yehudah (the Jews) and Ephraim are distinctly different tribes and peoples. 

 

Furthermore, the Jews living in Canaan after the Assyrian conquests were not and never could be a part of the "lost" House of Yisrael referred to by YESHUA in His commission to the twelve, as has been noted previously. 

 

Significantly, the word “Jews” (Yehudim) first appears at II Kings 16:6; and there, it refers to descendants of Yehudah or the people of the House of Yehudah. 

 

Thereafter, in the Tanakh, the word “Jews” is used in reference to the tribe of Yehudah or the House of Yehudah (although a few individuals of the other tribes did move to the territory of Yehudah to live and be assimilated during the divided kingdom, as will be covered later herein--I Kg 12:17, 23; I Chron 9:3; II Chron 10:17; 11:3, 13-17; 15:9; 16:1; 30:6, 10-18; 31:1, 6; 34:9).

 

The Scriptures are abundantly clear that the divided houses, nations and tribes of Yisrael were, are and will be goyim, ethne, ethnesi and ethnon (plural forms) until they are reunited into one sheepfold in the future (Ezek 34:23; 37:19).  There can be no mistaking of this point. 

 

 

Goyim And Ethnos (Plural) Are Used In A Religious Sense 

 

Earlier, reference was made to the "Foundations of Our Faith" conference at ORU in October 1991.  At that meeting, Dr Ken Hanson (quoted earlier herein) of ORU gave a talk on "The God-Fearers," in which he noted that in contrast to monotheistic Judaism, all of the contemporary worldly religions of Second Temple days were polytheistic. 

 

Hanson next observed that the Jews of those Second Temple times customarily applied the term "goyim" to the peoples of those pagan, polytheistic religions in general.  As Hanson outlined it, there is certainly doubt that the first century CE Jews would have given the subject of race or ethnicity any particular considerations at all in contrast to their views on religion. 

 

Therefore, in this context, it is patently obvious that to the Jewish mind of the first century CE, the word "goyim" (and its related Greek translations) was used in a religious vein to refer to persons of non-Jewish religions, of whatever race or ethnic background.  Certainly, this fact impacts grossly upon the subject at hand, as will be shown shortly. 

 

Interestingly, on this point, Thayer’s “Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament” reflects that ethne (plural of ethnos) means “foreign nation, not worshipping the true God; pagans, gentiles,...and very often; in plain contradistinction to the Jews: Ro iii 29; ix 24; Gal ii 8, etc.”  Obviously, Jews here surely refers to Jews by religion, as has been amply established. 

 

Thayer also observes that Shaul also uses ethne “even of Gentile Christians: Ro xi 13; xv 27; xvi 4; Gal ii 12.”  While the word Christians here may be argued (because of its source, based upon comments to be made later in this study), the issue remains that ethne is linked to “non-Jewish” peoples. 

 

Even Strong’s definition of ethnos, discussed earlier, offers the same idea in saying that it means a non-Jewish tribe, usually by implication, meaning pagan. 

 

Assuredly, religion has to be the usual theme of ethnos or goy in the Scriptures.  In this sense, the NT uses of these words suggest that they (in their singular or plural forms) connect to the lost tribes of Yisrael in a religious vein.

 

It would also be appropriate here to also note the remarks of Isaiah 61:9, in linkage with the “Testament of Moses” and the work of that writer and of the Jews generally to connect the words goy/goyim/Gentiles to the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael. 

 

As Yeshayahu noted, Yisrael would be found in or among the Gentiles.  Clearly, in Jewish eyes in New Testament times, the Hebrew words goy and/or goyim were descriptive of the lost tribes of Yisrael certainly in a religious sense and possibly in a national vein as well.  Second Temple Jews certainly understood them and their meanings. 

 

A final note on this line surfaces in an article on “Gentiles” from the “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” (v. 4, p. 533), which affirms that “Gentiles are persons who are non-Jews by birth and religion.  The essential distinction between Jew and Gentile is, however, not one of nationality or race, but of religious belief and moral standards.  A convert to the Jewish faith is not regarded as in any sense a Gentile.” 

 

This same Jewish source additionally asserts that “goyim, nations, came to mean the pagan world.”  There is no way to miss what that writer had in mind.  He was focusing on the theme of religion and assuredly nothing else. 

 

Surely, any thinking Jew would relegate the status of the lost tribes of Yisrael to the same as any other “pagan” nation or people out in the world.  Therefore, it was and still is today correct to Scripturally refer to the lost tribes of Yisrael as goyim and/or ethne-ethnon (or also technically Gentiles, despite confusion over that word in Christendom). 

 

 

Greek Loipos and Apallotrioo

 

Turning back now to the New Testament, since this is the theme of this work, ethnesi and ethne were used on two occasions (Rom 1:13; Eph 4:17) in connection with the Greek "loipos" (which is translated as "other;" but more correctly means "the rest or remaining")--to read "other Gentiles" (in the KJV). 

 

But the context of Ephesians 4:17 is clear that the word loipos is a reference to other Israelites in difference to the Jews.  The correct translation there would have to be "the rest or remaining (Israelite) tribes" and not other Gentiles as the KJV has it. 

 

Additionally, in Ephesians 2:11-12, Shaul is very explicit in using ethne for the non-Jewish "lost" tribes of Yisrael in saying that the very elect of the apostolic age were once "ethne" (poorly translated as Gentiles by the KJV) in the flesh and "apallotrioo" (incorrectly translated as alien by the KJV). 

 

Young's "Analytical Concordance" says that apallotrioo means "to alienate."  Richard Weymouth's New Testament translates it as "estranged from" and Ronald Knox's New Testament gives it as "outlaws from." 

 

The point being, the very elect subjects under discussion were formerly a part of the Commonwealth of Yisrael, but had become separated, estranged or alienated from Yisrael. 

 

Thus, ethne in Ephesians 2:11-12 has to refer to the non-Jewish lost tribes of Yisrael then in the Diaspora.  There is no other plausible explanation for this text.  So ethnos (singular or plural), which means a “tribe(s),” can and often does mean for sure a tribe(s) of Israelites, as Strong's definition allows and as the contextual uses of the word(s) demonstrate. 

 

 

Shimon (Called Simeon in the KJV)

 

There is a third piece of evidence making it abundantly clear that ethnos (singular or plural) can and often does refer to a tribe or tribes of Israelites.  This one surfaces when Shimon, a just and righteous man, goes to the Temple to behold The Baby YESHUA (Lu 2:25-35). 

 

In describing this visit, the writer Luke is careful to say that, in context, Shimon was in a state of anticipation and expectancy in looking forward to the "Consolation of Yisrael" (Lu 2:25).  On this, please note that this visit occurred when The MESSIAH was a small child and long before He uttered His commission to the twelve under discussion. 

 

Of course, in YESHUA, Shimon saw SALVATION (Lu 2:30) in the vein of Him being "A LIGHT to lighten the Gentiles (ethnon) and (Greek "kai") the glory of" The ELOHIM's people Yisrael (Lu 2:32). 

 

 

More on the Greek Kai 

 

There are at least two or more significant points worth mentioning in these observations.  First, the English word "and" between the two phrases (in Luke 2:30) is from the Greek "kai" (which has been cited in former chapters). 

 

While it is true that, in context, the connective "and" could translate kai, it is also true that kai can be translated often as "even" or "that is to say" or “namely,” as if the second phrase is an enhancement, enlargement or restatement of the first phrase (per Bullinger's “Companion Bible,” Strong's “Greek Dictionary,” Thayer’s “Greek English Lexicon” and other Greek lexicons). 

 

Because of The ANOINTED ONE's statement of His commission, there is every reason to believe that "kai" (in Lu 2:32) more correctly means that YESHUA was A LIGHT to lighten the ethnon "even" or "that is to say" or "to be" the glory of Yisrael.  Certainly here, kai is linking ethnon to the people of Yisrael.  This fact seems crystal clear. 

 

Another case of “kai” being used as “even” or “that is to say” surfaces at Acts 4:27 where the killing of YESHUA is attributed to Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles (ethnesi) and (kai) the people of Yisrael.  Positively here, the ethnesi have to be “namely” the people of Yisrael. 

 

Why?  Well, because Acts 2:36 in context appears to clearly link the House of Yisrael to the murder of YESHUA.  Kefa was the speaker in both instances.  Obviously, Acts 4:27 cannot contradict Acts 2:36.  Thus, the ethnesi at Acts 4:27 must be “even” or “namely” the people of Yisrael. 

 

 

Back to Shimon 

 

For a second issue on this text (Luke 2:30-32), please note that Shimon is addressing The Child YESHUA perhaps as many as 30 years before He would grow up and utter His famous commission about the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael.  Hence, at this very early time, the Scriptures are recognizing that the recipients of the Good News will be Israelites who will be known as ethnon (goyim in Hebrew). 

 

 

No Change In Mission! 

 

Wherefore, when The MESSIAH restated His purpose to the disciples, just before He left them (Matt 28:19; Mk 13:10; Lu 24:47), He was not bringing up a change in their mission since His use of the Greek ethnos (in its plural forms) was nothing new in connection with His mission.  

 

For sure, the concept of His message going to the "ethnon" Israelites was something that was already known all the way back in time to when YESHUA was A Small Child.  As this idea was not new and since it had been around for at least 30 years by the time of Matthew 28, there is no way one can believe that the use of ethnos (in its plural shapes) can constitute a change in the commission. 

 

The bottom line on this sub-topic is plain.  Very soon, in the earthly life of The MESSIAH, the Greek ethnon is used for Israelites within the purview of YESHUA's mission.  Thus, it was no big deal or a change when ethnos (in its plural presentations) is used in later years.  Clearly, the Scriptures are consistent and are not in a state of confusion on this topic. 

 

Consequently, any attempt to relate ethnos (in its plural forms) exclusively to non-Israelites (as most translators do with the confused "Gentiles") would have to be wrong.  Thus, there is just no way that ethnos, ethne, ethnesi or ethnon should normally be translated as Gentile or Gentiles, as various English translations show. 

 

But it also does appear that at least on occasion, ethnos (in its plural forms) was used for non-Israelites (as at Matt 10:5; Acts 13:19) where the article “the” does not appear in the Greek texts, as discussed by Thomas Jones.

 

Too, there are several other verses involving ethnos (singular) in the possible vein of all or some grouping of collective nations and peoples (including both Israelite and non-Israelite), as at Revelation 5:9, 7:9, 11:9, 13:7, 14:6 and variously others.  In citing these texts from Revelation, it must be noted that they are not all precisely the same in every detail in the Greek text (for whatever reason). 

 

In general, in these apocalyptic lines, the meaning may be clearer than just the plural forms of ethnos because Yohanan seemingly wrote about every (Greek pas), kindred (Greek phule), and tongue (Greek glossa), and people (Greek laos) and nation (Greek ethnos). 

 

So, in Revelation, the context seems to allow that in some instances (but not in all instances) a multitude of every and all (or all in a particular class) peoples and nations might seemingly be involved (and in a future context at least when written).  In this regard, please note here that the Greek has several other words to mean nations and peoples generally. 

 

For example, the phrase quoted above from Revelation often uses the Greek "pas laos" (perhaps with a broader meaning than just Yisrael) in conjunction with ethnos (not in the plural, but in the singular and without the article) to seemingly cover all or all peoples and nations in a particular classification (maybe Israelites and non-Israelites).

 

Though it is possible that the above texts from Revelation 5:9 and 7:9 allow for something beyond just Israelites, it does seem likely that Adamites only apply in the two texts for several good reasons which will be discussed below and in later chapters herein (though Rev 5:9 probably concerns Israelites essentially, as will be later covered). 

 

Here, in Revelation, Adamites mean a people greater than Israelites and yet more limited than all humans/humanoids (to be broached below and in some detail in later chapters).  Hence, it is likely that Revelation 5:9 and 7:9 only address the collective Adamite kind and not all created humans/humanoids (as might possibly be implied in Revelation 11:9, 13:7, 14:6). 

 

Dan Gayman of the Church of Israel of Schell City, MO teaches that phule in Revelation addresses the Israelite people of the same racial stock who largely had been scattered abroad in the times of Israelite exile from Canaan.  The “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” (v. ix, p. 245-250) is clear that phule involves a clan or group (like the Israelites) bound together by common descent or blood relationship. 

 

This view has it that the every tongue, people and nation has to be addressed in the context of the tribes of Yisrael, as suggested by the Greek phule.  Of course, the relationship idea would also allow phule to address Adamites in the collective sense.  As a minimum, the idea of every class of humans/humanoids in Rev 5:9 and 7:9 seems to be in conflict with other texts which will be covered in later comments on this theme. 

 

 

The Greek Ktisis/Ktisma 

 

Moreover, there is another important reason suggesting that some of those Revelation passages might refer to Adamites only in a general sense.  This one surfaces because there is another interesting Greek word used in the NT which seemingly does refer to all kinds of humans/humanoids, besides just Adamites (again, this reality will be broached in some detail in subsequent chapters). 

 

Here, reference is being made to the Greek “ktisis/ktisma” which are often translated as “creature” and mean “a making” or “thing made” (per Young’s “Analytical Concordance”).  Ktisis is used at Mark 16:15 in the preaching of the Good News to every “creature.”  Other texts at Romans 1:25, II Corinthians 5:17, Colossians 1:23, and Hebrews 4:13 suggest that this word can apply to all created humans/humanoids. 

 

The book of Revelation additionally seems to use ktisma several times in the context of every human/humanoid creature made, as at Revelation 6:13 and 8:9.  In these references, ktisis/ktisma appear to convey a broad meaning of “every” human creation, to perhaps include both Adamites and non-Adamites. 

 

With these possible uses of ktisis/ktisma for all humans/humanoids, one would have to stop and wonder if the words every “pas, phule, glossa, laos and ethnos” might therefore have a more restrictive meaning like every “Adamite.”  Some constructive research might disclose YHWH’s real intent on this question. 

 

It is furthermore useful to note that while every “pas, phule, glossa, laos and ethnos” would have, at least in a future period, some saved persons (in a resurrected sense in Revelation 5:9 and 7:9 and not in the vein of immortal souls, as usually believed in Christendom), it does not necessarily prove that the ktisis/ktisma address saved ones in any and every situation. 

 

However, the basic thesis of this study survives intact, irrespective of how the reader might wish to read and interpret the various texts just cited.  The point remains that the linkage of ethnos (in its plural forms) to the tribes of Yisrael in the New Testament is definitely established. 

 

 

Both Ethnos And Goy Are Vague 

 

At this instant, it is apparent that the meaning of ethnos (and its plural forms) can be vague and not necessarily clear without a careful study of the context.  Frequently, the words clearly refer to the tribes of Yisrael.  But on some occasions, they seem to link to non-Israelites. 

 

Plus, on this, please remember that both ethnos and goy (singular or plural) can refer to aspects of a population other than just race and ethnic dimensions.  Hence, by these terms, the subject could well be a people from a philosophical, religious, cultural, territorial, nationalistic, etc perspective. 

 

This fact attains a high level of significance when one calls to mind the previously cited comments by Dr Ken Hanson of ORU on the common practice of the Jews of Second Temple days to refer to all pagan, polytheistic worshippers as goyim irrespective of race or ethnic considerations.  Surely, this religious dimension was the setting for the entire Apostolic Assembly age.   

 

Therefore, without the definitions as used in Revelation, the word ethnos (or its plural shapes) used alone raises questions and concern, and particularly so in connection with dispensing the Good News to all kinds and created orders of peoples, contrary to YESHUA's original commission. 

 

In fact, since ethne, ethnesi and ethnon often does refer to the tribes of Yisrael, why wouldn't one at first and logically suppose that this is the intent at Matthew 28:19, Mark 13:10 and Luke 24:47, and especially in view of Shimon's earlier remark linking the ethnon to Yisrael (Lu 2:32)? 

 

Without equivocation and based upon the just quoted remarks by Dr Ken Hanson at the Tulsa meeting, it becomes almost certain that the Hebrew word goyim (Greek ethne, ethnesi and ethnon) was in the mental thinking of all of the leading New Testament personalities, including YESHUA, Himself, in any reference to persons of the House of Yisrael in the context of them being people of the heathen, polytheistic religions in contrast to monotheistic Judaism. 

 

 

Ethnos (Plural) Does Refer to the Lost Tribes of Yisrael 

 

Naturally, this thinking later on translated into the words and writings of the disciples recorded for posterity.  By the way, it would be well to pause here and mention that just as the world has been plagued with polytheistic beliefs, Christians have continued the same nonsense with their theories about a so-called trinity (as discussed previously).  Hence, these pagan beliefs are still around today. 

 

In effect, in Second Temple days, the New Testament usages of goyim and/or its Greek forms was often being applied to the "lost" tribes of Yisrael from the religious viewpoint that they were non-Jews living in the world of heathen religions.  Actually, this has to be the meaning of those texts because the Scriptures are consistent and do not contradict each other.  

 

Furthermore, as one more side point on this reality, it should be noted that whereas the peoples of the House of Yisrael were in the Diaspora in the first century CE, largely practicing the pagan religions, they are still in the same situation today to invoke a coming time of trial on them, as envisioned by the prophet Yechezkel (Ezek 4-7). 

 

Incidentally, their test comes upon them just as they complete a "marked off" period of 390 years of sin (Ezek 4:5).  This situation is discussed at some length throughout this publication. 

 

In the earlier presentation on the Israelites living abroad (from Palestine) in the Diaspora and referred to as Greeks, the point was made that these people could be Greeks because of religion or because of culture, nationality, residency or possibly even citizenship.  The same is true with the Hebrew goy(im) and Greek ethnos. 

 

The conclusion on this is manifest.  In clear and certain words not subject to question or confusion, The MESSIAH had already specified that the Good News was to go to the "lost" tribes of Yisrael (Matt 10:1-42; Lu 9:1-6).  Why would He later have contradicted His Own words without offering some clarification or comment?

 

Mattityahu, Mark and Luke plainly knew what the original commission was.  They were not dumb.  How can anyone suppose that these writers would come along in later texts to use the vague, ambiguous and uncertain ethnos (in its plural forms), all alone and without explanation, to completely change and alter what had already been said.

 

Surely, if Matthew 28:19, Mark 13:10 and Luke 24:47 were to include all kinds and created orders of humans/humanoids, why wasn't words also used (as in Revelation) or some other interpretation presented to show that YESHUA's charge to the disciples was, in fact, being changed to a brand new definition. 

 

The only conclusion that a student of Truth can come to in the texts where ethnos (and its plural presentations) are used alone and without qualification or clarification is that the words normally identify the tribes of Yisrael in whole or in part, as with the Jews. 

 

What a tragedy it is that English translators so often use the confusing "Gentiles," rather than the more literally correct "tribes" to translate the terms. 

 

In fact, because of the confusion over the words' meanings, one could make a pretty good argument to transliterate ethnos (singular or plural types); instead of even attempting a translation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 49--The New Testament Writers Wrote

 

 

To The World? 

 

Another and different statement of the alleged "great commission" appears at Mark 16:15 where the KJV gives the sense of taking the Good News to all the "world."  This same idea appears at Matthew 26:13 and Mark 14:9 where the woman's anointing of YESHUA was to be remembered when the Good News was preached in the "whole world." 

 

In these uses, the "whole world" is from the Greek "kosmos."  As the "Analytical Greek Lexicon" and others indicate, kosmos refers to the physical planet, world or even the material universe.  Manifestly, kosmos addresses the physical and material earth and not people, per se. 

 

The issue here is geography, as is proven from Matthew 24:14, where mention was made that the message was to be preached as a witness to the whole world (Greek "oikoumene," which means "habitable earth or land" per Young's "Analytical Concordance"). 

 

A similar idea is found in Acts 1:8 where the Word is to go to the uttermost (the extreme or last) parts of the earth (from the Greek “ge,” meaning the earth or land, per Young’s “Analytical Concordance.”  Ge is similar to and apparently used to translate the Hebrew “erets”).  Again, the issue is geography. 

 

Therefore, in telling the disciples to go out into the kosmos (and/or to the ge or oikoumene), The MESSIAH was instructing the disciples on "where" to go to fulfill their mission to the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

And where were the Israelites back then as well as today?  In the Diaspora, Israelites have been literally throughout most or all of the inhabited, civilized world (certainly, in the age end, Israelites are found all over the world, as will be proven in subsequent chapters herein). 

 

 

The Wedding Feast 

 

The next record in the first four New Testament books worth mentioning appears at Matthew 22:1-14 where the call goes out to the bidden guests for the wedding feast.  But they make light of it so the king turns to others.  At a first reading, some may incorrectly speculate that all of Yisrael initially received the call and rejected it; hence, allowing YESHUA to turn to non-Israelites. 

 

However, this is not necessarily what that parable is saying at all.  Instead, the New Testament repeatedly teaches and communicates over and over again that of necessity the Good News had to go to the Jews (the recognized Israelites) first for a good reason whether we can understand it or not. 

 

Only after the Jews in Palestine and the Diaspora had received and largely rejected the message did the apostles focus their attention on the unrecognized Israelites of the "lost" tribes (the original commission), who were then living in the Diaspora with other religions, nationalities, citizenships, etc. 

 

The context of this story about the wedding festival actually commenced in Matthew 21:43, which suggested the omission of the Jews in YESHUA's stated commission.  In this situation in Matthew 21:43, The MESSIAH was clearly addressing the Jews to whom He was talking.  The other people alluded to in the parable at hand have to be the lost tribes of Yisrael if the Scriptures are to be consistent. 

 

 

Some NT Words  

 

The next account, in the so-called Gospel writings worth mentioning, is at John 10:16 when YESHUA referred to other sheep not of this fold.  Some readers may wish to try to interpret this "other" as being non-Israelites.  But please notice the context.  

 

Regarding this aspect, the other sheep are to become "one flock" with the Jews (who were being addressed) under one Shepherd.  Here, this statement is a positive reference to Ezekiel 34:23 and 37:19 where certain Jews and the lost tribes of Yisrael will one day (still in the future) be united into one sheepfold under YHWH YESHUA. 

 

Actually, this same situation surfaces again very quickly in John 11:51-52 (noted earlier) when Caiaphas made a prediction about YESHUA's death for the Jews and the gathering together into "one" of the children of The MOST HIGH scattered (Greek "diaskorpizo") abroad. 

 

This text by Yohanan absolutely refers to the ultimate reunification of the Jews (recognized Israelites) with the lost tribes (unrecognized Israelites in the Diaspora) into one sheepfold under The SHEPHERD YESHUA, as prophesied centuries earlier by both Yeshayahu (Isa 49:6) and Yechezkel (Ezek 34:23; 37:19). 

 

As a matter of fact, the book of Acts and subsequent New Testament writings are abundantly filled with reports of the Good News going out to all of the sheep of Yisrael--both to the Jews first and to the lost tribes of Yisrael later. 

 

The Apostle Shaul personally preached to the Jews first on many different occasions (Acts 13:5, 14; 14:1; 16:13; 17:1-2, 10, 17; 18:4; 19:8; 28:17; Rom 1:16; 2:9-10).  Only after the Jews largely rejected his words did Shaul turn to the people of the lost tribes (the so-called Gentiles). 

 

 

Did the House of Yisrael Israelites Help Kill YESHUA? 

 

No wonder that very early in Acts Luke wrote that "therefore, let all the house of Israel know" (Acts 2:36).  This exact reference also suggests that the House of Yisrael had a hand somehow in the death of YESHUA (as will be discussed in some detail in future sections of this study). 

 

Was this statement made because of the fact The MESSIAH had been sent to die for them (the executing soldiers); or for all of Adam, including them in the broader sense?  Or perhaps the Roman soldiers, involved in YESHUA’s death, included individuals from the House of Yisrael (this reality would be most extraordinary and far reaching in scope and meaning). 

 

At this place, it would be well to mention that beyond the soldiers, there are, additionally, good reasons to believe that Pontius Pilate himself was an Israelite from the lost tribes of Yisrael. 

 

His father was an officer in the Roman Army and tradition has it that Pilate was born at Fortingall, Scotland (per Oct 1995, “New Beginnings”).  To this day, the Royal Scot Regiment of the British Army bears the nickname “Pontius Pilate’s Bodyguard.” 

 

 

Luke 5:32 

 

There are several other references in the first New Testament books which next deserve some comment.  First, Luke 5:32 reflects that YESHUA came to call "sinners to repentance."  Some might wish to try to read into that line a meaning that the thrust of His work was to all sinners of all races and kinds. 

 

But the condemnation of sin legally exists only in the context of YHWH's Torah (Rom 5:13; I John 3:4) and the Torah was given solely to Yisrael (Acts 7:53; Rom 9:4).  Since it was not bestowed on non-Israelites (Rom 2:14), the sinners in Luke 5:32 have to be Israelites. 

 

 

Acts 5:30-31 

 

As a follow-up on the question of sinners needing repentance, as outlined by Luke (5:32), The Great KING of Yisrael (Matt 27:42; Mk 15:32; Lu 1:33; Jo 1:49) came to grant specifically “repentance unto Yisrael” (Acts 5:30-31).  Here, please understand that this same repentance comes only to the elect, called out ones (obviously Israelites, per Acts 5:30) as a free gift of grace (Acts 11:18; II Tim 2:25). 

 

Yes, it is true that this repentance is something which these individuals do not muster and produce on their own.  It is something given free as an unmerited gift.  A future chapter in this work will study this idea in some detail. 

 

In this context, in Acts 5:30-31, Kefa spoke to the elders and people of Yisrael (Acts 4:8, 10; 7:42) and subsequently pointed out that YESHUA's purpose was to give "repentance and forgiveness of sin to Yisrael" (Acts 5:31).  Kefa surely knew and understood what he was talking about.  After all, he was present at the initial presentation of the commission by YESHUA. 

 

 

Kefa's Charge 

 

When YESHUA's work was about finished in 30 CE, He singled out Kefa for a restatement of what Kefa was supposed to do.  The MESSIAH specifically charged him to "feed My sheep" (John 21:15-17) with no mention, suggestion or allusion of any change or new direction in terms of Kefa’s earlier commission. 

 

Therefore, there is absolutely nothing in this text to alter Kefa's previous commission as a part of the twelve.  In fact, since YESHUA was The SHEPHERD of Yisrael (Matt 2:6), one can surmise that Kefa was to feed (teach) the sheep of Yisrael. 

 

 

Cornelius 

 

Now, what about the Roman Centurion Cornelius whom Kefa dealt with (Acts 10:1-48).  Is there any reason at all to suppose that Cornelius wasn't an Israelite (maybe, an unrecognized one from one of the lost tribes)? 

 

Admittedly, Cornelius was a Roman.  But so what--so was Shaul a Roman (just as Moshe was an Egyptian).  The fact that this Centurion was a Roman really proves nothing in terms of what his racial and/or ethnic origin could be. 

 

While some people may not realize it, but the truth is that even the city of Rome itself must have had some number of Israelites as residents (House of Yisrael Israelites, according to the flesh) because Shaul wrote his letter to the believers at Rome in the context of them being fleshly descendants of Avraham (Rom 4:1; 9:3-6).  Assuredly, they were Israelites. 

 

Not only were these Romans addressed by Shaul in the context that they were obvious Israelites, but more precisely, they had to have been Israelites of the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael.  This fact is proven when Shaul outlined his commission to carry the Good News to the ethnos (in its plural forms) which certainly included the called out ones of Rome to whom he was writing his epistle (Rom 1:1; 5:7; 11:13). 

 

This linkage of the Romans to Israelites of the lost tribes deserves a few more comments.  In legend, Rome was founded by Romulus in c735 BCE.  This was just about the time of the fall of the House of Yisrael tribes to the Assyrians.  Is it plausible that some of these Israelites escaped Canaan to come to Rome and establish it? 

 

This writer believes that it is highly possible that Rome was founded by Israelites, during the Assyrian conquests in the Middle East.  Sometime, starting with the decline of Rome in the first century CE, many of these surviving Israelites moved on to the West to establish new House of Yisrael nations. 

 

However, some perhaps did stay in Rome for the next 500 years while she declined and effectively died out as a world power.  The fall of Rome is described in other comments herein and needs not be repeated at this time. 

 

Suffice to say, the release of the slaves and the integration and miscegenation with them, coupled with other immigration into the area and assimilation with the Italian Sabines (of Hamitic stock), all contributed to the fall of Rome.  The people surviving in Rome and in Italy in the last 1,500 years are a far different people racially and ethnically than the early Romans. 

 

 

The Centurion--An Israelite 

 

Maybe, the Centurion involved with Kefa was a fleshly uncircumcised Israelite from Rome.  Furthermore, the centurion could easily have also been a Briton (unrecognized Israelite) because the British Isles supplied many soldiers to the Roman army. 

 

And if the Centurion was of the House of Yisrael from Rome, Britain or some other place, this fact alone could furthermore be pertinent because it might help to establish that some of the Roman soldiers participating in the execution of YESHUA were actually persons of the "lost" tribes of Yisrael, as suggested by Luke (Acts 2:36; 4:27) and as mentioned above. 

 

Although the evidence otherwise is quite profound and most convincing, one must allow, too, that Cornelius could moreover have been a prospective ger convert to the Apostolic Assembly faith which would have been perfectly proper and compatible with Kefa's commission. 

 

 

Linked to Judaism 

 

Additionally, on this question of the status of Cornelius, some students of the Word have even went so far as to suggest that the Centurion was, in fact, a convert to Judaism (possibly a Hasidic Pharisee); or as a minimum, a proselyte to Judaism (at least, in belief and practice, though formal conversion and circumcision may not have occurred) because of his personal description, as penned by Luke (Acts 10:2, 22). 

 

The “Expositors Greek Testament” (v. II, p. 250-251) notes for Acts 10:2 that Cornelius was “a God-fearing proselyte... In Acts, this class of proselytes are always so described... All the incidents of the story seem to point to the fact that Cornelius had come into relations with the synagogue, and had learned the name and the fear of the God of Israel.” 

 

Here, it is well to observe that many, if not all, of the Apostolic age converts to YESHUA were connected in some fashion to Judaism.  In most all of these instances, the apostles clearly preached to both the religious Jews and non-Jew Israelites in attendance at the Jewish synagogues. 

 

These non-Jews must have been there to learn about the Torah (law) and Judaism with a possible view of eventually completing the conversion process to Judaism. 

 

At the previously discussed Foundations of Our Faith Conference at ORU in 1991, Dr Ken Hanson suggests that these persons constituted a body of non-Jews who were generally observant of the Torah, but had not been circumcised or had not completed formal conversion. 

 

It appears that they were a group of goyim who were taking the first stand on commencing the process to Judaism by at least adopting the teachings of righteousness.  While some of them would go on to become circumcised proselytes, many would go through life without a change in their status. 

 

Therefore, there were ELOHIM fearers like Cornelius and those individuals at Antioch (Acts 13:16, 26) and Lydia in Philippi (Acts 16:14, per “Lamsa’s Translation from the Peshitta”).  This pool of persons, worshipping at the synagogues, provided a large segment of the eventual believers in YESHUA. 

 

 

Yes, Cornelius Was An Israelite 

 

If the Scriptures are consistent, one can be sure that the Centurion was indeed an Israelite (racially or at least a legitimate ger in the process of conversion) because, at Acts 10:36, Luke carefully noted that the Word was sent to the "children of Israel" in the context of Kefa's visit to Cornelius (on this, see the “Twentieth Century New Testament” translation which gives "God has sent his message to the Israelite people"). 

 

It is quite clear that the message had gone to Yisrael in the person of Cornelius.  And because of this precise little remark in Acts 10:36, it is most evident that Cornelius was truly a racial "Israelite" of the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael. 

 

Furthermore, on this conversion of Cornelius in Acts 10:45, the KJV poorly translates ethne as Gentiles where the giving of the spiritual baptism to the ethne (unrecognized Israelites of the lost tribes) is being contrasted to its receipt by those of the circumcision (Jews). 

 

One final fact on Cornelius’ conversion surfaced when Luke wrote that in this situation, repentance had been granted to the Gentiles (ethnesi--Acts 11:18).  As noted earlier, in this section, Luke, the writer of Acts, repeatedly asserted that repentance was for Yisrael.  Since Cornelius was, indeed, an Israelite, the ethnesi in this verse has to be referring to Israelites. 

 

 

An Earlier Centurion Incident 

 

Actually, Kefa’s encounter with the Roman Centurion was not the first NT contact with such a person.  During The ANOINTED ONE’s personal ministry, He, too, came into contact with an interesting Centurion in Capernaum (Matt 8:5-13; Lu 7:1-10). 

 

This first incident with a Centurion is interesting because it demonstrates a manifest difference in the way The MESSIAH reacted to this “non-Jewish” Centurion, as opposed to the nokri/nekar Syro-Phoenician woman, discussed previously. 

 

This Centurion approached YESHUA and was not repelled or rejected (YESHUA’s acceptance of him means that he was indeed an Israelite of the lost House of Yisrael; because otherwise, YESHUA’s commission to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael would have turned The MESSIAH away from him, as happened with the Syro-Phoenician woman).   

 

Clearly, this Centurion was an Israelite--just like the Centurion was in the book of Acts.  Moreover here, it is pertinent to recognize that this Centurion was a man who had some extensive contact and respect for Judaism (Lu 7:4-5).  It’s not hard at all to allow that this man could have been an ELOHIM fearer or a prospective Jewish proselyte, as was suggested for the one in Acts. 

 

In any case, the Centurion’s servant was sick of the palsy and he came to YESHUA, seeking the healing of his servant.  Rather than reject him, as The MESSIAH surely would have done (if he was not an Israelite of the lost tribes), He was receptive to this Centurion. 

 

Though the Centurion recognized and appreciated YESHUA’s power to heal and heal simply on His Word (which could be spoken at a distance without the necessity of The SON OF ADAM even going to the physical abode of the servant), YESHUA could have chosen to go into the house where the servant was sick, as was His normal NT practice. 

 

Yet, He healed the man’s servant at a distance without entering the house.  The just mentioned Dr Ken Hanson’s talk at ORU suggested that the Centurion was unclean (for not being circumcised), and that YESHUA precisely did the healing at a distance so that He would not have to enter the house of the unclean Centurion or servant. 

 

In this context, it would make sense that Kefa later would be hesitant about going to the house of the apparently uncircumcised Cornelius.  But it is very clear that in each of the two cases of the Centurions, they both were persons of the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael (who were the objects of YESHUA’s commission). 

 

 

Acts 10:28 

 

Moreover, please note that at Acts 10:28, the Greek "allophulos" (meaning another tribe--per Young's "Analytical Concordance") is used for nation or race.  Plainly, allophulos allows for another tribe of Israelites, as well as perhaps other peoples of other racial and/or ethnic configurations. 

 

These remarks in Acts 10:28 are interesting also because they bring out the fact that the first century CE Jews (surely the religious Jews--Pharisees) were very exclusive and would have nothing whatsoever to do with uncircumcised peoples. 

 

Obviously, since the divorced House of Yisrael included uncircumcised persons (Eph 2:11), the Jews would have felt the same way towards them, irrespective of their racial and genetic relationships (if they were even aware of them). 

 

In reality, it is probable that huge numbers of House of Yisrael peoples were out in the Diaspora and the typical Jew in Palestine would not have had the foggiest notion of who many of those individuals were (racially or ethnically). 

 

The same thing is true today.  Most informed Jews (especially Orthodox) are well aware that the lost House of Yisrael has never returned to Canaan.  She still exists somewhere out in the Diaspora.  Many Jews are very informed about the reality of the lost House of Yisrael.  It’s just that they just don’t know where Yisrael is today.  Numbers of them have no concept at all about the modern identifications of the lost tribes. 

 

 

Separation Over Circumcision 

 

Of course, the idea involved in separation (or segregation--see Lev 20:26; I Kg 8:53) is one of achieving the desirable state of (the Hebrew) "kodesh," which means to be separate and obtaining separation (segregation).  English translations incorrectly translate this word as "holy," as a matter of information. 

 

Naturally, the basis for the separation among the Jews in those days was assuredly over circumcision and not necessarily over race, as discussed earlier.  In a later presentation in this work, mention will be focused on the Pharisees of Judaism. 

 

In particular, the Pharisees were noted for their exclusiveness and separation from others.  In fact, during and after the Babylonian exile, the importance of race in conversion to truth seems to have been set aside and ignored by Jews repeatedly, as they undertook efforts to convert and proselyte huge numbers of non-Israelite peoples to Judaism. 

 

One can see this reality particularly in the work of John Hyrcanus to force Judaism on much of the entire population of Edom, as will be described in a later chapter herein. 

 

Clearly, in Acts 10:28, Kefa was well aware of this division between circumcised Jews and others, and in the context that Cornelius evidently was not a circumcised Jew.  Hence, the reality of Cornelius' true status evidently would not have affected the issue of separation, regardless of what his racial ancestry was. 

 

Probably, it was irrelevant to the Jews that Cornelius was racially of Yisrael, Yehudah or whatever.  What mattered to them was that he apparently was uncircumcised (religiously); and thus, an unclean individual which necessitated separation (segregation) in their eyes. 

 

 

The Wall of Partition 

 

Monte Judah, in the May 2001 “Yavoh” (p. 1), presented a commentary on Ephesians 2:10-15--with a focus upon the middle wall of partition between the uncircumcised goyim and the circumcised Jews.  Ephesians 2:11, from this passage, was just cited by this writer above in the reality of a great gulf or separation between the Jews and their racial kinsmen--the uncircumcised House of Yisrael goyim. 

 

The reality of the situation at the Second Temple was noted by Judah.  He pointed out that there was a wall of separation at the Temple which separated the interior courts of Yisrael (accessible by circumcised Jews) from the uncircumcised goyim (Gentiles in the KJV and most English translations).  It was in place between the Beautiful Gate and the Court of the Women. 

 

Judah made the point that Moshe never prescribed or outlined that wall of separation in the Torah.  Yet, the religious Jews managing the Temple built it.  It was built to be a barrier to keep the goyim out of the Temple.  In other words, only circumcised, religious Jews could enter the Temple and take advantage of the sacrificial and offering systems for the atonement of sin. 

 

Monte Judah went on to make the case that this wall was never intended by The ELOHIM and that The MESSIAH came to take it down and make both Jews and goyim one in YESHUA. 

 

Although some of Judah’s remarks are well made, there is a little more to this subject.  As demonstrated throughout this publication, the reference to the goyim typically refers to the scattered House of Yisrael Israelites out in the Diaspora.  So, what happened is that the Jews had erected this barrier between themselves and their racial brethren in the scattered House of Yisrael. 

 

Obviously, in the Jewish mentality, there was a great gulf or separation between themselves (the Jews) and the goyim--despite the fact that the racial brethren of the Jews in the lost House of Yisrael were out in the Diaspora and accepted as being heathen--just as was true with the rest of the pagan peoples. 

 

So yes, YESHUA came to tear down and abolish this middle wall of separation between the two peoples.  This reality is one of the key features and teachings of the entire NT.  It was the message of The MESSIAH, and indeed, the entire Apostolic Assembly.  Certainly, Shaul knew and understood the need, as he outlined it in his letter to the Ephesians. 

 

 

More On Kefa 

 

Before departing this subject of Jewish separatism, the reader may recall another situation involving Kefa when he chose to separate himself from new, non-Jewish converts to the faith (Gal 2:11-12).  This event upset Shaul somewhat since he wrote and told about it. 

 

Shaul, of course, criticized Kefa sharply for his actions.  In truth, the Jews, as just noted, were so religiously proud that they looked upon the uncircumcised, other peoples, seemingly to include their own racial and ethnic brethren of even the House of Yisrael, as unclean and on a low level. 

 

In fact, some in this status and certainly those of the nokri/nekar racial makeup (as will be described in some detail in a future chapter) were called “dogs.”  Yes, even The MESSIAH referred to certain people in the context of them being "dogs," as noted earlier (Mk 7:27-28).  Consequently, there was a tremendous barrier or gulf between the Jews and other peoples, whether Israelites or not. 

 

Since Kefa knew and understood the original commission and his own charge, he subsequently wrote his first epistle to the "elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion" (I Pet 1:1). 

 

The elect exiles in the Diaspora are and have always been Israelites.  There is just no way that Kefa could be addressing any other peoples.  In fact, in I Peter 2:9-12, he calls these persons "an elect race."  The elect race is Yisrael (Isa 45:4; 65:9, 22). 

 

 

Shaul Once More 

 

Turning once more to Shaul the Apostle, it's worth noting that he was specifically chosen to carry the Good News to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael in the Diaspora.  Many times over, this fact is stated where the KJV poorly translates the Greek ethne, ethnesi or ethnon to Gentiles. 

 

For example, at Acts 9:15, the KJV mentions Shaul's commission to "the gentiles (ethnon), and kings, and the children of Israel."  The first “and” in this sentence is from the Greek “kai,” which has been previously discussed in this study. 

 

The reader may recall that “kai” can mean “even” or “that is to say” in the context of an enhancement, enlargement or restatement of the immediately preceding statement.  Consequently, Shaul’s commission was correctly to the ethnon, that is to say the kings and the children (sons) of Yisrael.  By making this correction in the translation, truth becomes quite manifest. 

 

Otherwise, to the Galatians, Shaul stated that he was commissioned to go to the “ethnesi” (Gal 1:15-16)--obviously, those ethnesi of the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

Later, it will be shown that these very Galatians were themselves Israelite descendants of the lost House of Yisrael (in “The New Testament A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings,” p. 304, Bart D. Ehrman says that the Northern part of Galatia was inhabited by Celts, which will be an important issue discussed in a later chapter herein). 

 

Moreover, in this same letter, the apostle went on to reflect that he was specifically chosen to preach the Good News to the uncircumcision (Gal 2:7).  Again, the uncircumcision in this situation has to be referring to the lost tribes of Yisrael who were certainly uncircumcised in their cutoff state of divorcement from YHWH. 

 

Thus, in accordance with his mission and the pattern established earlier, Shaul preached first to the Jews. 

 

And as they largely rejected the message (evidently, because they were not to be its recipients), he turned to the ethne, ethnesi and ethnon (lost tribes of Yisrael) then in the Diaspora--many of whom were obviously Greeks, nationally or religiously (Acts 13:5; 14:1-2, 27; 15:5-7; 16:13; 17:1-4, 12; 18:4, 19; 19:10; 20:21; 21:19; etc). 

 

Over and over again in Shaul's letters to the Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians, etc, the same theme is repeated--to the Jew (circumcision) first and then next to the ethne, ethnesi and ethnon (uncircumcised, lost tribes of Yisrael).  This message is unmistakable in the New Testament. 

 

 

Acts 13 

 

Although recorded by Luke, there is another very important remark by Shaul on this topic. This one is at Acts 13:26 where the KJV has Shaul as saying:  "Men and brethren, children of the stock of Avraham and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent." 

 

There are several features about this writing that deserve some analysis before trying to jump to any conclusions as to it's meaning.  For this text, one can find some earlier parallelism in Acts 13:16 where Shaul says, "Men of Israel and ye that fear God" (KJV). 

 

The whole context of this communication started at Acts 13:14 when Shaul entered a Jewish synagogue for worship on the Sabbath and was invited to speak (Acts 13:15).  Verse 16 commenced Shaul's discourse which went on to run through verse 43. 

 

Acts 13:43 interestingly noted that in this particular synagogue, Shaul was addressing some Jews who were racial descendants of Avraham, plus some persons who were ELOHIM fearers and religious proselytes (evidently legitimate House of Yisrael converts). 

 

It was only to these Israelites present in the synagogue (both those racially from Avraham and the converts among them) that Shaul's remarks were directed.  No one else was present or involved in that dialogue.  There can be no confusion on this unmistakable condition. 

 

Consequently, it is apparent that the "whosoever among you" in verse 26 must be connecting to the converts to Judaism present with the traditional Jews in that synagogue and to no other persons.  The point being is that Shaul was taking the Good News first to the recognized Jews, as he apparently done throughout much of his preaching career. 

 

Later, he turned to the non-Jewish peoples of Yisrael--obviously, also living in Antioch (verses 44-48).  By the way, Richard Francis Weymouth, in his "The New Testament in Modern Speech," translates Acts 13:26 as "Brethren, descendants of the family of Avraham, to us has the word of this salvation been sent." 

 

Could anyone possibly believe that the Apostle Shaul was wrong in saying that to us (descendants of Avraham) has this salvation been sent and not to all kinds and orders of humans/humanoids, as Christendom alleges. 

 

 

Romans 9:6 

 

In writing to the Romans, Shaul offered a little statement about his commission which, at a first glance, would seem to be a paradox of sorts when he wrote that “all those who are from Israel, these are not Israel” (Rom 9:6). 

 

In this context, the apostle was writing about his racial kinsmen (Rom 9:3).  He clearly was recognizing that while “all” of them (his racial kinsmen) were descended from Yakov Yisrael, they were “not” all known as Yisrael or as Israelites. 

 

Again, Shaul was calling to mind the then existing situation regarding the lost tribes of Yisrael which had lost the true Hebrew religion and their own “identity” respecting their true ancestry and heritage.  This confused reality surfaced as a result of YHWH’s divorce of the House of Yisrael, as has amply been described in this paper. 

 

 

Romans 9:20-21 

 

Shaul’s perception in tying the Romans of his epistle to the ancient House of Yisrael was also brought out adamantly in Romans 9:20-21, when he observed that The POTTER certainly has power over the clay to make vessels of honor or dishonor as The POTTER sees fit.  Of course, this message was seemingly for the House of Yisrael and to precisely no one else. 

 

Persons familiar with the Word will at once recognize this statement as being a quotation from the prophet Yirmeyahu who said precisely the same thing (Jer 18:2-6). 

 

As Yirmeyahu put it, the clay in his communication was the House of Yisrael (Jer 18:6).  Yeshayahu, too, had a few choice words on the same subject in the obvious context of Yisrael (Isa 45:4-9, 11). 

 

 

Romans 9:25-26 

 

Furthermore, the fact that Shaul knew the message was to go also to the unrecognized descendants of Avraham in the lost tribes of Yisrael is demonstrated in Romans 9:25-26, when he wrote that those who were not YHWH's people will be called YHWH's people and sons of The Living ELOHIM. 

 

As Shaul was aware, he was quoting from the prophet Hosea (2:23) whose prophesy was specifically designed for the (lost) House of Yisrael.  Even Kefa was to draw this same analogy (I Pet 2:9-10).  Both of these apostles certainly understood what was involved on this theme. 

 

 

Hosea Enters the Arena 

 

Probably, this is good place to bring up the subject of Israel’s divorce, to be described in some detail later herein.  Therein, the point must be made that after the divorce, the resulting children of Yisrael were born illegitimately and out of wedlock through the House of Israel’s fornication with the heathen nations. 

 

In allegory, this is precisely what happened to the prophet Hosea, his adulterous wife and their illegitimate children. 

 

This man Hosea evidently was a citizen and resident of the House of Yisrael.  In the eyes of Jewish scholars, he was identified with Beerah of Reuven (I Chron 5:6), but most Christians link him to the tribe of Issachar (Yissakhar in the Hebrew)--per Herbert Lockyer (in “All The Men Of The Bible”).  But what is more important about Hosea is the fact that he was specifically a prophet to or for the House of Yisrael. 

 

Some scholars and students of the Word have appropriately named Hosea “The Prophet of a Sorrowful Heart” because he suffered and underwent wrongs, trouble and sorrow in his life that paralleled the sins and unfaithfulness that the House of Yisrael demonstrated against The HIGHEST (per Herbert Lockyer).  In other words, Hosea experienced the wickedness and adultery of Yisrael in his own flesh and life. 

 

 

Gomer 

 

In his commission, The SUPREME commanded Hosea to go and marry a woman named Gomer, which he did.  In time, Gomer conceived and eventually brought forth three children:  Jezreel, Loruhamah and Loammi.  All three of these children were to have enormous prophetic significance to the House of Yisrael.  So the student of truth might wish to go to the book of Hosea and read about them (Hos 1:2-10). 

 

Jezreel means YHWH will sow and refers to the end of the ancient House of Yisrael kingdom and the scattering of her people.  Loruhamah means not beloved or not receiving mercy which refers to the fact that the House of Yisrael peoples would no longer receive YHWH’s mercy.  Finally, Loammi means not my people which is what the House of Yisrael peoples became. 

 

Please note the enormous prophetic significance of Gomer’s infidelity and her production of these three specifically named children, in the context of the House of Yisrael and her coming trial in the time of Yakov’s Trouble, as broached elsewhere here in this study in discussions on the curses in the law and the punishment outlined in the book of Ezekiel. 

 

Though this bleak judgment was put upon the House of Yisrael and her peoples, The MOST HIGH went on to acknowledge the great promise to Avraham that these Israelites would become as the sand of the seaside, along with a pungent little remark about their eventual future in the day of Jezreel (Hos 1:10-11). 

 

Hosea fully felt the pain and agony of being married to a woman who abandoned him for adultery and fornication--because it appears that at least the last two and perhaps all three of these children born to Gomer were born illegitimately from Gomer’s harlotry and unfaithfulness (Hos 2:4, as some scholars suggest). 

 

Despite Gomer’s history of sin, it is well to recognize that Hosea eventually paid redemption money (fifteen pieces of silver and some barley) to receive her back which was prophetic of what YHWH would eventually do in the future age end with the adulterous, lost House of Yisrael (Hos 3:1-2). 

 

What a fantastic message by Hosea, as quoted by Shaul, to the elect of the New Testament Assembly.  Consequently, the House of Yisrael (the fornicating wife) will be taken back by YHWH; and more importantly, her children of fornication, who were not YHWH’s children or people, will ultimately be called the sons (and daughters) of The MOST HIGH YHWH. 

 

 

Isaac Troki 

 

Incidentally, these remarks by Shaul in Romans 9:25-26 to interpret Hosea 2:23 have been used by Jews over the years to discredit Christians (who ignorantly attempt to argue that Shaul, directly, and Hosea, indirectly, were referring to “Gentile” non-Israelites--when, in fact, both writers were writing to true, blood-line Israelites of the House of Yisrael). 

 

Early Jewish scholar, Isaac Troki, a Karaite, who lived from 1533-1594 CE, wrote a textual criticism of the New Testament and a defense of Judaism which has been preserved to our time as the “Faith Strengthened.”  Troki correctly perceived that the Christian Church “interprets” those words of Shaul in the context of Gentile non-Israelites. 

 

However, the writer Troki went off in the wrong direction from truth when he also went along with uninformed Christians and accused Shaul of referring to (non-Israelite) Gentiles.  He even charged that Shaul acted in ignorance or intentional perversion in quoting from Hosea (2:23); when, in fact, the Old Testament was clearly addressing Israelites (Hos 1:1-10). 

 

The essence of all this is that ignorant and uninformed Christians do not understand Romans 9:25-26 and its application to true Yisrael.  Accordingly, Jewish scholars, like Troki, also misunderstood Shaul’s words.  But at least, the Jews are able to correctly comprehend that the prophet Hosea’s remarks were focused on Israelites and not on pagan, non-Israelite Christians. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 50--Shaul in More Detail

 

 

Romans 11:11-26 

 

The Apostle Shaul also wrote another very fitting report on the subject of salvation for Yisrael at Romans 11:11-26, where he outlined the grafting in of these ethne, ethnesi and ethnon as "a wild olive shoot into a good olive tree."  In the Book, Yisrael, possibly in her unified sense, is the olive tree (Ps 52:8; 128:3; Jer 11:16; Hos 14:6). 

 

Please notice that the wild shoots are 100%, complete olive shoots--though they have turned and/or have become wild after having departed from the good olive tree.  The grafting in process merely brings them back to the original good olive tree stem and roots, so that "all Israel can be saved," as the apostle said (Rom 11:26). 

 

Elsewhere, there is some amazing proof which makes it conclusive that these "wild olive shoots" are, in fact, from the "lost" House of Yisrael clearly and directly as a result of YHWH’s divorce. 

 

And interestingly, as now will be seen, these Israelites became "wild olives," evidently just about the time, or shortly thereafter, that they were deported from Canaan by the Assyrians to become "lost" to secular history. 

 

The “Davis Dictionary of the Bible” (p. 577) suggests that the wild olive shoot or shrub (which are unproductive) grows up from “the drupe or from slips cut from below the grafted branches, and the shoots which spring up around the trunk” and that these worthless wild shoots can be grafted onto a good olive tree to become productive. 

 

It is very probable that this description by Davis applies precisely to the divorced House of Yisrael, although there is one more interesting feature about the wild olives.  This one was brought out by Wallace Delph, in his paper on “Bible Trees” (p. 6).    Delph says that a good olive tree can revert to a wild olive if neglected and not cultivated. 

 

 

Yeshayahu on the Wild Olive 

 

On this theme, the prophet Yeshayahu had a most pungent remark about a wild olive in the context of a fallen Yisrael (surely, the fallen House of Yisrael).  He said that The ELOHIM will plant this wild olive and certain other trees in the wilderness so that men may see that the hand of YHWH was involved in the planting (Isa 41:19-20, per the "Amplified Bible"). 

 

Unequivocally, this was to be a future planting and would evidently require a "wilderness land" beyond Canaan land--which probably had just been vacated by the Israelites from the Assyrian deportations, when Yeshayahu wrote his remarks. 

 

 

II Esdras 

 

This is a good place, by the way, to mention the remarks of the writer of II Esdras, to be addressed later herein.  He made a reference to a movement by the lost tribes of Yisrael to a “further country where never mankind (Adam-kind) dwelt” (II Esdras 13:39-45).  Could this comment link in some fashion to Yeshayahu’s wilderness land for the wild olive? 

 

The point of all this is that the olive or the potential olive of the House of Yisrael had become "wild" and would be moved and planted in a new wilderness land by The MOST HIGH.  Other texts in the Word say the same thing, as a matter of information. 

 

 

The Pruned Off Natural Branches 

 

Otherwise, the Word communicates that some of the natural, olive branches were broken or pruned off by YHWH in order for the wild, olive shoots to be grafted into the good stem and root system.  Please understand that in YHWH’s wisdom and choice, He pruned off some of the good, natural branches in order to allow the wild shoots to be grafted into the good root structure. 

 

The Apostle Shaul conveys the image (which is certainly the truth) that the cut off branches are the Jews--more exactly, "good" Jews, as to race and religion and not necessarily all Jews, as will be soon shown (Rom 11:23-24). 

 

Now, an important point emerges from Shaul’s remarks to the Romans.  He effectively teaches that not only must the wild shoots be grafted into the good olive tree, but that these cut off, natural branches have to also be grafted back to the tree from where they were cut off (Rom 11:24). 

 

The good Jews (both racially and religiously) were cut off from Second Temple Judaism (which will be addressed in some detail in subsequent chapters).  Since that was their root system and structure, is it factual then that Second Temple Judaism was the same root structure which the wild olive must likewise be grafted into?  This question will also be addressed in later chapters herein. 

 

 

Israelite Blindness 

 

Furthermore, in Romans, chapter 11, Shaul wrote another fitting remark on the just discussed olive tree, which provides more proof of his linkage of the Good News to the lost tribes of Yisrael. 

 

At Romans 11:25-26, the apostle noted that temporary blindness had come to a part or portion of Yisrael (the true Jews) until the full number of the ingathering of the ethnon (correctly the lost tribes of Yisrael) has come in, so that "all Israel" will be saved (Rom 11:26). 

 

Clearly, the salvation of "all Israel," as outlined by Shaul, has to include the ethnon mentioned in context along with the blinded portion of (recognized) Yisrael at Romans 11:25-26.  Absolutely, the ethnon in that text has to refer to Israelites who are a part of the definition of "all Israel."  There is no other way to interpret this remark. 

 

 

Galatians 3:28-29 

 

Another relevant text by Shaul on salvation is at Galatians 3:28-29 where he stated that "there is neither Jew nor Greek... If you be MESSIAH's, then are you Avraham's seed (reckoned through Yitzhak--Gen 21:12) and heir according to the promise."  Of course, this has been one of Shaul's writings also quoted most often by Churchianity in her quest to justify her worldly evangelism to all humans/humanoids. 

 

Upon analysis, this Christian theory is blatantly wrong, along with her other ideas so far examined.  For certain, Shaul directly linked the concept of being in The MESSIAH to Avraham's seed (Gal 3:29; 4:22-31).  And anyway one might try to slice it, a man's seed line is a fleshly descent issue and cannot possibly involve any other options. 

 

This fact of tying the promises to Avraham’s fleshly seedline likewise surfaced in the Torah’s findings that Avraham was to become the human father of many nations/goyim (Gen 17:4-6).  At this place, the Hebrew goyim (which the New Testament connects to the Greek ethne/ethnon) certainly referred to Avraham’s physical descendants and not to every human kind on planet earth. 

 

So, in Galatians, it is most appropriate to go back and look at the entire context (Gal 3:1-29).  As Shaul so wisely reflected, the issue of the heirs of the promises directly links to persons under YHWH’s Torah (Gal 3:13, 17-19, 23).  And who and what people have been and are under YAH’s Torah?  Why Yisrael, of course! 

 

By the way, this check of Galatians, chapter 3, similarly hurls at us the reality that the “people of faith” are, in fact, the children of Avraham (Gal 3:8-9).  After all, the whole presentation concerned persons who had been under The MOST HIGH’s Torah.  Again, Yisrael is the only nation that is so qualified.  No other people meets this test. 

 

Previous commentary herein mentioned the ties that Galatia in Asia Minor had with the ancient Celts (who had an Israelite origin, as is discussed elsewhere herein).  Finally, questions in Asia Minor must recognize the influence of the Troy settlement and the possibility that it involved Israelites (as discussed elsewhere herein). 

 

 

Colossians 3:11 

 

Moreover, the same New Testament reference to "neither Jew nor Greek" was also used by Shaul in his letter to the Colossians where he wrote that "there is neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free," but The MESSIAH is all and in all (Col 3:11). 

 

Obviously, these references to a Jew or Greek in both Galatians and Colossians could be referring to religion or nationality and not race at all.  Or because of the evidence for the presence of many racial Israelites in Asia Minor, maybe the issue is race. 

 

But perhaps religion was the focus here--as is discussed elsewhere in this study, and because of another use by Shaul of a reference to "Jews or Greeks."  In this other instance, to the Corinthians, Shaul wrote that "we are all, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, baptized..." (I Cor 12:13). 

 

 

Corinthian Israelites 

 

Here, to the Corinthians (I Cor 12:13), Shaul was surely referring to himself as a part of the "we"--which for him certainly must connect to his use of the word "Jews."  Of course, the apostle, racially, was not a Jew since he, correctly, was a Binyaminite (Acts 13:21; Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5). 

 

Yet, from the religious perspective, Shaul plainly was a Jew (I Cor 9:20; Gal 2:15).  Thus, Shaul's reference to himself in I Corinthians 12:13 as a Jew has to be from the religious viewpoint.  With this background, Shaul's usages elsewhere of the phrase "Jews or/nor Greeks" most probably also focused on the religious issue and not to racial Jews and Greeks at all. 

 

But alternatively, assuming the issue is race and if both Jews (Israelites) and Greeks are ger descendants of Adam, then they both will ultimately face the likely matter of salvation in the coming (still) future reconciliation of the Adam kind, as mentioned in prior comments and to be discussed in later chapters (Rom 11:32; I Cor 15:22).  Too, the Dorian Greek settlement of SE Greece seems to have involved racial Israelites, as discussed elsewhere herein).

 

While some allowance is being given here to the religious aspects of the Corinthian believers, it should be pointed out that there is one key text which unquestionably makes it plain that the Corinth congregation was essentially or totally fleshly Israelites. 

 

 

Our Fathers 

 

This proof of an Israelite linkage arises in an interesting little remark by Shaul when he wrote to these Corinthians and mentioned the Israelites in the Exodus from Egypt as being "our fathers;" or more correctly, "our forefathers," as some translations have it (I Cor 10:1). 

 

The Greek word involved in this text is "pateres," which means "ancestors" (“Young's Analytical Concordance," p. 336).  This word was frequently used in reference to the fleshly ancestors of the Israelites in various New Testament writings and conversations.  Miryam spoke of "our ancestors" at an early time in her conversation with her relative Elisheva (Lu 1:55). 

 

This whole situation at Corinth seems to be rather significant in view of the fact that the Apostolic Assembly at Rome was assuredly made up of fleshly Israelites, as has been previously discussed herein (Rom 4:1; 9:3-6). 

 

A question can now surface to make a student of truth wonder about the racial makeup of all of the other, true, New Testament, Apostolic Assembly congregations as well.  Logically, were they not all composed largely of fleshly Israelites who had converted or were in the process of conversion (surely to Judaism) from their former Greek religions? 

 

For a real revelation on this expression, the student of truth should take a few minutes and review the use of pateres and its cognates in the Greek NT (i.e. “Young’s Analytical Concordance,” p. 336).  In many instances, the NT uses the pronoun “our” in connection with pateres in contrast to a number of situations which read “your fathers.”  

 

The value of such an analysis demonstrates that the apostles typically referred to Avraham, Yitzhak, Yakov and/or other Israelite ancestors as “our father/fathers” in discussions with the NT election (House of Yisrael peoples).  Yet, there are other cases where the pronoun “your” is used with father/fathers to denote persons other than fellow Israelites.  

 

A study of those latter cases suggests that the audience being addressed were not “fellow Israelites,” but were persons of other racial and ethnic classifications.  A later chapter will focus on the Kenites and Amalekites and the fact that some such persons (who were correctly Judeans) pretended to be Shammai Pharisees in first century CE Palestine.  Tragically, the KJV calls these Judeans--Jews, which they were not! 

 

On occasion, The MESSIAH addressed these Judean aliens and used “your fathers” (Lu 6:23-26).  Sometimes, the speaker would actually switch the pronoun from our to your for the two different peoples being addressed in one presentation, as in the situation with Stephen, to be later discussed (Acts 7:11-52).

 

 

More on Colossian Israelites 

 

Still also, there is another aspect of the remark in Colossians (3:11) and the use of the words "Barbarian and Scythian."  Some students of the Word are acutely aware of some very definite ties between the Scythians and other so-called barbarians with the lost tribes of Yisrael (“Bible Research Handbook,” v. 2, p. 572.9353). 

 

In fact, many students of ancient history would even argue that the Scythians and certain barbarians were, in truth, Israelites.  Whole books have been written on the Scythians and their eventual migration across Europe and their probable linkage to the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael (as will be further discussed in later chapters herein).  Hence, the Colossians were likely Israelites as well. 

 

Therefore, it might well be that Shaul's remarks were about "lost" Israelites--thought to be (in his mind) uncircumcised barbarians and Scythians with the Greek religion (thus, not to genetic Greeks at all).  By the way, if the Good News by chance did go to some racial or ethnic Greeks in apostolic times, it would have been perfectly legal by YHWH's law as long as they were racial gerim, as mentioned before (Ex 12:48-49). 

 

Actually, there is evidence available in John 12:20 indicating the mention of apparent Greek converts to Judaism who were worshipping in Jerusalem during YESHUA's final Passover.  Earlier, in this paper, Acts 13:43 was highlighted which also referred to the conversion of likely Israelites of the Greek religion (or even possibly gerim Greeks) to Judaism. 

 

Surely, the converted, circumcised ger has the same offer of the promises (in the context of conversion) as any bloodline Israelite.  At least, Moshe said so (Ex 12:48-49).  Therefore, one must not get all excited if in certain situations, the Good News did go to some ger non-Israelites. 

 

But irrespective of how one might try to interpret Galatians 3:28-29 and Colossians 3:11, the matter has little or nothing to do with the basic theme of who generally was destined to receive the Good News in the historical context of the first century or even subsequently. 

 

 

The Promises 

 

Before leaving the topic of the promises in Galatians, Shaul elsewhere very clearly wrote (Rom 9:3-21) that the children of the promises are indeed the children of the seed (genetically--verse 8) and are categorically his brethren and kinsmen "according to the flesh" (verse 3). 

 

Shaul argued (in verses 6-7) that Avraham had sired (children) who were not Israelites (from Ishmael, Esau and Keturah) and who did not receive the promises. 

 

Clearly, the promises were to and for the line of Yitzhak and Yakov (Rom 9:7, 10-12) who were Israelites and kinsmen in the flesh of the Binyaminite Shaul (Rom 9:3-4).  So descendants of Avraham's flesh from Ishmael and Esau (or the children of Keturah) are not the children of The ELOHIM or of the promises (verse 8), but only "those from Isaac-Jacob" (verse 8), as Shaul so pungently declares. 

 

In this communication, the apostle was categorically contending that non-Israelites (except of course, legal ger converts) were not "children of the promises."  Consequently, Shaul's comments in Galatians 3:28-29 about the promises logically must be directed at non-Jewish Israelites of the lost tribes in the Diaspora with Greek religions or nationalities. 

 

On this same theme, it is well to recognize that in Galatians, Shaul also had some relevant words on the promises for his readers (Gal 4:22-31).  In this environment, the children of the promises were affirmatively of the fleshly seed of Avraham, Yitzhak and Yakov (Gal 3:29; 4:23, 28, 31). 

 

Actually, the correct seedline of Avraham Scripturally was established, reckoned or called with Yitzhak (Gen 21:12), in contrast to Ishmael and the eight sons of Keturah; despite their physical descent from Avraham. 

 

In an article on “The Coming Kingdom,” in the June 1997 “New Beginnings” (p. 1), the conclusion was that to no other people were promises made (as discussed in the NT), as were those made to the twelve tribes of Yisrael. 

 

Along with the promises, there is the whole issue of adoption which concerns racial Israelites (and legitimate "ger" alien converts), since Shaul wrote that to them belong the adoption (Rom 9:4).  And is not this adoption related in some way to the grafting in of the wild olive shoot to a good olive tree (Rom 11:11-26)? 

 

Why is there a need for adoption or grafting in?  Could the fact that the House of Yisrael was divorced, put away and cut off from The HIGHEST for sin have anything to do with it?  Assuredly, the truth is that this adoption event is quite profound and absolutely contrary to what false Christianity has supposed for centuries. 

 

 

The Adoption 

 

Much of Churchianity supposes that the peoples of Cain, Canaan, Ham, Japheth, India, Arabia, Turkey, China, Black Africa, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Britain, the United States and on and on are all being adopted into the family of Avraham through YESHUA's death at this time; so that they all can share in the promises made to Avraham. 

 

Christendom theorizes that every human living can now, all of a sudden, become a seed or child of Avraham by the adoption process.  Naturally, this unscriptural "theory" has provided much of the impulse which has pushed, prodded and propelled false Christianity on and on in her quest for more and more money, members, proselytes, numbers and so forth. 

 

Thus, it is interesting and perhaps relevant here that Christendom persists in believing that all supposed "human beings" are being adopted unto Avraham (and Yisrael); despite the fact that both Moshe and Shaul said that numbers of nokri/nekar, mamzer and nothos peoples can never legally be Israelites and/or be adopted as sons of The HIGHEST under any condition, as will be discussed later on in this study (Ex 12:45, 48; Deut 23:2-8; Heb 12:8). 

 

Therefore, any assessment of this Christian thinking on adoption should alert an observer that something, besides cheese, smells here.  Of course, this reasoning about the adoption of all classes of humanoids to Yisrael is absolutely stupid and contrary to what the Scriptures plainly say, as Shaul also proved in his elaborate discussion of this issue in Romans. 

 

 

Shaul On Adoption 

 

Please note that Shaul sets the stage in Romans 8 for his powerful dissertation on adoption (in Romans 9).  He opened his subject by making it clear that The ELOHIM acts through the process of election in choosing those destined to salvation and this election is certainly in the context of a thing called in English "predestination" (Rom 8:28-33; Eph 1:4-5). 

 

In this same initial discussion, the apostle communicated the fact that these elected persons become the heirs and sons of The MOST HIGH (Rom 8:14-21). 

 

And most significantly, these elected persons become the sons of The HIGHEST through the process of adoption (Rom 8:15; Eph 1:5).  Consequently, the issue is one of adoption into the family of The ELOHIM and not the family of Avraham at all, per se. 

 

 

The Adoption Is For Lost Israelites 

 

The surfacing of this concept of “adoption” is significant for a lot of good reasons. 

 

As heretofore established, Christianity, in her state of ignorance, confusion and misinformation, has erroneously concluded that the “adoption” exercise pertains to non-Israelite Christians so that they might become descendants of Avraham and be eligible to receive the promises by some strange and mysterious method.  Of course, this nonsense is patently absent in the Book. 

 

Importantly, the Scriptures are quite precise in declaring that not only do the promises apply to fleshly Israelites, but the whole subject of adoption pertains to them as well and to exactly no one else (Rom 9:4).  This is a most profound conclusion because it underlies the entire New Testament. 

 

Once one realizes that the adoption process pertains solely to Israelites, then a host of other related Scriptures all of a sudden have meaning.  For example, various prophets referred to Israelites as The ELOHIM's sons (Ex 4:22; Isa 45:11; Hos 11:1) and Hosea also expressly wrote of the cut off (lost) Israelites in the context of them eventually becoming sons of The HIGHEST (Hos 1:10). 

 

 

Why Adoption Is Necessary 

 

At this juncture, it would be well to look more carefully at this whole topic of adoption from the perspective of “why” it was and is necessary for Israelites of the lost tribes to be adopted into the family of The HIGHEST. 

 

Please understand that under the terms of the Sinai Covenant, YHWH married Yisrael.  She became His wife and was to be the mother of His children.  Of course, He was Ha AV (The FATHER in English) of those legitimately born children in the theocracy.  Thus, the Book repeatedly refers to the children of Yisrael as being the sons and daughters of The MOST HIGH (Isa 43:6). 

 

But then, over time, the House of Yisrael proceeded to rebel against her Husband, The SOVEREIGN, and commit whoredoms with the heathen nations.  She became an adulteress and subject to the demands of YAH’s divorce law (Deut 24:1-4). 

 

The prophet Hosea typified this whole situation in his marriage to Gomer who, in time, turned to adultery.  In her whoredoms, Gomer certainly bore the illegitimate children Loruhamah and Loammi, as mentioned earlier (Hos 1:6-9; 2:1-5).  In allegory, this was an outline of the exact environment which precipitated YHWH’s divorce from Yisrael. 

 

 

The Divorce

 

Later discussions will address YHWH’s famous divorce of the House of Yisrael and the fact that Israel’s subsequent children were born by fornication and out of wedlock (Isa 1:2; Hos 2:2-4; 5:3-7).  The point is that those sons and daughters were not and never could be or would be the descendants and legal heirs of YHWH--unless and until some profound things were to occur and change that condition. 

 

Now, one can readily appreciate what all The MAN YHWH YESHUA did when He came and died, so that reconciliation could come to these lost Israelites.  As Shaul, so pungently put it, YHWH will “adopt” these illegitimate children born illegally to the harlot Yisrael while she was in her state of adultery and divorcement (Rom 8:1-9:4). 

 

Yes, in a coming time, those illegitimate children will become YHWH’s legal sons and daughters (II Cor 6:18).  Please note that it will be YHWH Who adopts these children and not Avraham (as Christians incorrectly believe and teach).  They will never become spiritual sons and daughters of Avraham (as Christendom argues). 

 

As might be anticipated, the Apostle Shaul also discussed YHWH’s adoption of lost Israelites as sons in some of his other epistles beyond Romans and Corinthians (i.e. Gal 4:4-5; Eph 1:4-5).  In all of his letters, Shaul consistently wrote to Israelites (goyim) in the vein that they were not “true” sons (since they were illegitimate).  However, they would become sons of YAH through (predestined) adoption (Eph 1:5). 

 

Oh what absolutely incredible love!  How many men, in human flesh, would dare adopt as their own heirs, the illegitimate children born from adultery of their harlot, divorced wives.  For sure, not many, if any. 

 

Incidentally, in Shaul’s several remarks on adoption in Romans, Galatians and Ephesians, his letters used the Greek word “huiothesia” for the English adoption.  Young’s “Analytical Concordance” says that huiothesia means “placing as a son.”  Truly, the process places a non-son in the position of a “true” son. 

 

Obviously, this was the setting and environment for The MESSIAH's famous Sermon on the Mount where His audience (his disciples, to be later discussed) was assuredly Israelites in the flesh and followers of YESHUA (Matt 5:1-7:29).  Therein, YESHUA spoke of those Israelites as being "children" of The MOST HIGH (Matt 5:45), as were others later alluded to by Yohanan (Jo 1:12; 3:10) and by Shaul (Rom 9:26; Phil 2:15). 

 

To recap this point, the process of adoption (which Shaul described in his writings) is one whereby the elect Israelites, in a cut off, illegitimate state from YHWH, are adopted by Him as His heirs and children.  Of course, Shaul was merely repeating and reciting previously established elements of truth from the Hebrew Tanakh when he wrote those words. 

 

 

For Those Under The Law 

 

By the way and as a side remark, Shaul, in his letter to the Galatians, again focused on this topic by saying that The EL sent His Son, born of a woman, to redeem (Israelites) subject to the Torah, so that they might be adopted and receive sonship as the sons of EL (Gal 4:4-6). 

 

In another powerful small text, Shaul was also careful to limit the redemption provision to those persons "under the Torah" so that they might be adopted as the sons of The HIGHEST (Phil 2:15). 

 

Without question, there has been only one group of people in history "under the Torah" --Israelites and absolutely no one else (Deut 33:4; Josh 1:8; Mal 4:4; Acts 7:53; Rom 9:4). 

 

Continuing on, in Romans, Shaul was furthermore quite clear in mentioning his brethren (the Israelites) as his "kinsmen according to the flesh" (Rom 9:3) and in declaring that this adoption (by EL) does apply only to those Israelites and to absolutely no one else, as mentioned previously (Rom 9:4). 

 

He then went on to point out that YHWH's presence, the Covenant, the law, the Temple and the promises were all given to Yisrael (Rom 9:4) and that the patriarchs (yes, Avraham, Yitzhak and Yakov) also belong to them (Rom 9:5--yes, genetically by racial ancestry). 

 

 

For Ishmael and Esau--No Way! 

 

Now, if there is any confusion on this point by misinformed Christianity, Shaul, as outlined previously, made it quite clear that even Avraham's bloodline descendants through Ishmael and Esau are not recipients of the promise and will not be adopted or chosen for salvation through YESHUA at this time (Rom 9:7-13). 

 

Elsewhere, in terms of the Ishmaelites, Shaul echoed the precise same thing when he observed that these descendants from Avraham and Hagar (through Ishmael) "never" can share in the inheritance (the promise) which went to the line of Yitzhak (Gal 4:22-31; Heb 6:13-17). 

 

Dogmatically, the apostle asserted that The ELOHIM is thoroughly "unchangeable" in His promises and oaths (Heb 6:18).  So, when Shaul wrote "never" (Gal 4:30), he certainly meant "never."  Manifestly, he was not so dumb that he would contradict his own writings.  Or would he?  No way! 

 

 

No One But Yisrael! 

 

Obviously, it's quite certain that the modern Arabs (from Ishmael) and the modern Turks (from Esau) are not eligible for adoption as sons of EL, nor do they have the door of salvation now opened to them presently through the efforts of YESHUA, Shaul or anyone else. 

 

Assuredly too, it is not the nokri, nekar, mamzer or nothos persons (to be described later), since they cannot be a part of the true Assembly. 

 

Manifestly, it's not the Ishmaelites, Edomites, Moabites, Egyptians, Philistines, Hamites, Canaanites, or any of their descendants (at least, to the 3/10 generation level, as will be discussed in later chapters) who are now eligible for sonship, the promises and/or salvation. 

 

There is absolutely not one word or piece of evidence which would open the door of salvation to any of these people in the last 1,970 years and regardless of how "good" this thinking might sound to limited, little, human beings. 

 

No!  It's not the modern Turks, Arabs, Chinese, Japanese, American Indians, Portuguese, Spaniards, Mexicans, Italians, Filipinos, Nigerians, Ethiopians, Ugandans and so forth who are now collectively getting a shot at adoption and salvation; unless, of course, some of these peoples qualify by virtue of them being persons of the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

On this, Joseph Smith and the Mormons believe that the American Indians are Israelites and some more recent scholars speculate that the Black Ethiopians and Russian Khazars going to Palestine presently are all of the lost House of Yisrael.  And if so, why then haven’t these persons responded en masse to the Good News message? 

 

Actually, such stupidity by supposedly intelligent people is enough to blow one's mind.  On all of these possibilities, the truth is patently clear.  The adoption and promises of salvation belong only to Israelites and to absolutely no one else in the present environment.  Now, how about other peoples and in the context of the future, per the plan of YHWH? 

 

Well, as this writer repeatedly states, everybody who is supposed to receive grace and be saved will receive grace and be saved with no exceptions.  Yes, all 100% of them can bank on it.  No one will be short changed on this.  It is only a question of timing and calling; which, of course, only The MOST HIGH decides upon. 

 

It's just that the first century, CE calling and election by YESHUA was for the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

 

Salvation May Be Different 

 

Incidentally, on the obvious limitation of the concept of the adoption procedure to Israelites only, some confusion can arise in that it would appear that salvation may come to certain past and presently excluded non-Israelites in another time frame and under other circumstances, probably still in the future. 

 

On this, it is likely that the adoption and salvation messages are not synonymous ideas.  Very probably, they are different. 

 

Consequently, there are cogent reasons to believe that the salvation experience or realization may come to certain non-Israelites (besides gerim) at their appointed times and places.  However, the adoption condition of becoming a son of The HIGHEST seems to apply only to Israelites (and evidently their legitimate ger converts), as based upon the NT use of the Greek nothos (noted earlier and to be described later herein). 

 

Thus, maybe some non-Israelites will be saved.  But they will not become sons of The HIGHEST, as will be the case with Israelites and their ger converts.  However, the related subject of the promises is far more complex and involved than is the adoption question.  Space herein will not allow it to be broached to any degree presently. 

 

But like adoption, there are some reasons surfacing which might suggest that maybe all the aspects of future salvation are not covered expressly in the Avrahamic promises.  The terms may not be synonymous, though most Christians have traditionally thought of them in that vein. 

 

 

Blessings For Avraham's Fleshly Seed 

 

Unquestionably, these various discussions about the promised blessings for all nations (goyim), because of Avraham's obedience, are expressed and placed in the same context as the multiplication of Avraham's fleshly progeny to the point of them being liken to the stars of the heavens and sand of the seashore (Gen 22:17-18; 26:4; Deut 10:22; 28:62). 

 

Wherefore, Shaul plainly linked the promises to Avraham's fleshly seed (Rom 4:19; 9:4-14; Gal 3:16; Heb 6:15) in his presentations on this theme (Rom 4:13-20; Gal 3:14-18; 4:22-31; Heb 6:13-18).  These connections certainly cannot be missed or confused. 

 

Not only did the famous apostle undeniably link the promise to the fleshly seed of Avraham, but at one point in time, he boldly asserted that he was "on trial" (before King Agrippa) because of this pledge which is "the promise" that the twelve tribes of Yisrael were (and are) hoping to see fulfilled (Acts 26:6-7). 

 

 

The Role of Faith 

 

Furthermore, on this topic, some readers like to seize upon Galatians 3:6-9, discussed earlier, where Shaul wrote that it is persons who live by faith who are true sons of Avraham and who will be justified as foretold in the promise to Avraham that in him the nations (goyim) would be blessed (Gen 12:3). 

 

Well, of course, there are Christians, in particular, who will immediately speculate, presume and assume all kinds of interpretations on this text in Galatians by Shaul in their view of the "promise" being available to "anyone" of faith without regard to any other conditions. 

 

Significantly, that specious reasoning won't hold water at all.  True, the promise belongs to people by "faith," but not necessarily just any and all people without reference to YHWH's law and Word.  More particularly, the "people" of faith have to be the people of Yisrael.  There can be no other alternative or option on this text. 

 

As presented heretofore in this section, the great faith chapter of Galatians 3 addresses people who have been under YHWH’s Torah.  Of all of earth’s nations, only Yisrael has been under YAH’s Torah by marriage and contractual obligation. 

 

Consequently, when the Scriptures (Gal 3:8) state that The ELOHIM would justify the heathen (per the KJV wording) through faith, He was, of course, referring to the lost tribes of Yisrael--because the word “heathen” in the KJV comes from the Greek “ethne,” which identifies the lost House of Yisrael, as established conclusively herein. 

 

But otherwise, there is another consideration on Galatians 3:6-9 and the issue of faith under discussion.  Question--can anyone, on his/her own and at large, exercise or demonstrate the "faith" needed in this situation under discussion? 

 

Obviously, if a person at large could muster the necessary, saving faith on his/her own, then salvation would be a product of works and not be a free gift of unmerited grace, as the Book declares (Jo 4:10; Rom 5:15-17; II Cor 9:15; Eph 3:7; 4:7). 

 

 

The Gift of Faith 

 

The truth is quite certain.  Even faith is not "self produced."  But rather, it comes as a free "gift" of grace to the elect, as Shaul so pungently observed in the context of Avraham's faith (Rom 4:16). 

 

In short, YHWH gives the called out ones the necessary faith for salvation (Rom 12:3; I Cor 12:9; Eph 2:8; II Pet 1:1).  And there is only "one" kind of faith--not two or more as some might argue (Eph 4:5; Titus 1:1). 

 

The point of this whole presentation is that truly it does take the faith of Avraham to achieve a state of reconciliation and salvation.  However, this faith is not something a person can muster on his/her own.  Clearly, this faith is a free gift of YHWH, as a part of unmerited grace.  Thus, the gift of faith comes free to the elect who, of necessity, must be the Scripturally correct recipients of the Good News. 

 

Manifestly, based on this tie by Shaul of the promises to Avraham's fleshly descendants from Yitzhak and Yakov Yisrael, there are good reasons to believe that Moshe's use of the Hebrew word "goyim" (translated as nations in English translations) in Genesis 12 through 22, in regards to the blessings, evidently may just apply to the goyim tribes of Yisrael and to no one else. 

 

 

The Avrahamic Promises 

 

Briefly, on this line of thought, there were several promises given to Avraham (Gen 12-22)--perhaps one of the primary ones might be, as Shaul stated it, that Avraham (or his fleshly posterity) “should inherit the world” (Rom 4:13, “Amplified Translation”). 

 

Here, the book of Romans uses the Greek "kosmos," which is translated to world.  As discussed previously on this word, the issue seems to be geography--perhaps habitable land area(s). 

 

While this writer would not dare suggest any uncalled for limitations in defining kosmos for this blessing, the word may or may not include the whole land area of planet earth. 

 

 

The Land Grant 

 

In support of this thesis, Yechezkel wrote a wonderful description of the future allocation and distribution of the real promised land to Yisrael in the evident future millennium and kingdom on earth (Ezek 47-48). 

 

Of course, this grant was and will be vast and extensive in scope to cover a large area, to possibly include much of the Middle East--like Asia Minor and maybe even the whole Arabian peninsula (as Bible scholar Dr Ernest Martin, formerly of Portland, Oregon, saw it). 

 

Howbeit, regardless of how much land is involved in this grant, it is well to observe that this allotment is precisely for the "tribes of Israel" (Ezek 47:21-23) and their legal ger (translated as stranger in the KJV) converts who are properly a part of the Congregation of Yisrael, as authorized in the law (Ex 12:48-49). 

 

From these writings by Yechezkel, it is abundantly certain that this future, coming land apportionment, from the Avrahamic promises, comes only to the tribes of Yisrael and their legitimate ger converts and not to every and all kinds of non-ger humanoids. 

 

 

Christian Mis-conceptions 

 

As a demonstration of the warped thinking of false Christianity in trying to understand the Avrahamic promises, mention must be made here of an article by Anthony Buzzard in the Summer 1993 "Radical Reformation," on "The Christian Hope:  Life in the Land of the Promise," (p. 27). 

 

Therein, Mr Buzzard tried to link the land promise to Christians, despite his confession that traditional Christian theology has almost no interest in the land promised to Avraham. 

 

As proof of his thesis, Buzzard seized several texts by Shaul from Romans (4:3, 13, 16) and Galatians (3:6-9, 14, 29), which Buzzard seemingly misunderstood.  Then, he proceeded to misuse the references (in a typical Christian fashion) by charging that the Avrahamic promises “now” belonged to Christians. 

 

Never mind that those promises were all placed in the context of the fleshly descendants of Avraham.  Buzzard implies, that by some unknown, mysterious and unheard of method, Christians have replaced these physical seed lines.  By the way, this whole idea of Christian replacement or displacement will be discussed in detail in a future chapter. 

 

Obviously, Shaul's thinking and discussion about the Avrahamic promises of land were entirely to the fleshly Israelite descendants of Avraham and to the ger strangers who have been legally converted and incorporated into the broader definition of the Congregation of Yisrael.  Categorically, there is no other way to view this subject. 

 

 

The Issue Is Flesh! 

 

As a part of YHWH's actual pledge to Avraham, Moshe perhaps put the issue in the contextual portion of Avraham being the father of many nations (goyim--Gen 17:4) and that all the nations (goyim) of the earth would be blessed because of Avraham's obedience (Gen 22:18: 26:4). 

 

The most obvious interpretation of these remarks has to be in the vein of Avraham being the fleshly ancestor of many descending nations (goyim) as Shaul suggested, and as things have literally worked out over planet earth these past 4,000 years. 

 

Persons familiar with the history of the House of Yisrael and how her peoples have scattered over the planet to become several important nations (goyim) in modern times will at once recognize this incredible phenomenon. 

 

Of course, it is in this context of fleshly descent that the promises also stated that Avraham's lineage was to be like the stars of the heavens and the sand of the seashore (Gen 15:5; 17:2; 22:17; 26:4).  Again, this fantastic prophecy of blessings has been fulfilled over the past 4,000 years. 

 

 

Question of Salvation 

 

Perhaps the blessings of salvation alluded to in The MOST HIGH's statements, as recorded by Moshe (Gen 22:18; 26:4), may just refer to the salvation of Yisrael which is what the Book also repeatedly states (Deut 33:26-29; Heb 2:16). 

 

A question surfaces here--does this salvation later extend in some way to other peoples besides Israelites (to include their legal ger converts) as the Word also might seem to allow for the behemah (Ps 36:5-6--although Eccl 3:21 could well have a different perspective here on the behemah than what a first interpretation of Ps 36:5-6 might suggest); for the nokri/nekar aliens (I Kg 8:41-43; Isa 56:3-7); and certainly for the ger strangers (Rom 11:32; I Cor 15:22)? 

 

Well, if so, it has to surface in a future time and place because it is plainly not a part or parcel of the past and present environments.  Accordingly, the place we come to here is that there are cogent reasons to perceive that for sure the promises and salvation apply only to Yisrael in terms of history to date. 

 

 

Salvation Could Be Different 

 

Salvation possibly could be totally limited to Yisrael (and her ger converts) or perhaps it will, in time, extend to other races and kinds of humans/humanoids, as also suggested in the other Scriptures just cited. 

 

Frankly, this writer is of the opinion that all of Adam will eventually be saved since Shaul was so assertive on this point (I Cor 15:22).  Previous chapters in this study addressed this option in some detail. 

 

However, one must be responsible on this line of thought and not try to combine apples and oranges simply because "we" limited, little humans like the idea of salvation for all.  Surely, the teaching of the universal reconciliation of Adam is absolutely marvelous and wonderful. 

 

But in subscribing to this fantastic and extraordinary theology of universal reconciliation, there is no reason to act like a stupid fool and try to incorrectly use the Scriptural authorizations for the promises to Yisrael to justify and support the salvation of Adam, as is usually done in false misinformed Christendom. 

 

 

Prudence Required 

 

It may well be that the Avrahamic promise of salvation and restitution for Yisrael will, in time, extend to cover all of Adam and perhaps might even reach to cover hordes of non-Adamites.  Maybe, there is already sufficient legal authority (in the context of Scriptural law) in the Word to support this condition.  And if so, all the people who are eligible for salvation will flat receive their call.  They can bank on it. 

 

Yet, for the past and presently, one must take the obvious and plain statements of the Book and not try to read anything extra into them on the premise that it sounds good.  Thus, for Yisrael, maybe salvation and the promises all belong in the same breath.  Otherwise, possibly they are entirely different themes in terms of other peoples. 

 

The bottom line of this dissertation is that we must be careful about jumping to conclusions on these subjects of sonship, the adoption, the promises and salvation for at least the past and present situations. 

 

Maybe, all of these terms do not mean the exact same thing at all.  Maybe, they are not interchangeable, though Christendom usually places them all in the same dimension. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 51--The New Covenant

 

 

Shaul On The New Covenant 

 

All of these remarks presented so far on sonship, adoption and salvation are but important preludes to the new sub-topic which Shaul opened when he brought up the matter of the coming so-called “New Covenant” (which was mentioned earlier) and the removal of sin from Yisrael (Rom 11:26-27; see also Heb 8:10). 

 

These remarks in Romans (11:26-27) and Hebrews (8:10) refer back to Isaiah 59:20-21 and Jeremiah 31:33 and the promised future Covenant which will materialize upon the return of YESHUA to establish His kingdom on earth. 

 

 

Really the Renewed Covenant 

 

While English translators of the New Testament usually express this Covenant, under discussion, as being the “New” Covenant, that expression is probably not correct.   The underlying Hebrew words are “berit hadashah,” which can more correctly be translated to English as the “Renewed Covenant” (per David Bivin, in the Mar/Apr 1990 “Jerusalem Perspective,” p. 2). 

 

Bivin explains this word “hadashah,” as being a Hebrew concept which suggests an application to something that has never existed before (correctly “new”) or is unfamiliar (also seemingly “new”) or something which has existed before but which has undergone restoration or renovation--like a building. 

 

Obviously, the Covenant is something which has existed before, but it is only being restated, renewed or restored. 

 

 

Jeremiah 31:33 

 

As previously discussed, the Summer 1998 “Lederer” (p. 1) had some comparisons between the Dr David H. Stern English translation of the “Complete Jewish Bible” with certain other English translations.  One of the Scriptures focused upon in this presentation was Jeremiah 31:33 (as noted above, with Romans 11:26-27). 

 

Stern gives it as follows:  “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” says ADONAI, “I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts...”  How wonderful it is to understand that English references to the law are typically to the Torah (Genesis through Deuteronomy). 

 

Few Christians will be ready to accept Yirmeyahu’s plain words.  Many hate and oppose the Torah so much, never understanding that the Torah and its obedience is the whole basis of the coming New/Renewed Covenant. 

 

Therefore, upon YHWH YESHUA’s return, He promises to the Israelites that they will have a New/Renewed Covenant, whereby His Torah will be written in their hearts and minds in such a fashion that they can and will stop sinning (transgressing the law--I John 3:4). 

 

This will be quite a miraculous event; because historically, Israelites have always sinned.  It will be most profound and extraordinary when they will become obedient sons of The Living EL.  And under the terms of the New/Renewed Covenant, this is precisely what will happen (Rom 11:26-27).  They will stop sinning (being lawless, by violating YHWH’s laws--I Jo 3:4). 

 

Obviously, all of this is still future for Yisrael and her legitimate racial ger (a Hebrew word often translated as stranger or alien, as noted earlier) converts, as provided for in YHWH's law (Ex 12:48-49).  It should be noted that YHWH's Torah expressly denies the conversion privilege (of becoming members of the Congregation of Yisrael) to the nokri/nekar aliens (the Hebrew at Ex 12:45), in contrast to the ger aliens (Ex 12:48-49). 

 

Some (or all) of the nokri/nekar strangers will possibly have an election and calling to salvation (perhaps, but not as members of the congregation of Yisrael) at some future time (I Kg 8:41-43; Isa 56:3-7) and particularly so if they fit into the context of salvation for all of Adam (I Cor 15:22) or possible salvation to the behemah (the Hebrew at Ps 36:5-6 and Jer 31:27; but in the context of Eccl 3:21, which seems to raise a question about salvation for the behemah). 

 

 

The New/Renewed Covenant Subject Is Yisrael 

 

More proof that the New/Renewed Covenant is with Yisrael and Yisrael only materializes in a most unique way when one goes back and reads its Scriptural foundation and initial basis in the original Avrahamic Covenant.  It must be recognized that YHWH’s Covenant was explicitly with Avraham and his fleshly descendants and no one else (Gen 17:7). 

 

In time, The MOST HIGH restated this contract with Yitzhak and not with Ishmael, as some misinformed Christians might have wished (Gen 17:19). 

 

In a later presentation of this agreement, it bypassed Esau (contrary to the thinking of uninformed theologians) and settled in on Yakov Yisrael--where it was eventually restated and ratified by the people at Sinai and where it has remained to this day (Gen 27:28-29; Ex 19:3-8; Lev 26:42-46; Deut 31:9-12, 26). 

 

Naturally, when it is time for the Covenant to be renewed, after the divorcement of Yisrael and Yehudah’s effective rejection of YESHUA, such a renewal has to be between The HIGHEST and fleshly Yisrael, as was the initial plan and purpose with Avraham. 

 

All of the Scriptural writers, including Yeshayahu, Yirmeyahu and Shaul, were cognizant of this fact and wrote about it on occasion (Isa 59:20-21; Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10).  In short, the New /Renewed Covenant is with Yisrael and Yisrael only! 

 

Now, if there still remains any question or concern about the reality of the promised New/Renewed Covenant resting on Yisrael only, then the reader should go back and read the whole context where Yirmeyahu mentioned it. 

 

First, observe that the Word described the New/Renewed Covenant in some detail in Jeremiah 31:31-34; and next, compare it with Shaul’s remarks at Hebrews 8:10. 

 

Thereafter, Yirmeyahu went right on to state that as long as the sun, moon and stars exist in the heavens to perform their functions, then the posterity of (fleshly) Yisrael shall exist as a people (Hebrew goy) through the ages (Jer 31:35-37).  The point being is that Yisrael is truly goy/goyim and ethnos/ethne, as described herein and in the context of the New/Renewed Covenant. 

 

 

The Blotting Out of Ordinances 

 

On at least two occasions, Shaul wrote about the blotting out of an ordnance or note (as “The Amplified Translation” has it) against Yisrael (Eph 2:15; Col 2:14).  Howbeit, these references have been traditionally misunderstood and misused by uninformed Christians to “abolish” the law.  Yet, in fact, they really have a fantastic meaning for Yisrael. 

 

In an article on “Witnesses and Their Testimony,” appearing in the April 1995 “New Beginnings,” Howard B. Rand perceptively observed that The MESSIAH had “blotted out the handwriting of the bill of divorcement written against Israel.”  Rand did not elaborate on his point, but it is a very far reaching one. 

 

The law required that an adulteress wife was to be divorced by a “written” note or bill of divorcement (Deut 24:1; Matt 19:9). 

 

Consequently, when The HIGHEST divorced Yisrael (Jer 3:8), surely there was a written bill or note of divorce (was it the written OT prophetic condemnations or something else?).  With that outstanding note or bill, Yisrael could never return to her HUSBAND YHWH under the terms of His law (Deut 24:1-4). 

 

In order for the New/Renewed Covenant (marriage) to ever be consummated between YHWH and Yisrael, that existing note of divorcement had to be abolished, nullified, set aside or blotted out in some legal fashion.  By The SUPREME’s Torah, there is just no other way on this reality.  The question was not whether, but only of how. 

 

As Shaul wrote, the illegitimate Israelites, who were outsiders with their divorced mother, have to become heirs with the full rights of citizenship in YAH’s kingdom (Eph 2:19).  Their status as heathen goyim (Greek ethne) estranged from the promises to Yisrael has to undergo a transformation or conversion--actually through the shed blood of YHWH YESHUA, as discussed earlier herein (Eph 2:11-13). 

 

 

YESHUA Had to Die 

 

In effect, YHWH, in the form of The MAN YESHUA, had to die in order to blot out and abolish the written bill of divorcement against Yisrael so that He can and will remarry her later in the New/Renewed Covenant (noted above)--without violating the provisions of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 prohibiting her return (to Him). 

 

He apparently will do this based upon Romans 7:1-3, which indicates that death of the husband frees a woman from the provisions of the adultery law and also paves the way for her to legitimately remarry.  With the remarriage, YHWH YESHUA will adopt all of those illegitimate children born to Yisrael while she was in her adulterous, divorced state. 

 

Therefore, the written note of divorcement had to be dealt with because the goyim House of Yisrael (in the divorced state) could never enter into a new contract (marriage) relationship with The MOST HIGH.  So The ELOHIM clearly had to just “blot out” that contrary bill or note (by dying), as Shaul so fittingly put it. 

 

Actually, the gist of the book of Galatians (particularly chapter 3) seems to address this very blotting out of YHWH’s bill of divorcement against Yisrael.  It appears that this process is done for these lost Israelites (children of Israel’s harlotry) through the work of adoption and faith among other things. 

 

Therefore, Shaul’s entire mission (commission) focused on the restoration and conversion of the lost House of Yisrael to sonship.  What a fantastic commission!  How incredible, fantastic, great, unexplainable and wonderful are the ways of The ELOHIM. 

 

 

The New/Renewed Covenant--Once Again 

 

Moreover, and before leaving Shaul, it would be well to briefly consider the impact of the coming New/Renewed Covenant which has just been discussed.  At this time, one needs to consider it again in terms of what was written to the Hebrews, probably by Shaul.  For this review, the reader must once more digress into history briefly. 

 

The MOST HIGH was married in a Covenant (the so-called Old Covenant or marriage contract) relationship with Yisrael. 

 

With the division of the kingdom under Rechavam, YHWH effectively had two wives in covenant relationship with Him--the Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah.  In time, perhaps around 700 BCE or so, He divorced the House of Yisrael for adultery.  But He remained married to Yehudah. 

 

However, in still more time (c30 CE), the remnant of Yehudah (the Jews) were “some” of the leaders in killing Him, their Husband.  In a sense, it would seem that this act of murder could be construed as abolishing the balance of the marriage covenant then in existence with Yehudah (on this, see Rom 7:1-3). 

 

Of course, this fact may have had something to do with why the Jews were not addressed by YESHUA in His commission when He brought it up (Matt 10:5-6), at least, some time before He was finally impaled on the stake.  Likely, He was still in covenant relationship with Yehudah in the early chapters of Matthew before His eventual death. 

 

 

Nothing Is Wrong With YHWH! 

 

Incidentally, if the "Old" Covenant was not abrogated by the Jews in 30 CE (as it probably was done), in their evil acts against YESHUA, it clearly was nullified later or will be nullified and concluded with them in the future because of their sins--perhaps just before or during the coming day of YHWH (Zech 11:10-11).  This theme will be discussed in some detail in later comments herein. 

 

Now here, some misinformed Christians might want to argue that there was something wrong with The MOST HIGH, His Word or His Covenant with Yisrael.  Many of us have heard this Christian nonsense repeatedly. 

 

Cloudlessly, the problem all along was none of these things.  The truth is that the Israelites were extremely rebellious and sinful and refused to obey YHWH's Torah, as required by the Covenant. 

 

In short, the problem was not with YHWH, His laws or His Covenant.  The problem was precisely with both the Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah and their rebellious contempt for The CREATOR's mitzwot and the obedience required and specified in the Covenant (Isa 24:5; Jer 11:3, 10; Ezek 16:59; 44:7; Hos 6:7; 8:1; etc). 

 

Knowing full well of the sins which Yisrael would do, YHWH made a provision very early on to provide a means of reconciliation and the establishment of a New Covenant (or more correctly, a renewed and restated Covenant, as was outlined above) between Himself and His people Yisrael. 

 

 

The Prophets Described It 

 

Yeshayahu mentioned this coming New/Renewed Covenant in the context of The ELOHIM's Torah being written into the hearts and minds of the Israelites so that they would remember it, be obedient and quit sinning (Isa 55:3; 59:20-21). 

 

In time, Yirmeyahu followed up and wrote about the New/Renewed Covenant, also in the context of YHWH's Torah being put into the hearts and minds of Israelites so that they would obey (Jer 31:31-34). 

 

A previous chapter discussed the wonderful work of R. Kahana, known as “Pesikta De-Rab Kahana.”  The particular discourse on Piska 12 (p. 243) discusses the Torah.  An item 12.21 offers a commentary on Jeremiah 31:33 and the coming New/Renewed Covenant. 

 

In terms of placing YAH’s laws in the hearts and inner parts of the people of Yisrael in the New/Renewed Covenant, Piska 12 suggests that YHWH, Himself, shall do the teaching of the Torah to the Israelites under this New/Renewed Covenant.  This reference also ties to Isaiah 54:13, which has a message about the coming abundant peace when the children of Yisrael are taught personally by YHWH. 

 

 

Yechezkel 

 

The Prophet Yechezkel also focused on the New/Renewed Covenant topic by saying that YHWH's sanctuary shall then be in the midst of Yisrael forever and that Israelites would then know The ELOHIM (Ezek 16:60-62; 37:26). 

 

Please note that Ezekiel 37:26 puts this coming New/Renewed Covenant into a time frame immediately after the return of YESHUA and the establishment of His kingdom on earth, to be addressed in some detail in later chapters herein. 

 

Consequently, it is patently obvious that the New/Renewed Covenant has not been executed with false Christianity in the past.  It is still future here in 2003 since YESHUA has not yet returned with His government on earth. 

 

Furthermore, in the context of this coming New/Renewed Covenant, the prophet Hosea had some very revealing remarks when he pointed out that Yisrael would become "not YHWH's people" (clearly, in the then future, coming divorce), and yet would ultimately be transformed into being YHWH's people in a still future time of religious regeneration (Hos 1:9-11; 2:23). 

 

Of course, this condition becomes reality in the eventual regathering of Yisrael to Palestine at the start of the millennium and the implementation of the New/Renewed Covenant, as predicted by the prophets (to be discussed herein in later remarks).  Obviously, in these texts, the entire issue is moreover of a coming New/Renewed Covenant with Yisrael and absolutely no one else.

 

 

The New/Renewed Covenant In the NT 

 

Additionally, please note that by the early New Testament times, the topic of the New/Renewed Covenant was again to surface (Lu 22:20; I Cor 11:25).  In his letter to the Romans (Rom 11:26-27), Shaul mentioned it in the context of YHWH taking away (stopping) the sin in Yisrael (in her transgression of YHWH's Torah--I Jo 3:4). 

 

And naturally, in time, the writer of Hebrews, probably Shaul, also had some words on the subject when he repeated what the earlier prophets had declared in saying that The MOST HIGH would write His laws, defining sin and righteousness, on the hearts and minds of the Israelites, whereby they would become obedient and stop sinning (Heb 8:6-12). 

 

Again, please recognize that this coming New/Renewed Covenant (which is still future here in 2003) will be executed with the Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah and not with Christianity, Hinduism, Japheth, Ham, Canaan, Black Africa, Italy, Germany, Russia, Turkey, Portugal, Spain, Mexico, Arabia, the New Age Movement, or anyone else but Yisrael (whoever and wherever she is to be known and found). 

 

Also, please observe that this remark about the laws would only be with the House of Yisrael and not with the House of Yehudah.  Why the difference?  Maybe, it has been Yisrael who has lost YHWH's laws, while Yehudah (as sinful as she has been) has maintained some knowledge of them (see Matt 23:2; Rom 3:2).  Shaul supported this option when he declared that the Jews had the truth of YHWH’s Torah (Rom 2:17-20). 

 

 

The New/Renewed Covenant Is Still Future 

 

Now, if there is any person who wants to persist in believing that YHWH's laws have been placed into the collective and general hearts and minds of Yisrael or anyone else for that matter, to include Christendom, then that person probably still believes in the tooth fairy business and has lost touch with reality. 

 

Conspicuously, YHWH's mitzwot don't appear to have been in much of anyone's hearts and minds for the last 1,930 years or so, and this certainly applies to Christianity which has devoted her resources and efforts for 1,930 years to proclaim that YHWH's laws have been abolished, done away with and no longer apply. 

 

In addition, and on this New/Renewed Covenant theme, please recognize that it will involve YHWH and the Houses of Yisrael and Yehudah and absolutely no one else. 

 

There is not one word or iota of evidence which would allow its application to any other peoples or nations.  There is clearly no way that it can be or will be made with rebellious, hateful, sinning Christianity. 

 

Furthermore, on this, it should be observed that the prophet Hosea (as mentioned earlier) had this eventual New/Renewed Covenant in mind when he foresaw the coming time when the House of Yisrael would not be YHWH's people (following the divorce), but still later would become YHWH's people (Hos 1:10; 2:23).  Too, both Shaul (Rom 9:25-26) and Kefa understood it correctly (I Pet 2:9-10). 

 

 

Why The New/Renewed Covenant Is Necessary 

 

This subject of the New/Renewed Covenant is one more classic example of the prevailing confusion and misinformation in Christendom.  In Churchianity’s eyes, something was wrong with the so-called Old Covenant, as noted previously. 

 

From her perspective, The MOST HIGH goofed and made an imperfect Old Covenant contract which provided for the keeping of laws (obedience) which were inherently bad and which nobody could obey anyway.  In this Christian view, the problem with the Old Covenant was YHWH and not the poor, innocent people who were not able to keep those bad laws that were oppressive and contrary to man. 

 

Categorically, this Christian thinking is absolutely ridiculous and too stupid to be entertained in the minds of intelligent people--much less in the mentality of persons who theoretically read and study the Scriptures on occasion. 

 

No!  There was nothing wrong with YHWH or His OT laws (which represent love, justice, loyalty, good and righteousness).  The problem was with the people back then just as it is today.  Assuredly, the people could always have obeyed the Torah (after all, YESHUA did in the flesh).  It’s just that the people of Yisrael have consistently refused to obey YAH’s mitzwot. 

 

And certainly, the materialization of a New/Renewed Covenant raises no questions whatsoever of any changes by The SUPREME because He does not change, as established in previous chapters.  In truth, the New/Renewed Covenant is necessary because of the 3,500 years of sin and adultery of both Yisrael and Yehudah which have resulted in their cut off state from The EVERLIVING. 

 

Most people (including Christian Identity types) can never understand that Yisrael has sinned continuously for the past 3,500 years. 

 

Many persons have insisted that Yisrael (particularly Christian Yisrael) has had historical periods of time when she did not sin.  This is not true.  Yisrael was always in sin, though there were revival times when it subsided briefly during the reigns of a few reforming kings and judges (i.e., Hizkiyahu, Yoshiyahu, etc). 

 

 

Sin Must End 

 

The book of Ezekiel will be quoted later to prove that it is the one prophetic book in the Tanakh which lays out the future for the House of Yisrael (written some 140 years after Yisrael had already went into Assyrian captivity).  Yechezkel not only gave some general information on Yisrael for the next 2,500 years, but focused on Yakov’s Trouble for seven years in excruciating detail. 

 

The book of Ezekiel repeatedly tells the story of Israel’s sins for those 2,500 years.  When the countdown to Yakov’s Trouble ends and the terror is ready to strike, the prophet often mentions the impudence, hard-heartedness, evil and wretchedness of the House of Yisrael. 

 

Nowhere does Yechezkel or Yirmeyahu (who also wrote about Yisrael in the age end) have any words of praise for Yisrael--only words of condemnation for Yisrael’s gross sins. 

 

The whole purpose of Yakov’s Trouble of seven years and the later “coming” New or Renewed Covenant is to make Yisrael at last learn the necessity to stop sinning.  At that time, YHWH’s Torah will be so heavily imprinted upon Yisrael’s minds (collectively and individually) that Yisrael will stop sinning in her hands, deeds and actions.  That’s the essence of the idea of the Torah (law) being placed in Yisrael’s hearts and minds. 

 

Despite the very obvious intent of the New/Renewed Covenant, many Christians want to start whining and moaning that the New Covenant is in their hearts and minds right now (upon becoming a Christian in baptism).  The Christian Identity motion hypocritically teaches this nonsense. 

 

For instance, the Jan-Feb 2000 “Intelligence Newsletter” (p. 2), by Christian Identity preacher Earl Jones, said that the laws of “God” were not done away with but were placed in our (Christian?) hearts.  As will be conclusively proven herein, Christians certainly do not obey the generic Torah and cannot possibly have YHWH’s Torah in their hearts.  This was just wishful or confused thinking by Jones. 

 

If Christians have YAH’s law in their hearts, it never translates to deeds, fruits and actions (which is the purpose of the New/Renewed Covenant).  When the laws of The ELOHIM are in a person’s heart/mind, the person will become cognizant and obedient of those laws. 

 

Christians simply do not obey the Torah.  They rarely if ever even read from the Torah and almost never ever study the Torah.  In the general context, Christians have virtually no knowledge, information or understanding about what laws are even in the Torah.  So, how could the Torah be in their hearts?  Obviously, it isn’t in Christian hearts today. 

 

 

More on Yisrael’s History of Sin 

 

For sure, Yisrael has always sinned--whether in 700 BCE, 700 CE, 1776, 1900, 1950 or today in the early 21st century.  Of course, the argument can legitimately be made that Yisrael’s sins here in 2003 are far more serious and profound than at any time earlier in Yisrael’s history.  And this is true. 

 

But the difference is only in degrees, as elsewhere pointed out herein.  Thus, Israelites were perhaps not as bad in sin in 1776 as they were in 1913.  They were not as bad in 1913 as they were in 1960.  Manifestly, they have grown progressively worse and worse since 1960 to the present. 

 

The famous curses in the law, due to come upon Yisrael in the age end (which will  be covered in detail in later chapters), offer a most fascinating remark.  When this coming punishment comes upon the age end Yisrael because of sin, YHWH offers the hope of ultimate deliverance when Yisrael confesses her sins and repents (Lev 26:40-42). 

 

Howbeit, this repentance must include a most unique confession.  Not only must the age ending Israelites confess and acknowledge their personal sins, but they must confess and acknowledge the historic sins of their fathers (Lev 26:39-42; Jer 16:19).  This confession is not just for Israel’s sins in 1960, 1950, 1913, 1900, 1860 or 1776. 

 

But this process must go all the way back to the Exodus and the giving of the law at Sinai in c1464 BCE--because Yisrael’s fathers have always sinned.  Obviously, The MOST HIGH is not going to accept the repentance of Yisrael in her final hours of chastisement until she confesses and acknowledges this mountain of sin for the last 3,500 years. 

 

The great Jewish commentator Samson Raphael Hirsch offered some very incisive comments on this projected repentance (“The Pentateuch,” v. III, part II, p. 802-803). 

 

Hirsch said that the coming punishment will continue on Yisrael until the survivors recognize their continued treatment of the laws of the Torah with indifference, as if they were merely of secondary importance (which has caused them to decay spiritually, socially and morally). 

 

The correction will ultimately bring the Israelites to self-knowledge and self-confession.  Per Hirsch, they will admit their “Galut unfaithfulness” and in the indifference with which they have just casually kept parts of EL’s Torah.  They, like their fathers, have departed from the straight path. 

 

In short, surviving Israelites in the age end must confess their sins and the sins of their ancestors before deliverance comes.  Consequently it will be the mechanism of the coming New/Renewed Covenant (after the punishment and repentance) which will bring these sinning, rebellious people to The HIGHEST.  That is why YESHUA was sent to the divorced, lost House of Yisrael. 

 

 

Jeremiah 31:22 

 

Beyond the obvious reality that YHWH (as YESHUA) will marry Yisrael again in a future ceremony (at the wedding supper of The LAMB), there is an interesting sidelight to this whole process which serves as a prelude to Yirmeyahu’s discussion of the coming New (or Renewed) Covenant.  The prophet wrote about this introduction when he described a most fascinating phenomenon to take place in the prophetic future. 

 

Yirmeyahu wrote about this fantastic event in the context that a woman would actually compass a man (Jer 31:22). 

 

For years, Christian commentators struggled with this text in attempts at its interpretation.  A footnote in “The Amplified Bible” (p. 879) suggested that the “early (Church) Fathers” believed that it had reference to “Christ’s Incarnation.” 

 

“The Amplified Bible” (p. 879) then went on to translate the text as “a female shall compass (woo, win and protect) a man.”  This translation clarified the text by adding that the implication was that Yisrael would devote herself to winning back and deserving the love of her “divine Husband.” 

 

 

The Present Dilemma 

 

In 2001, a bad situation developed with a widow woman and six fatherless children in Bonner County, Idaho, when local authorities arrested her and oppressed her significantly in an apparent effort to steal her land.  This tragedy of evil will be addressed in some detail in later chapters herein.  But for now, this event raises a very relevant point which seems connected with the idea of the Covenant. 

 

There is a powerful condemnation from The ELOHIM to anyone who afflicts a widow woman and fatherless children (Ex 22:22-24).  Of all of YHWH’s promises of coming punishment on man for sin, this one in Exodus 22 seems most profound. 

 

“The Soncino Edition of the Pentateuch and Haftorahs” (edited by Dr J. H. Hertz, p. 314) gives this text as:  “Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.  If thou afflict them in any wise--for if they cry at all unto Me, I will surely hear their cry--My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.” 

 

Moreover, there are also the great promises of blessings and curses in the Torah (Lev 26; Deut 28), as well as similar words in the second commandment of the Decalogue.  Finally, there is the reality that YHWH is The HEALER of His people. 

 

Many of these promises are so pungent and declarative that one must wonder that surely the ELOHIM would intervene to make His Word certain in these various circumstances.  Manifestly, it would seem almost a certainty that His promises for afflicting widow women and children would invoke a powerful response from Him. 

 

 

Yet, They Don’t 

 

However strong and powerful these words are, this writer has struggled in an effort to relate these promises to contemporary people and events.  Yet, they just don’t seem to fit.  Accordingly, there has to remain some type of explanation to account for the seeming disparity. 

 

It is very easy to immediately link these promises in with the reality that Christianity is not the religion of the Scriptures.  Therefore, when one looks for fulfillment of these promises among Christians, they simply won’t be there.  Take the case of a widow woman who ostensibly cries out to YHWH in her affliction.  If she is involved in false worship, can she cry out in truth?  Will He hear her cry? 

 

Too, this writer has believed that the blessings and curses in the Torah (Lev 26; Deut 28) appear to be essentially nationalistic in application--although they aren’t necessarily so limited in their statements which appear to be individually tailored in application.  Consequently, it might be that they are both nationally and individually directed. 

 

After thinking about the subject somewhat, it seems that in YHWH’s divorce of Yisrael, the marriage Covenant between Him and the House of Yisrael was terminated.  In that sense, the promises to Yisrael in the Tanakh must be assessed in terms of the Covenant. 

 

With the termination of the Covenant, is The MOST HIGH under obligation to fulfill His promises under the Covenant to divorced Yisrael?  Evidently, the answer is no.  So, if the House of Yisrael Israelites are still in the divorced state, as they are in 2003, then perhaps The ELOHIM is not obligated to fulfill those promises in the general sense. 

 

Next, how about the Jews.  While He never divorced Yehudah, there has to be a question about whether the Sinai Covenant still exists presently with the Jewish people or not. 

 

Did their role in killing Him abolish the Covenant?  Maybe!  Also, there are questions about the Jewish efforts to amend the Amidah (to be discussed in a later chapter) and expel true believers from the synagogues.  Did these acts end their possession of the Covenant?  As noted in former comments, likely the Covenant with Yehudah has been terminated or will be terminated (to allow the renewal in Hebrews 8:8). 

 

Consequently, one must wonder if anyone alive on earth today is in possession of a covenanted relationship with The HIGHEST?  Frankly, this writer does not know the answer to that question.  While His Sinai Covenant was an everlasting Covenant (per Ps 105:6-10, to be assessed next), has it been totally suspended, pending the coming time when it will be renewed with the Houses of Yehudah and Yisrael? 

 

Next, one must ask if it is possible for a person to voluntarily (by his or her own choice and action) come under the provision of the Covenant in any form right now (like with true repentance and conversion to YESHUA).  Certainly, it seems out of the question for people involved in pesha, maal or awon wrongs (as described in prior chapters). 

 

Clearly, as a minimum, a person must accept the authority of the Torah to define moral right and wrong.  So, what if a truly converted person has renounced all pesha, awon and maal sins and is living by the standards of the Torah (if that is possible).  Could the curses and blessings of the Torah then apply?  This writer is unsure here of the answer. 

 

 

Psalm 105:6-10 

 

Before concluding this chapter on the New/Renewed Covenant, mention must be made of Psalm 105:6-10, where the Word says that YHWH remembers His Covenant forever--His Covenant made with Avraham, confirmed unto Yakov for a law and (given) to Yisrael for an everlasting Covenant. 

 

In short, the New/Renewed Covenant can only be and must only be for Yisrael and absolutely no one else. 

 

What a tragedy it is that ignorant, uninformed Christians come along and seize Israel’s promises, covenants and future and attempt to apply them to themselves?  This dilemma will be discussed at length later on in a future chapter in this publication. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 52--Still More on Shaul

 

 

Shaul's Words Were For Fleshly Israelites 

 

Of course, Shaul had a host of other equally penetrating remarks to the Romans on this important theme of salvation for certain elect persons.  For instance, he went on to next observe that the Jews should have known that the Word was to go forth to the lost tribes of Yisrael who were no longer YHWH's people because of the divorce (Rom 10:20-21). 

 

Naturally, this truth by Shaul was made earlier in prophecies by Moshe (Deut 32:21) and Yeshayahu (Isa 65:1-7) in the context of being Yisrael.  Actually, this is a concept that relates to the idea that the House of Yisrael would attain a status of not being YHWH's people and then later would become YHWH's people (Hos 2:23; Rom 9:25-26; I Pet 2:9-10). 

 

In a remark to the Hebrews, the writer of that book (evidently Shaul) carefully pointed out that "The Deliverer and Savior" will come to and for Avraham's seed of Yisrael (Heb 2:16).  Assuredly, the mention of a man’s seedline (like Avraham’s) must focus on the flesh.  There is no other way to take this reference.  This charge also goes back to Yeshayahu where the subject was clearly Yisrael (Isa 41:8-9). 

 

 

Romans 11:26 

 

A most important conclusion, by Shaul, on this topic, was reached when he dogmatically asserted that "All Israel will be saved.  As it is written, The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will banish ungodliness from Jacob" (Rom 11:26). 

 

This word “all” used above is quite profound and far reaching.  It certainly must include not only the known or recognized Israelites; but also, those Israelites that are unrecognized in the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael.  Moreover, the reference to the banishment of wickedness from Yakov appears to address Yakov in the broad sense and not in any limited aspects. 

 

Surely, this banishment must tie back to the reality that under the terms of the New/Renewed Covenant, as described in the prior chapter, The ELOHIM’s laws will be put in the hearts and minds of the collective Israelites (not just the House of Yehudah, but specifically the Israelites of the lost House of Yisrael), so that they will quit sinning.  And that’s the essence of the New Testament and the coming banishment of sin from Yisrael. 

 

 

Yisrael Heard! 

 

The Apostle Shaul was involved in one more relevant happening which the student of truth needs to next consider.  To set the stage for this event, Shaul told the Romans that by then (when he was writing his letter to them), the Good News message had gone to all the world, the kosmos (obviously, where the lost tribes of Yisrael were then located) as a witness (Rom 10:18-19). 

 

Per this statement by Shaul, the Israelites in the election had been reached and had heard the Good News of salvation being opened up to them.  When one considers the entire context of Romans and particularly its early chapters, it is no wonder that Shaul could and indeed would make such a charge that the Good News had, by then, been preached to the persons who were supposed to learn of it. 

 

In effect, Shaul had completed his commission of preaching to the election of his time.  Obviously, those elected individuals constituted the group of persons which were supposed to be the recipients of the Good News in the first century CE. 

 

 

The Age Ending Election? 

 

Beyond the House of Yisrael election in Apostolic Assembly days, there is furthermore evidence of an age ending election, to be discussed in a future chapter, which also was supposed to share in and be recipients of the Good News--perhaps in a duality of purpose in terms of the entire New Testament writings. 

 

However, in making this suggestion of the applicability of the New Testament Good News to a coming age ending election, this writer is aware certainly of the fact that the entire situation and environment of the age end differs in many respects from that of the Apostolic Assembly of 2,000 years ago.  These two time entities are not precisely the same, although there seems to be some important similarities between them. 

 

 

Shaul and Agrippa 

 

To further establish the reality that Shaul completed his mission, the student of truth can next turn to King Agrippa.  To support this linkage, one needs to acknowledge that the Apostle Shaul already had asserted clearly that the Roman believers he wrote to about the Good News going to the world (Rom 10:18-19) were fleshly descendants of Avraham and assuredly Israelites, as was noted earlier (Rom 4:1; 9:3-7). 

 

With this background, Shaul later appeared before King Agrippa, as mentioned earlier, to make a defense of his faith (Acts 26:1).  He indicated that Agrippa was an expert on Jewish customs and "questions" (as indeed, Shaul was also). 

 

These questions surely would have included some concern over the who, where, what and why of the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael (Acts 26:3).  Actually, extant Jewish writings for centuries (unquestionably from the time of Josephus) have addressed this issue as one for thought and consideration. 

 

Certainly, informed Jews for ages have known and understood that the Jews of the exile were not the peoples of the House of Yisrael. 

 

Both Shaul and Agrippa would have been conversant on this topic.  And of course, in Shaul's condition, with his commission and link to truth, he certainly would have known and understood much on this topic.  He must have been an exceptional person with fantastic insight on the status of the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

 

Promises Belonged to Yisrael 

 

So, in speaking to Agrippa, the apostle brought up the fact that the promises of The MESSIAH and the resurrection made long ago (Acts 26:6) belonged to Yisrael, which the twelve tribes (including the lost ones) hoped to realize as they (presently, as Shaul spoke) fervently worshipped, night and day (Acts 26:7). 

 

The essence being is that Shaul had indeed, by then, accomplished his mission to the uncircumcised, lost tribes of the House of Yisrael.  Those Israelites of the election had received the Good News of their selection for salvation and were thus then fervently worshipping night and day in expectation of the promises. 

 

To sum up this sub-topic, Shaul's very lengthy and revealing remarks to Agrippa were, by and large, quite plain and leave little room for speculation.  The people elected to receive the Good News (in the first century CE) had by then received the Good News.  In a word, Shaul had most likely “accomplished” his mission to the lost House of Yisrael. 

 

 

Shaul's Words Are Difficult! 

 

Before leaving this discussion about Shaul's letter to the Romans (as noted above), it should be noted that sometimes a little difficulty surfaces in his writings and particularly so in those addressed to the Romans.  The main problem comes about because on occasion he clearly seems to be referring to the Jews, but then goes on to call them Yisrael (Rom 9:31; 11:7, 11, etc). 

 

Actually, in Second Temple days, it was very common for Hebrew speaking and writing Jews to refer to themselves as Yisrael or Israelites, while non-Jews (in their extant Greek, Latin and Aramaic writings) would call them Jews (per “Jerusalem Perspective, Apr 1989).  These figures of speech (and idiom) have to be studied and focused upon to ever begin to appreciate what the New Testament actually said. 

 

Also, in the book of Romans and others, Shaul frequently refers to the lost tribes of Yisrael by use of the Hebrew goyim and/or Greek ethne, ethnesi or ethnon, as has been previously noted herein.  This condition can leave open the possibility of some confusion on the part of a reader when reading Shaul's references to Yisrael. 

 

Of course, it was proper to call Yehudah “Yisrael,” as has been previously observed.  Obviously too, Shaul was not and would not have dared to try to change the commission by YESHUA, as it had been already established. 

 

After all, the Word is not one of contradiction, confusion and change.  The Scriptures are a product of consistency.  As noted in earlier comments, Babylonian confusion is found in Christian theology and not in YHWH’s Word. 

 

 

Help On Understanding Shaul 

 

In referring back to the talk by Dr Ken Hanson at ORU in 1991, as discussed previously, mention was made of the fact that Second Temple, monotheistic Jews used the Hebrew goyim in a generic sense to apply to any and all peoples of worldly polytheistic religions (regardless of racial or ethnic factors). 

 

Consequently, an ethnic or racial Jew who adhered to one of the pagan religions was goy in every sense of the word from this perspective.  When this rationale is applied to the letters of the Apostle Shaul, it is possible to realize that this mental mind-set would have affected him materially in his writings.  And it did! 

 

Shaul's epistles clearly reflect the Greek ethne, ethnesi and ethnon (or Hebrew goyim) from the religious context of non-Jews.  More precisely, he certainly referred to peoples of the lost tribes of Yisrael with heathen religions often as goyim (or ethne, ethnesi and ethnon), as established herein. 

 

 

Shaul Understood the Truth! 

 

Although Shaul had this propensity of calling the Jews "Yisrael" (as was the usual practice among religious Jews in the Diaspora) and of referring to the lost tribes of the House of Yisrael as the ethne, ethnesi and ethnon (or goyim, in the Hebrew), he vividly communicated truth elsewhere in other instances when he effectively defined his terms and made it plain that he knew that both peoples were of Yisrael. 

 

For example, at one point in time to the Romans (Rom 9:24-31), the apostle placed himself in the category of an elected or called out (religious) Jew, in contrast to the called out ones of the lost tribes (per the plural forms of ethnos), which he precisely connected to the Israelites described centuries earlier by Hosea (Hos 1:10; 2:23; Rom 9:25-26) and Yeshayahu (Isa 10:22-23; Rom 9:27-28).  He clearly understood this tie. 

 

But otherwise, this dilemma of identification in Shaul’s writings intensifies when one realizes that he also wrote from time to time about what would appear to be the ultimate reconciliation of the House of Yehudah and the whole of Adam generally (vis-à-vis just the House of Yisrael) in the vein of entirely different time periods and under precisely different circumstances (see I Corinthians, Hebrews and other “Pauline” epistles). 

 

 

Confusion Over The Word "Jew" 

 

There is still one more difficulty on this matter of identification, which not only affects Shaul, but it may impact upon other NT writers as well.  Respecting this, there is often substantial confusion when the word "Jew" comes up.  There is the initial problem of whether the topic is one of race, citizenship, residency, religion or what, as noted previously. 

 

However, this perplexing question is probably only the tip of the iceberg of uncertainty because, over all, there is the whole spectrum of the presence of numbers of non-Jews (racially and/or religiously) posing as "Jews" (as will be discussed in a future chapter).  Hence, when Shaul (and the others for that matter) used the word Jew, exactly who was the subject? 

 

Alternatively, does the appellation refer to real, true (religious and/or racial) Jews or does it refer to both real and false (good and bad) Jews?  Plainly, in trying to address this enigma, a person faces a filled can of worms which cannot be resolved in any easy fashion.  Certainly, caution, care and concern have to be the bywords whenever the word Jew comes up. 

 

 

Usually Religion is the Issue! 

 

Gerhard Kittel’s “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” (v. III, p. 369) probably has the best approach to this problem in saying that “Alongside the political, historical and national aspect of the name Ioudaios there is always the religious, and this plays a decisive role in the attention devoted to this people.” 

 

Kittel’s focus on the word “decisive” is substantiated in previous quotations in this study from the “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” and other sources.  As a minimum, Shaul had the concept of religion in his mind-set certainly on occasion in some of his remarks on the Jews, as the Word proves (Gal 1:13-14). 

 

From a study of Shaul’s various uses of the word Jew in relation to his uses of ethnos (for the lost tribes of Yisrael) and Yisrael (apparently for true racial Jews), it does appear that generally Shaul had religion in mind when he used the word Jew. 

 

Dr Ray Pritz of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research makes note of the fact that some of the Greek New Testament books referred to the Judeans (called Jews in the KJV), in the context of some of the wicked people in the Jerusalem area (to be discussed in detail in a future part of this work).  Yet, English translators typically do not attempt to make this distinction. 

 

Of course, “Judean” offers a geographical linkage suggesting residency and/or citizenship and not race or religion at all.  While the word Jew was not used frequently in the Synoptics, the writer Yohanan certainly used it and often in a critical or unfavorable vein for certain persons of the Judean province. 

 

Since many of these Judeans were actually racial Amalekites (to be later established) and perhaps atheists or agnostics in reality, as so many of them tend to be, it seems likely that Yohanan used the word primarily in the geographical sense of a Judean resident or national, as suggested by Pritz and some of the early Greek NT writings. 

 

 

Caution is Required! 

 

Consequently, a reader must be careful in trying to comprehend the New Testament messages because of the difficulty of ascertaining exactly “who” the writer may have had in mind or was referring to in the various Scriptures. 

 

Sometimes, it would appear that there is a commingling of the different parties (especially in Shaul’s letters) to the extent that some confusion can surface if one is not prudent in attempting an interpretation. 

 

The gist of this is that a reader has to be careful when interpreting Shaul's writings, as Kefa so long ago also observed (as noted earlier).  They are difficult and hard to understand (II Pet 3:15-16).  Hence, a reader trying to comprehend Romans without benefit of the rest of the Scriptures can get tangled up with Shaul's use of the word Yisrael for the Jews on occasion, as well as over the other difficulties just mentioned. 

 

 

Forged Letters, Revisited 

 

Beyond just the simple fact that the writings of Shaul are extremely complicated and hard to understand, there is a furthermore discrete remark by Shaul, himself, which conveys the image that there were some forged letters in circulation in the first century CE which were alleged to be from Shaul (as briefly mentioned in prior comments). 

 

This fantastic revelation surfaced when Shaul wrote of those "letters as from us" (II Thes 2:2).  While one can not be thoroughly positive, the door must be left open that some of Shaul's writings (now accepted as his) may, in fact, be forgeries from some other author (like possibly Simon Magus).  Quite naturally, any forgeries floating around and accepted as Shaul’s works would only serve to create more confusion. 

 

 

Titus 2:14 

 

Assuredly, all of the Scriptures on a subject have to be considered together when involved in critical study.  Of course, there are numerous other texts which leave no doubt in one's mind that Shaul was thoroughly aware of the fact that the Good News was destined for Yisrael.  This fact is well brought out in Titus 2:14 when he noted that YESHUA died to purify for Himself a "peculiar people" zealous of good works. 

 

Actually here, the apostle was referring back to Deuteronomy 14:2 where Moshe had written that Yisrael was to be a "peculiar people."  Incidentally, the epistle to Titus was one of the later “Pauline” writings--perhaps written as late as 65 CE, just before his reported death.  Certainly, at this late date, the apostle still believed that the very elect of the apostolic age were Israelites. 

 

 

Ephesians Revisited 

 

Earlier in this study, Ephesians 2:11-12 and 4:17 were reviewed relative to Shaul's use of ethne to refer to the lost (unrecognized) tribes of Yisrael.  In this present discussion of his evangelistic efforts, you may wish to go back and reread the analyses presented earlier as they are very germane here. 

 

 

Shaul Preached To All--Israelites? 

 

Furthermore, in terms of Shaul's preaching, there is another verse deserving of mention.  In a Roman prison, Shaul preached to all who came to him (Acts 28:30-31).  Could this "all" have included some non-Israelites?  Most likely, the all involved only Israelites.  But this writer would not argue the point if some others came also (perhaps "ger" converts). 

 

While incidentally, some allowance is being made here that "maybe" some non-Israelite "gerim" did come to Shaul, the context of Acts 28 is plain that his visitors were, in the main, fleshly Israelites.  This reality surfaces in one instance where Shaul, in a conversation with them, refers to their common, fleshly ancestors as "our fathers or forefathers," which used the Greek word "pateres," as discussed earlier (Acts 28:25). 

 

And if some non-Israelites did come to Shaul, so what?  Such an event would have done nothing to alter or change Shaul's primary mission and purpose.  He certainly knew and understood that he had been expressly chosen and commissioned to carry the Good News message to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 53--More Relevant Scriptures

 

 

Yakov 

 

Otherwise, on the subject of the recipients of the Good News, the Apostle Yakov also focused in on the commission when he wrote his important epistle and addressed it "... to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting, My brethren ..." (Jas 1:1-2).  Yakov knew what he was doing.  He was aware of his brethren in the twelve tribes scattered abroad. 

 

By the way, this English word “scattered” here in James 1:1-2 is from the Greek “Diaspora,” discussed earlier.  The Second Temple Jews used it as a reference to the Israelites scattered abroad from Palestine in the prior dispersals (Jo 7:35).  Therefore, Yakov used the exact, same word to locate his “racial brethren” of the twelve tribes. 

 

 

Kefa 

 

It is likewise important to observe that Kefa addressed his first epistle to the same Israelite people (strangers in the KJV) scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (I Pet 1:1).  Once more, the Greek “Diaspora” was used to identify the locale where Kefa’s words were to go--unto the Israelites dispersed from Canaan land. 

 

I Peter 1:1 furthermore uses another interesting word relevant to this presentation.  The Greek “parepideemos,” translated as strangers, is used to designate the scattered Israelites.  Young’s “Analytical Concordance” says that it means “one among the people” (thus, Israelites among the collective nations). 

 

Kefa used the same word again at I Peter 2:11 where it clearly refers, in context, to Israelites who were a “chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people” (I Pet 2:9-11).  Undeniably, all of these nominatives apply to Israelites only in YHWH’s Word.  This fact cannot be avoided. 

 

The “peculiar people” is certainly Yisrael, to be elaborated upon in a later chapter (Ex 19:6; Deut 14:2, Titus 2:14).  Likewise, the “chosen generation” is Yisrael (I Chron 16:13; Ps 105:6; Isa 43:20; Matt 22:14); the “royal priesthood” is Yisrael (Ex 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 5:10); and the “holy (kodesh) nation” is Yisrael (Ex 19:6; Isa 26:2). 

 

This same Greek “parepideemos” appears still one more time in the Greek New Testament where it is used in Hebrews 11:13.  The context, therein, includes the descendants of Avraham (Heb 11:12-13) who were “people of faith,” along with Abel, Enoch and Noah. 

 

Obviously, the people of faith, who were descendants of Avraham, were Israelites because they were identified (i.e. Moshe, Yehoshua, David, Daniel and the prophets). 

 

I Peter 1:1 has still one more extraordinary feature.  As stated, Kefa was writing his letter to Israelites in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia--just as Shaul wrote his epistles to Israelites in Southern Europe and Asia Minor.  Therefore, in I Peter 5:13, the apostle referred to the recipients of his letter as the “elect.” 

 

And who are the elect?  Why Yisrael, of course, as was so thoroughly established in the Scriptures (Isa 45:4; 65:9, 22). 

 

In short, Kefa was writing his epistle to the elect strangers of Yisrael who were scattered abroad in the geographical lands cited.  Yes, the called out ones, the elect, in Rome, Corinth, Galatia, etc, were all categorically Israelites.  There can be no confusing or mistaking of this fact, as it has been so thoroughly established throughout this publication. 

 

 

Yohanan 

 

In continuing, the Apostle Yohanan wrote one of his marvelous letters to lost Yisrael--for sure!  In II John 1:1, he wrote to the “elect lady” and her children.  Naturally, ignorant Christians will speculate, on and on, that this subject was some (false, rebellious) Christian Church.  But not so! 

 

No!  The “elect” race or people in the Book have always been Israelites, as so abundantly stated, over and over (Isa 45:4; 65:9, 22).  The word “elect” cannot be attached to any other peoples, collectively, in history or in the world presently.  It is and always has been Yisrael. 

 

Next, there are two primary, symbolic women in the Scriptures.  The wicked mystery Babylon is assuredly one of them (Rev 17:1-4).  Certainly, this evil woman was not the focus of II John.  So one must turn to the other woman.  Who was she?  Why Yisrael, of course. 

 

Yisrael was, is and will always be the primary symbolic woman in Scriptural language.  Yisrael was YHWH’s bride at Sinai (Jer 2:2; Ezek 16:7, 38; Hos 2:2) and will be YHWH YESHUA’s bride in the future (Rev 21:2).  Even in the days of the divided kingdom, Yisrael and Yehudah remained women married to YHWH in symbolism (Jer 3:1-12; Ezek 16:45-46; 23:2-4). 

 

Finally, who are the children of the elect woman to whom Yohanan focused his message (II Jo 1:1)?  Repeatedly, the Word declares, over and over, that in the theocracy the mother Yisrael bore children for The MOST HIGH (Jer 3:14; 16:2-3; Ezek 16:20-21; 23:4; Hos 2:2-4).  Even in her divorced state, the harlot Yisrael has borne children; which, by adoption, will ultimately become sons and daughters of YHWH (not Avraham, contrary to Christian theology!), as described herein. 

 

 

More on the Elect People 

 

Having just mentioned that both Kefa and Yohanan wrote some or all of their epistles to the elect Yisrael, further comment is now in order on that point.  As repeatedly asserted, the Scriptures very poignantly declare that in the 6,000 years history of Adam, there has been one and only one racial/ethnic class of “elect” persons--Yisrael and Israelites (Isa 45:4; 65:9, 22). 

 

With this background, the Apostle Mattityahu came along and quoted The MESSIAH as saying that the age end would have an “elect” people, who would receive special consideration from The SOVEREIGN (Matt 24:22). 

 

Obviously, this “elect” group would appear to be the precise same persons outlined earlier by Yeshayahu and later again by YESHUA in calling them the “blessed” to inherit the Kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world (Matt 25:34). 

 

Beyond these far reaching remarks of Mattityahu, a whole host of other New Testament writings referred to the “elect” of the MOST HIGH in the context of them being the subject of all of the involved Scriptures (Mk 13:20; Lu 18:7; Jo 14:17; 15:16-19 Rom 8:33; Eph 1:4-14; Col 3:12, 15; I Thes 1:4; Titus 1:1; I Pet 1:2, 4). 

 

Also, on this item, please note that Yisrael was chosen by election (Rom 9:11) and that this election is an election of grace (Rom 11:5). 

 

Consequently, one must come to the conclusion that the available evidence plainly suggests that “elect Israelites” were and are the addressees of all of the writings of Mattityahu, Mark, Luke, Yohanan, Shaul, Kefa and Yakov.  Are there alternatives on this issue?  Evidently not! 

 

 

Revelation 

 

The book of Revelation closes the NT canon.  As might be suspected, these writings often concerned the prophetic future of certain Israelites.  Many of the early chapters of Revelation clearly focused on Yisrael.  And as already established in this publication at hand, the NT Assemblies at Ephesus, Galatia, etc were and have to be Israelite congregations. 

 

Moreover, there are some very powerful Revelation references which prove conclusively that the NT “elect” were and are Israelites.  For example, the (future) sealing of the 144,000 chosen ones (to be discussed later) is plainly a sealing of 144,000 Israelites since it is defined as involving 12,000 from each of twelve Israelite tribes (Rev 7:4-8). 

 

All the tribes of Yisrael are named in this sealing except Dan which was absent, perhaps because of sin--likely, the illegal mixing with Edomite Phoenicians in their allocated tribal lands.  This prospect will be assessed in later remarks in this study. 

 

It is also correct to note that many of these referred, elect, saved ones are, in fact, a portion of a “kingdom of priests” (Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6).  Now, the Book is elsewhere clear on who the people are that have been designated to be a “kingdom of priests” (Ex 19:6).  By the way, Kefa had the same understanding when he noted that his readers were a royal priesthood, as just discussed (I Pet 2:9). 

 

Another poignant reference occurs in Revelation when mention was made of the beginning of YHWH’s harvest of the vine with the winepress (Rev 14:19).  Students of truth realize that the vine is, Scripturally, the House of Yisrael (Jer 6:9; Hos 9:10; 10:1; Joel 1:17).  Truly, the harvested grapes are Israelites. 

 

 

Acts 5:31 and 11:18 

 

The book of Acts recorded the words of Kefa when he reflected that The HIGHEST exalted YESHUA to give repentance to Yisrael and forgiveness of sins (Acts 5:31).  This statement is quite plain and precise to the point.  The MESSIAH’s whole purpose was to give repentance and forgiveness of sin to Yisrael and to no one else. 

 

A little while later, Kefa had an occasion to recount to the brethren in Jerusalem his experience with Cornelius, as elaborated upon earlier herein (Acts 11:2-19).  Kefa’s listeners proclaimed that indeed The SUPREME had granted repentance to the gentiles (Greek ethnesi). 

 

Luke, the writer of these words, must have tied those remarks of Kefa back to Kefa’s earlier words about the grant of repentance to Yisrael (Acts 5:31). 

 

Can any intellectually honest reader of the Book be foolish enough to suppose that Luke and/or Kefa would allow a contradiction between Acts 5:31 and Acts 11:18?  Isn’t it quite manifest that the grant of repentance to Yisrael (Acts 5:31) was and is the precisely same grant of repentance to the ethnesi (Acts 11:18)? 

 

 

Mattityahu 

 

The writer Mattityahu perceptively brought out a fascinating little point about Yisrael when he quoted YESHUA’s words regarding His (The MESSIAH, as Shepherd) separation of the peoples of all of the House of Yisrael nations/peoples (Greek “ethne”) into sheep and goats (Matt 25:32-33). 

 

Of course, the reference here in Matthew goes right back to Yechezkel’s remarks about separating the Yisrael sheep from the non-Yisrael goats (Ezek 34:17). 

 

The point being in this text is that in the age end House of Yisrael nations (ethne), the peoples are a mixed multitude of ger, nokri/nekar, behemah and chaiyah racial and ethnic types along with the true Israelites.  An explanation of these different racial and ethnic types will be analyzed in a later chapter in this publication. 

 

Therefore, The MOST HIGH will proceed with a separation or segregation of these various (sheep and goat) individuals into their proper stations and futures in life.  Obviously, this text is related to the parable of the wheat and tares, also to be discussed later. 

 

 

Jeremiah 2:3 

 

The prophet Yirmeyahu wrote an interesting passage in which he labeled Yisrael as the “firstfruits” (Jer 2:3).  As fantastic as it may seem, the elect, called out ones in the New Testament were repeatedly identified as the firstfruits--obviously linking back to the prophetic words of Yirmeyahu uttered 600 years earlier (Rom 8:32; 11:16; 16:5; I Cor 15:23; 16:15; Jas 1:18; Rev 14:4). 

 

 

Acts 7:42 

 

Stephen, on trial for his life, made mention of a profound record in history when he said that The MOST HIGH had abandoned (given up) the House of Yisrael “to worship the host of heaven” because of her sin (Acts 7:42).  This reference to the host of heaven is quite fascinating and most profound in respect to the House of Yisrael. 

 

Moshe wrote some words (quoting The ELOHIM) that are especially relevant here.  He defined the host of heaven as including the sun, moon and stars and linked this false worship to the non-Israelite nations (Deut 4:19; 17:3).  As Stephen observed, YHWH had turned the House of Yisrael over to the same worship of the sun, moon and stars (and the abandonment of the true faith). 

 

Of course, Stephen would be aware of this situation since the New Testament was written to, about, and for the House of Yisrael.  This whole subject will be considered in some detail in a future chapter in this work, since it is so profoundly and extremely important. 

 

 

Acts 15, Revisited 

 

Most Christians are well aware of the Apostolic conference held in Jerusalem, as described by Luke in Acts 15 and which was discussed earlier.  Many like this reference because they ignorantly and stupidly believe that this historic meeting helped abolish YHWH’s laws that define sin. 

 

As this Jerusalem assembly saw it, there was a discussion about some laws (from Leviticus, as stated with certain Temple ordinances) which would certainly apply to Israelites outside of Jerusalem, as well as being applicable in the historic city.  Mention here must again be directed at the question of individuals eating blood (directly or indirectly, as a part of an animal slain without being properly bled). 

 

The finding on this item was specifically stated to be that the eating of blood in either mentioned case was wrong for the elect persons of the Apostolic Assembly wherever they resided (Acts 15:20-25).  Of course, this statement was based on the codified law which already provided that determination for Israelites (Gen 9:4; Lev 3:17; Deut 12:16, 23; 14:21). 

 

But while the eating of blood or of animals not bled properly was wrong for Israelites in the Word, it is interesting that the Scriptures make it appear to be quite legal, proper and allowable for the nokri/nekar aliens (certain non-Israelites, to be described in a later chapter) to eat unbled animals (Deut 14:21). 

 

Clearly, the Acts 15 conference had in mind the Israelite peoples out in the Diaspora and not non-Israelite nokri/nekar persons wherever they lived, since the law in Leviticus 3:17 and Deuteronomy 14:21 was only of concern to Israelites. 

 

Of course, some rebellious individuals, particularly Christians, may try to come along and say that Leviticus and Deuteronomy were done away with--thus, allowing whatever meaning one may want to believe in terms of Acts 15. 

 

 

Luke Again 

 

Luke, the writer of Acts, mentioned a few other items which can be misunderstood because of translation problems and/or taken out of context to mislead the student of truth who carelessly reads the texts without due study and consideration.  On this, mention must first be made of Christendom's concept of the "baptism of the Holy Spirit," as initially described in Acts 2:1-21. 

 

There are at least two critical issues here which need some comment.  First, many persons reading this section will try to seize upon Acts 2:21 as a basis to believe that anyone and everyone can be saved in this age "only" by "calling upon the name of the Lord" (as the KJV has it), thereby bypassing every thing else discussed in this study on the subject of "who." 

 

Naturally, the real student of truth wells knows that this supposed requirement for salvation appears elsewhere in the Scriptures, along with other stated needs--like "believing" in the person of SALVATION (Acts 4:4; 10:43; I Cor 1:21), "confessing" that YESHUA is YHWH (Rom 10:9; Phil 2:11), "believing" that The EL raised The MESSIAH from the dead (Rom 10:9), "repenting" of sins, being "baptized," and other stipulated acts and actions (to be later discussed). 

 

The point from these various references is that the realization of salvation is far more involved than just speaking a word or two and regardless of how "religious" and "good" that word may appeal to Churchianity and the public at large. 

 

Actually, the verity is that YESHUA does all of the acts and actions needed by an individual to achieve reconciliation.  Literally, there is nothing anyone can "do" in the way of a work, duty, act or action to receive SALVATION. 

 

Obviously, the "work" to "call upon a name," as outlined by Luke (Acts 2:21), is an incidental step in a far larger presentation of truth--which space herein will not allow any discussion or analysis of in this chapter. 

 

 

The Spiritual Baptism 

 

The next issue for comment in Acts 2 must focus on the so-called spiritual baptism (more correctly, the baptism of The RUACH HA KODESH, in the Hebrew). 

 

The importance of this event in designating possible "recipients" of the Good News surfaced elsewhere when observers saw this same phenomenon come on other persons spontaneously--like Cornelius (Acts 10:45-47) and some at Ephesus (Acts 19:5-6). 

 

Like so many other involved and lengthy sub-topics surfacing in this paper, the subject of this baptism and experience is vast and cannot be looked at properly herein because of space constraints, although it will be reviewed again somewhat in later chapters. 

 

 

Modern Holy Roller Manifestations Are Bad 

 

But this writer will go on record right now and positively declare that the true baptism of The RUACH HA KODESH is far different than the condition one is witnessing in the contemporary Pentecostal and Charismatic movements.  They are not the same! 

 

Any open minded, fair and objective person, not functioning under the power of a false spirit (I Jo 4:1), can readily study the relevant discussions in Acts and I Corinthians and quickly determine that the real baptism is decidedly different than the present manifestations growing into prominence in modern Churchianity. 

 

Additionally, persons familiar with the Scriptures are acutely aware of the fact that there is a definite tie between the obedience of YHWH's laws (which Christendom says were abolished) and the receipt of The RUACH HA KODESH (Acts 5:32; Heb 5:9).  Yet, the modern Pentecostal and Charismatic people are frequently the most blatant and manifest sinners that are visible in the entire Christian body. 

 

Too often, the Pentecostals and Charismatics are not even discreet and covert in their outright rebellion, iniquity and disobedience toward YHWH's laws defining sin and righteousness (I Jo 3:4).  Thus, they can't possibly have the "real" baptism. 

 

Without any apologies or reservations, this present condition has to be demonic, as to source (Isa 8:19; Mk 13:22; II Cor 11:13-15; I Tim 4:1; 6:20; II Tim 2:14-16; Rev 16:13-14).  There can be no question about it. 

 

So the fact that we have all kinds of Adamites, nokri/nekar aliens and behemah falling and rolling in the floors, having altar calls, crying and going on, barking like dogs, crowing like roosters and muttering gibberish and unintelligible speech from influencing demons at Christian Church meetings (on this, see Ex 32:4-6, 17-29; I Kg 18:26-28; Isa 8:19; I Tim 4:1; 6:20; II Tim 2:14-16) means nothing in terms of proving truth and identifying the proper recipients of the Good News. 

 

Real lovers of truth should spend some time and effort to test the spirits (by the written Scriptures) that attempt to take over and motivate human minds and not just assume and presume them to be good (I Jo 4:1). 

 

Additionally, it goes without having to say that believers in YESHUA should spend some time to “study” to show themselves approved (II Tim 2:15), instead of trying to “feel” good from emotionalism. 

 

On this need to study, it is useful to note here that not only are Christians, generally, some of the most Scripturally illiterate and shallow persons, but the Pentecostals and Charismatics are often at the top of the heap in ignorance. 

 

By The ELOHIM's Word, one can bank on it that any "genuine" distribution of the legitimate RUACH HA KODESH will come upon the right people who have been designated by The HIGHEST to receive the Good News and not upon fake impostors and others specifically omitted by YHWH's Torah.  More will be said on this theme in later chapters in this production. 

 

 

Acts 8 

 

Two more references relevant to this presentation appear in Acts 8 where Philip preached to people at one of the cities of Samaria (Acts 8:5) and later to an Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:30).  Some people would assume that Philip preached to non-Israelites, especially in the case of the eunuch, since there could have been some Israelites in the particular city of Samaria involved. 

 

In a way, it would seem strange that Philip would go to a Samaritan town just after YESHUA said not to go there--unless there were some Israelites there who needed to be reached, per the commission (Matt 10:5-6).  On this, please remember that Samaria was a province in Palestine and the term has a geographical reference, as noted earlier. 

 

Additionally, there are two good reasons to confirm that the specific persons reached by Philip in Samaria were, in fact, Israelites, perhaps from some apostate Jews (except for Simon Magus, who might have been an Amalekite posing as a circumcised Jew--to be discussed in a later chapter).  First, Kefa, who also went to these same people in Samaria, actually was the commissioned apostle to the circumcision (per Gal 2:7). 

 

Thus, would Kefa have went to uncircumcised non-Israelites in this instance at Samaria?  Continuing on, the reader must once more look at the conversion of Cornelius, as noted earlier (Acts 10).  Luke wrote in Acts 11:1-8 that the Apostolic Assembly brethren in Judea were surprised that Kefa had actually contacted the uncircumcised Cornelius. 

 

Question--if Kefa had had religious contact with uncircumcised non-Israelites in Samaria (Acts 8), then would the Judea brethren be surprised and express concern as they later did when Kefa came into contact with Cornelius (Acts 11)? 

 

Of course, the context in Acts disputes this possibility.  Therefore, it seems quite evident that the Samaritans preached to in Acts 8 must have been circumcised Israelites (again--likely descendants of the apostate Jews mentioned by Josephus, as discussed earlier).  Probably, these are the explanations of why Philip went to Samaria in the first place. 

 

 

The Eunuch 

 

However, the eunuch on the road could be another matter.  Possibly, even the eunuch could very well have been an Israelite and an Ethiopian by citizenship or nationality.  One can't be sure.  But if he wasn't an Israelite, perhaps he was a ger racially and eligible for salvation (Ex 12:48-49); although he could not have membership in Yisrael's congregation, as he was a eunuch (Deut 23:1; Isa 56:3-5). 

 

In fact, since the Ethiopian was reading Yeshayahu (probably in a Hebrew scroll in Judea), the reader might be extremely suspicious that he was a religious Jew.  This likelihood seems extremely plausible.  And since the Ethiopian had just been to the city of Jerusalem to worship (Acts 8:27), one might also allow that he was a Jew, at least religiously if not racially. 

 

Surely, there were educated and capable Jews in the Diaspora who probably held many important jobs in finance and money in various governments just as they do today.  Jews do have a unique penchant for money and finance, as was noted earlier. 

 

The possibilities, indeed the probabilities, that the "Ethiopian" was a Jew gains credibility when one recognizes the House of Yehudah's transformation from agriculture to money and banking practices during the Babylonian exile (Ex 22:25; Neh 5:1-10).  Assuredly, these evil financial dealings were a part and parcel of the mental makeup of some so-called Jews in YESHUA's day (Matt 21:12; Mk 11:15). 

 

It is interesting here that while most of YESHUA's early disciples were probably of Binyamin or Levi, the most likely racial Jew was Judas Iscariot, keeper of the purse or treasurer (Jo 13:29), which he seems to have stolen from regularly (Jo 12:4-6).  Ultimately, of course, he sold The ANOINTED ONE out for money (Matt 26:14-15; Mk 14:10-11; Lu 22:3-6; Jo 18:2-5). 

 

Without spending the time and space here to review comments made by Dr Roger Rusk (in his book “The Other End of the World”) on Judas being a Jew (to be described in a later chapter), there are an awful lot of good reasons to believe that Iscariot was not even a real Jew.  Instead, he was possibly only posing as a Jew.  But whatever he was, the fact remains that historically many Jews do have definite ties to money. 

 

With this perfectly normal Jewish penchant for money, finance, banking and business, it would be quite logical that the Ethiopian treasurer, under discussion, was a Jew, perhaps a racial Jew.  In reality, it probably would be suspect or questionable to believe the contrary. 

 

Before moving on, it is useful to recall the earlier comments in this section on the surprise of the Jewish disciples that Kefa had went to the uncircumcised Cornelius (Acts 11).  Again, one must conclude that the context regarding the Ethiopian allows that Philip was dealing with a circumcised Jew or a legal ger convert to Judaism. 

 

So, whatever the Ethiopian was, it would change nothing because The POTTER assuredly has power over the clay (Rom 9:20-21) and could make an isolated exception as He did with the Syro-Phoenician woman.  This single, incidental act certainly would not alter the basic commission which is so thoroughly documented elsewhere. 

 

 

Shimon, Called Niger 

 

Luke wrote about one more man in Acts worthy of comment upon at this time.  In this regard, he told of certain prophets in the Assembly of believers at Antioch (Acts 13:1).  He mentioned specifically one Shimon, called Niger. 

 

Of course, much of the Christian world immediately concludes that Shimon was a Black African.  But was he?  Well, maybe not!  After all, no one would be foolish enough to say that actress Shirley Temple is a Negro simply because her married name is now (or was) Shirley Temple Black. 

 

In his younger days, popular Hollywood star and Academy Award winner Clark Gable was nicknamed "Blackie."  He even carried that nominative into at least two or more of his movies when Blackie merely meant a person of a dark complexion.  Certainly, Gable and others like him were not Negroes by American standards (though Gable and the others may have had some Black genes in their ancestry). 

 

In Othello, Shakespeare wrote about a Venetian Moor of dark complexion.  Nowadays, various persons would argue to no end that Othello was a Black Negro, despite the historical record of precisely whom Shakespeare had in mind. 

 

Actually the Spanish Moors were not Black Negroes, per se, although their racial ancestry from North African Berbers surely included Black African genes mixed in with Caucasian ones.  In Spain, their lineage was whitened further with still more miscegenation with Whites; where, over time, they came to be dark skinned Spaniards with straight, black hair. 

 

Of course, this reference to these Moslem Moors is not intended to deny their Black ancestry, as the same genes are present in many dark skinned peoples throughout the globe--including the Arabs, Turks, Iranians, Greeks, French, Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians and Southern Europeans, Latin Americans and Southern Asians in general. 

 

Yet, the truth remains that most of the world looks upon most all of these peoples as "White" or “Yellow” and not as Negroes. 

 

Some years ago, this writer became acquainted with a "White" Italian man whose family name was Dallanegra/Delanegra (evidently meaning "of the Negro").  While the man had straight, black hair, there was nothing else in his appearance and complexion that would suggest a Negro ancestor.  Yet, this was undoubtedly the case--as is true with vast numbers (maybe in the billions) of other supposedly White and Yellow peoples. 

 

The gist of all this is that while Shimon was called Niger, one must be careful about immediately jumping the gun and concluding that he was a Black man.  Maybe he was, but maybe he wasn't.  However, regardless of his makeup, it would change absolutely nothing on "who" was to receive the Good News. 

 

 

The Good Samaritan 

 

For a final, questionable, New Testament incident, it will be necessary to revisit Luke and his parable of the good Samaritan (Lu 10:30-37).  The problem therein seems to materialize when one relates the good Samaritan to the Hebrew concept of “neighbour.” 

 

In the Jewish mentality of Second Temple days (as well as in more recent times), many of the Samaritans were low-life, mongrel dogs. 

 

Even The MESSIAH chose to call some of the nokri/nekar peoples of His time “dogs,” as pointed out earlier in this study (Matt 15:26-27; Mk 7:27-28).  This NT feeling had its basis in YHWH’s OT Word and could not be dismissed out of hand as being “racial prejudice,” as many modern liberals would conclude. 

 

The ELOHIM’s law, defining righteousness, carefully limits the Hebrew word “rea” (translated to English as neighbor, discussed earlier) to the fellow children of Yisrael (Lev 19:18) in the context of the Hebrew hesed, discussed earlier.  As established in a former chapter, the Hebrew rea does refer to one’s racial kinsmen.  So, how could a nokri/nekar Samaritan be a rea? 

 

 

More Than Just Flesh 

 

In Luke’s parable, it seems that YESHUA was saying that the issue of “who” was one’s neighbour (rea) should be considered as being something more than just flesh and race (as important as those ingredients were in the OT law).  Obviously, rea must also focus in on other factors in the law, like loyalty, love, outgoing care and concern, kindness and compassion, as well as on race. 

 

The problem of love, loyalty and compassion is that these qualities must be performed or accomplished in deeds and actions and not merely in hypocritical words and talk (Matt 12:47-50; Mk 3:33-35; Rom 12:9-18; Eph 4:15; Titus 2:1-12, 16; Heb 10:24; Jas 1:22-23; 3:13-18; I Pet 5:5-9; II Pet 1:5-10; I Jo 3:18-19). 

 

It’s an easy trap to fall into and suppose that Israelites are rea among themselves (racial kinsmen) and hence, that fact alone constitutes brotherly love and compassion, as is so frequently demanded in the Word.  Of course, the flesh is only a part of it.  The love and compassion in YAH’s law requires deeds and actions far beyond just the aspects of race. 

 

It seems quite evident in the parable of the good Samaritan that YESHUA was not attempting to redefine rea from Leviticus 19:18 to say something new, per se.  Maybe His whole purpose was to clarify the issue and show that even a mixed blooded Samaritan could practice love and compassion while proud, evil, fellow Israelites could pass it by and refuse to comply with YHWH’s Torah. 

 

The essence being is that while race and flesh are important in YHWH’s law and in regards to brotherly love (in the sense of loyalty), there are spiritual demands involving deeds and acts to show and prove love.  Brotherly (Scriptural) love is far more than just race and talk. 

 

Regardless of how one may attempt to interpret the parable under consideration, the truth remains that Luke wrote nothing in his presentation to suggest or imply that the Samaritans could then or ever be legitimate recipients of the Good News.  Truly, the Good News story was for the House of Yisrael and not nokri/nekar aliens. 

 

The point of the Good Samaritan parable is something brought out in the New Testament that YHWH’s Torah does contain “weightier” matters (judgment, mercy [correctly loyalty] and faith, per the KJV), as well as a number of commandments requiring certain physical actions--like paying tithes, not stealing, not murdering and keeping YAH’s Sabbaths (Mic 6:8; Matt 23:23). 

 

 

The Prophet Jonah (Yonah in the Hebrew)

 

The prophet Yonah’s story is a most fascinating work which also goes a long way in establishing that the New Testament Good News was precisely for the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael, as YESHUA stated.  At a first reading, the typical Christian glosses over Yonah without giving this amazing man much time at all. 

 

Without study and research, it is quite easy to look at Yonah and conclude that he was simply a rebellious and disobedient man who would not do as he was commanded and was thus swallowed by a fish until he chose to obey.  True, he was rebellious and disobedient.  But there is more to this man’s story than what first meets the eye. 

 

For many long years now, numerous Seventh day Sabbathkeeping groups have understood that Yonah’s story of being in the belly of the fish (whale or whatever) for three days and three nights was a type of YESHUA’s burial in the heart of the earth for precisely three days and three nights (Matt 12:38-40 and 16:4--as was elaborated upon in a preceding chapter). 

 

But the three days and three nights linkage is only the tip of a iceberg of parallelism between the life of Yonah and YESHUA The MESSIAH.  For this discussion, the work of Dr Ernest L. Martin, formerly of Portland, Oregon (in an audio cassette on “Yonah in Theology and History”), will be reviewed and commented upon. 

 

Martin pointed out the obvious, as outlined above.  But he went substantially further.  Yonah was unique in that he was a clear prophet of the Northern House of Yisrael coming from a town called Gath Hepher, just North of the present city of Nazareth and West of the Jordan River (even Eliyahu came from East of the Jordan). 

 

Yonah seems to have been an established prophet of YHWH, of some reputation, during the days of Jeroboam (Yarovam in the Hebrew), son of Nebat--evidently in the 9th century BCE (II Kg 14:25).  Martin suggested that Yonah was a prophet of The ELOHIM some 30 years before his call came to go to Nineveh and preach against its great wickedness (obviously, in hope that the people there would repent). 

 

Yonah didn’t want to go to Nineveh.  So he fled in a state of rebellion from YHWH’s presence (in the Temple at Jerusalem).  He went down to Joppa and paid a fare and boarded a ship bound for Tarshish (perhaps modern Spain, to the West of Jerusalem).  Probably, there was a colony of Israelites in Spain at this early time (which may have attracted Yonah). 

 

 

The EL Intervenes 

 

However, once at sea, The MOST HIGH caused a storm to intervene in Yonah’s flight to cause panic and trouble for the mariners on the ship.  Because Yonah had told them he was fleeing from the presence of The HIGHEST, they were aware of his status and quickly perceived that he was the reason for the trouble which they were having. 

 

Reluctantly, they came to him with the dilemma of possible ship wreck which they faced.  Yonah acknowledged that he was the problem and told them to toss himself over board for their sakes.  The mariners prayed about it and looked long and hard for a way around Yonah’s solution.  Finally, they gave in and tossed him overboard. 

 

With Yonah gone, the sea returned to a normal state and the panic was all over for the people on the ship.  However, it was not over for Yonah.  He was swallowed by a great fish (or whatever) where he evidently died for three days and three nights, as the fish traveled to the land of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and as Martin suggests. 

 

Once in the land of the Assyrians (of Nineveh), Yonah was resurrected to life and he prayed about his situation.  Thereupon, he was vomited upon dry land by the fish.  Again, the Word of YHWH came to him to go to Nineveh and preach to the Assyrians.  Finally, he complied with the commission and went to Nineveh. 

 

Yonah reluctantly went and did as he was told, although the whole exercise displeased him much.  So the Assyrians heard Yonah’s words and responded. 

 

Both the Assyrian Adamites and the beasts of the field (the Hebrew behemah, to be discussed in a later chapter) present with them put on sackcloth, fasted, repented (both bore moral responsibility for sin) and prayed mightily (surely, by speaking audibly/vocally with their vocal cords) to YHWH for forgiveness (Yonah 3:5-8).  Of course, this angered and upset Yonah. 

 

The ELOHIM prepared a gourd to shade him from the sun and the next day caused a worm to smote the gourd (this event proves that The MOST HIGH can raise up and use worms, as well as stones, to do His will if He chooses--Jonah 4:7; Matt 3:9; 4:3).  Yonah was so upset that he wished he could die.  This is the essence of the story, as one first reads it.  But there is more to it. 

 

 

The Background on Yonah 

 

Martin’s audio cassette, as cited above, pointed out the background which really precipitated the event.  Assyria was an up and rising empire to the East of the House of Yisrael.  The SUPREME had already designated the Assyrians to become His instruments to chastise and punish the evil, sinning House of Yisrael.  That was their destiny.  The prophets had proclaimed it and Yonah knew and understood it. 

 

Of course, the wicked Israelites’ hearts were hard and the people would not repent and change.  So destruction was on their horizon (just as it is today for the high flying United States and British empire).  Yonah knew and understood these realities. 

 

However, The ELOHIM’s appointed agents of punishment and chastisement (the Assyrians) were evil and wicked as well in their own right.  In their state of iniquity, it was questionable whether The SOVEREIGN would go ahead and use them as His agents for Yisrael’s punishment. 

 

But what if the Assyrians were to repent?  Then YHWH would proceed to use them.  Yonah knew all of this and he obviously believed that indeed they would repent. 

 

Consequently, if and when the true prophet Yonah went to Nineveh and preached and the people there repented, trouble would come on the House of Yisrael--including Yonah’s people, family, relatives, friends, associates and so forth. 

 

Yonah knew that the Assyrians would repent and become the very commissioned persons to come down and destroy the House of Yisrael. 

 

 

The Bottom Line on Yonah 

 

Yonah also was well acquainted with YHWH.  He knew that as YAH’s prophet, The ELOHIM demanded obedience.  He knew that if he refused to go to Nineveh, he would surely be killed by YAH.  He loved his people of Yisrael and didn’t want them enslaved by the Assyrians. 

 

Hence, Yonah refused to go; fully realizing that his rebellion would cost him his own life.  In short, he loved his people of the House of Yisrael so much that he was willing to face his own death and give up his own life to delay or stop their punishment. 

 

Of course, that’s what YESHUA came and did in the New Testament.  The MESSIAH died for His people, just as Yonah was willing to die for his people.  The people involved in both cases were the same--the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael.  Oh how unsearchable are the ways of The MOST HIGH. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 54--The Scriptures are for Yisrael

 

 

Yes, The Scriptures Are For Yisrael 

 

While the focus so far has been primarily on the New Testament aspects of the question of the Good News, there is also an abundance of other Old Testament writings which make it plain beyond a doubt that the Good News could only be for Yisrael. 

 

Regarding this reality, it is useful to understand that "all" of the Scriptures were written by Israelites, essentially about Yisrael and Israelites (either directly or indirectly), and clearly for Israelites (at least, in terms of the worldly environment for the past 3,500 years or so). 

 

 

An Ancient Jewish Legend 

 

The previously cited “Book of Legends, from the Talmud and Midrash” (p. 106, item 1), records a very ancient Jewish legend that is far reaching in the vein of the present discussion.  In interpreting Habakkuk 3:6, on measuring the earth, R. Shimon Ben Yohai said that “the Holy One took the measure of all peoples and found no people other than Yisrael worthy of receiving the Torah. 

 

“The Holy One took the measure of all generations and found no generation other than the generation of the wilderness worthy of receiving the Torah.  The Holy One took the measure of all mountains and found no mountain other than Sinai worthy of having the Torah given on it. 

 

“The Holy One took the measure of all cities and found no city other than Jerusalem worthy of having the Temple built within it.  The Holy One took the measure of all lands and found no land other than the Land of Israel worthy of being given to Israel.”  This is a far reaching belief which has enormous implications both for Israelites and the peoples of the world. 

 

 

Noah and Shem 

 

To look further at this profound linkage between YHWH and Yisrael, one needs only to check a few more extraordinary Scriptures. 

 

Immediately, after the flood, there was an incident involving Ham and his father, Noah.  One of the fallouts of this event was that Noah uttered some far reaching words of prophecy for his sons and grandson, Canaan, which would most certainly apply to their descendants for the next 4,500 years or so. 

 

On this, Noah said:  "Blessed be (YHWH The ELOHIM) of Shem and blessed by (YHWH My ELOHIM) be Shem!  Let Canaan be his servant.  May (The ELOHIM) enlarge Japheth, and let Him (The ELOHIM) dwell in the tents of Shem" (Gen 9:26-27, per the “Amplified Bible”). 

 

For years, this writer has read that text from Genesis on the premise that the phrase "let Him dwell in the tents of Shem" pertained to Japheth dwelling in the tents (houses, households and buildings) of Shem.  But that's not the issue here, contrary to my wrong thinking. 

 

In an audio tape on Japheth, Dr Ernest Martin, formerly of Portland, Oregon, noted that the "Him" there has to apply to The ELOHIM since Japheth was to be enlarged while Shem was to be the smaller.  Clearly, the larger one could not dwell in the tents of the smaller one.  To this suggestion, this writer would certainly agree and now can even see it in the parallelism of the text that the "Him" has to be The ELOHIM. 

 

Thus, what this reference is saying is that The MOST HIGH will dwell in the houses, households and buildings of Shem.  What a fantastic prophecy.  Can anyone dare come forward and say that all of a sudden, The ELOHIM will now dwell in the houses of Japheth, or of Ham or of Canaan? 

 

Anyway one may try to cut it, The MOST HIGH will be found to be dwelling, at least in the general and collective sense, in the houses and tents of Shem and not the others.  Of course, Christianity, with their concepts of humanism and the brotherhood of all humans/humanoids, can never begin to grasp what all is involved in this marvelous prophecy affecting the Adam kind for thousands of years. 

 

Proceeding on, in the line of Shem, the reader comes to the time that a boy is born and given the name of Eber (Gen 10:24-25; 11:14-17).  And was this person ever significant in terms of world history?  We had better believe it because most scholars and students of the Scriptures generally believe that the progenitor of the Hebrew people and language was this man Eber. 

 

If Eber was not the direct father of the Hebrew tongue (on the premise that Hebrew was probably the original and first language of Adam given by YHWH).  It seems evident that the existing tongue was identified with and called Hebrew, surely by Eber’s time.  Of course, it was and is through the Hebrew language that The HIGHEST has chosen to communicate with Yisrael. 

 

 

Avraham and Yisrael 

 

Continuing on, one comes to a descendant of Shem and Eber named Avram (later Avraham). 

 

The EVERLIVING chose this man and established His Covenant with him and his descendants (Gen 17:1-10; Rom 4:4-13).  In fact, The SUPREME ONE even thought so much of this man that He elected to give him the special appellative "My friend," which goes a long way in describing YHWH's feelings about Avraham (Isa 41:8; Jas 2:23). 

 

Of course, The MOST HIGH's Covenant wasn't to be with all of Avraham's seed line, as Shaul later observed (Rom 9:7-13).  But rather, it was established with Yitzhak (or his seed was reckoned or called in Yitzhak--Gen 21:12; 26:3, 28) and Yakov Yisrael, as elaborated upon heretofore (Gen 27:28-29; Lev 26:42-46; Deut 31:9-12, 26). 

 

So Ishmael, Esau and the sons of Keturah are not the called or reckoned seedline of Avraham, as one may suppose at first. 

 

 

Precisely--Yisrael Is the Object of the Book 

 

Consequently, the Torah defining and establishing sin and righteousness was given exclusively to Yisrael (Deut 8:3; 33:4; Josh 1:8; Mal 4:4; Acts 7:53; Rom 9:4); and importantly, this Torah was to be read publicly and periodically to only Yisrael (Deut 31:10-13).  Yes, as outlined earlier in this chapter, an ancient Jewish legend powerfully confirms the wisdom of YHWH in making this selection. 

 

Also, as previously described and commented upon, The ELOHIM's Word was committed to Yisrael, in the form of the Jews, for transmission and preservation (Rom 3:2); YHWH's portion is His people Yisrael (Deut 31:9-14); Yakov is the lot of YHWH's inheritance (Deut 32:9); and salvation is for Yisrael (Deut 33:26-29; Heb 2:16). 

 

Additionally, Yechezkel was sent "only" to the House of Yisrael (Ezek 3:5), YHWH has known Yisrael "only" of all of the families of the earth (Amos 3:1-2), and YAH chose Yisrael out of all of the peoples on the face of the earth to be His Own personal possession (Deut 7:6-9). 

 

Of fantastic importance, The HIGHEST YHWH “created” Yisrael, “made” Yisrael, “formed” Yisrael, “established” Yisrael, “named” Yisrael, “called” Yisrael, “redeemed” Yisrael and “chose” Yisrael (Isa 41:8-14; 43:1-21; 44:1-28; 45:1-25). 

 

While Christendom has never been able to grasp reality, the truth remains that The ELOHIM has chosen Yisrael for salvation (Isa 41:14; 43:1, 3, 25; 44:6, 22-24; 45:17); Yisrael for justification (Isa 45:25); Yisrael for glory (Isa 45:25); and Yisrael for His witnesses (Isa 43:10; 44:8)--in contrast to the false, pagan Christian Church, as so much of the world has erroneously supposed these past 1,900 plus years. 

 

In view of these findings by the prophet Yeshayahu, one would have to wonder how in the world is it possible that “non-Israelites” can ever justify their so-called attempts to “witness” for Gee-Zeus?  Why can’t people read the words of Yeshayahu and quickly conclude that The MOST HIGH’s witnesses must be Israelites?  There is no way that non-Israelite Christians can ever qualify as witnesses for The SOVEREIGN. 

 

 

More 

 

Moreover, YHWH saw fit to give His people Yisrael a most revealing identification when he chose to call them "My servants" in His Torah (Lev 25:55).  On this, Nehemiah even went a step further in his prayer to The HIGHEST when he referred to the Israelites in Judaea as "Your servants and Your people" (Neh 1:6, 10). 

 

Furthermore, during the time of Moshe, The MOST HIGH told Yisrael that He had chosen them to be a special people (Deut 7:6-26).  The prophet Yeshayahu offered a restatement of this idea when he wrote that The EVERLASTING ONE declared to Yisrael "My servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen" (Isa 41:8-9; 42:1; 43:10; 44:1-2, 21). 

 

What wonderful words for Yisrael!  And words, by the way, which apply to Yisrael and to Yisrael only.  If these remarks so far are not enough to blow one's mind, in terms of the connection between The ELOHIM and Yisrael, there is more to come. 

 

Another poignant message, among many similar ones, surfaced in the beautiful Psalm 46 where the writer there focused attention on the fantastic connections which YHWH has with His people Yisrael.  Please observe therein that the Psalmist often uses the personal pronouns "we, us and our" and all in the vein of being Israelites who will be protected, delivered and saved by The ELOHIM (Ps 46:1, 7, 11). 

 

 

Psalm 147:19-20 

 

For something really powerful, there is a need to look at one more marvelous text of truth when the Psalmist wrote that YHWH "declares His Word to Jacob, His statutes and His ordinances to Yisrael.  He has not dealt so with any (other) nation; they have not known (understood, appreciated, given heed to and cherished) His ordinances" (Ps 147:19-20, per the “Amplified Bible”). 

 

What a fantastic statement of truth to state unequivocally that no one but Yisrael can appreciate, understand and give heed to YHWH's wonderful mitzwot in the past and present which define and establish righteousness and sin (right and wrong).  Incidentally, this very Scripture might well provide a clue or indication on exactly "who" the racial House of Yisrael has been in the world for the last 2,000 years or so. 

 

From this message, is it not possible to ascertain and identify the peoples on planet earth who have had the Word of YHWH in their possessions, homes and households and who do have some appreciation, reverence and respect for it? 

 

Surely, by combining Psalms 147:19-20 with the earlier citation from Genesis 9:26-27 (on YHWH's dwelling in Shem's tents), and the reality of who has accepted the Good News, an open minded, informed observer can put two and two together and recognize a gigantic clue or indication about "who" nationally has been members of the "lost" House of Yisrael for the last several centuries. 

 

And if we tie in Obadiah's (Ovadyah in the Hebrew) prophecy about the Edomites (to be described later), having their nests of power and influence over the tribes of Yisrael (Oba 1:4), then the national identification(s) of the "lost" House of Yisrael becomes even more evident.  It is so pervasive that surely thinking and informed observers just about cannot miss the truth, unless they close their eyes and ears. 

 

Assuredly, the primary purpose of this study so far is not to discuss the modern national identification(s) of the House of Yisrael, per se, since this subject is so profound on its own right and merit.  However, besides the Scriptures cited so far, which are most convincing, there are a whole host of other texts and prophecies which, when combined, leave little room or doubt over "who" nationally is the House of Yisrael. 

 

Of course, on this issue of national identities, some persons are extremely gullible and do bury their heads in the sand so that reality can't break through to stimulate their blank, dark minds and mental faculties.  Seemingly, such persons like the status quo, and they don't want anything to change in their lives. 

 

Now, how is it that Christendom would dare come along and try to deny these words of the Psalmist (Ps 147:19-20), and try to claim that YHWH's laws can be appreciated and understood by nokri/nekar aliens, behemah, the lines of Japheth, Ishmael, Esau, Ham, Cain, Canaan and so forth. 

 

 

The Christian Dilemma 

 

This religious link to race (and calling for the election) is a most profound point (as will be established in comments to follow).  Inevitably, Christians want to insist that anyone and everyone can come to their sweet Gee-Zeus.  But that’s not the real world of the Scriptures. 

 

The only people who will ultimately come to The True Jewish MESSIAH will be those persons whom He chooses and allows (this course of reality will be addressed in subsequent chapters herein which focus upon the election process and people). 

 

While it may be hard for mesmerized and confused Christians to understand, but The ELOHIM has made the choice and decision of His election based precisely upon race.  This choice depends entirely upon His position, will and decision; and not upon our position, will and decision (as will be demonstrated in the later chapters). 

 

If it was our choice, will and decision, then maybe anyone and everyone could stand up and make the decision (as Billy Graham and some others teach).  But that’s not the way it has been designed.  Because of this reality, the choice of The MOST HIGH is predicated in the NT entirely upon the question of physical race and seedline. 

 

As was described in some detail in preceding comments, Ishmael and Esau and their physical seedlines have been rejected by The MOST HIGH (at least, in this age and calling).  Instead of choosing either or both of them and their fleshly descendants in the NT election, they were categorically rejected (Rom 9:3-21; Gal 3:29; 4:23-31). 

 

Alternatively, based upon His Sovereignty, The EVERLIVING ONE chose Yakov-Yisrael and his physical descendants to be the first group of persons chosen for the promises and redemption.  And as demonstrated in the above comments, it is only people in this first category of election, calling and redemption who can even understand, comprehend and correctly obey the Scriptures. 

 

To other peoples, the Book is largely a closed book--perhaps not closed in terms of all duties (since everyone can obey the cited mitzwot in the Torah, like the Ten Commandments).  But it is closed in the sense of responding to YHWH’s calling and being able to understand the big picture of where Adam man is and what the future holds in the way of redemption. 

 

Yet, Christians persist in believing and teaching that anyone can stand up and choose salvation by some act or action (as predicated by the different Christian Churches for supposed salvation).  As will be commented upon in later chapters, this type of salvation is a salvation dispensed by the different denominations of the generic Christian Church.  It is not from The HIGHEST. 

 

The essence here is that YHWH’s election, calling and promises are being dispensed in this age, by Him, based upon His choice and will.  In His calling, there is a legitimate racial component--whether we like it or not.  Since most modern Adamites have been taught the brotherhood of man theology, they have a hard time in understanding that YHWH is operating upon the basis of a racial calling and choice. 

 

 

An Illustration 

 

Some 25 years ago, this writer was heavily involved with the Bible Sabbath Association and the promotion of the Seventh day Sabbath in a non-denominational viewpoint.  In that sense, much contact and many acquaintances were made with various Sabbathkeeping peoples and groups. 

 

One interesting Seventh day Sabbathkeeping preacher was a Black man in Nashville, Tennessee who had an independent Black Christian Church that kept the Seventh day Sabbath.  This group had several points of theology in common with the traditional, old-time, Sardis Church of God--Seventh Day (which had moved earlier from Stanberry, MO to the Denver, CO area). 

 

While the Negro Church in Tennessee had some things in common with Sardis, there were some disagreements.  Probably, the Sardis people were a little more obedient on the Torah than the Blacks.  But there weren’t many major differences between them.  In those days, Sardis was against eating pork and unclean foods which the Black group may not have been in strong agreement with, per its basic doctrine. 

 

In a discussion this writer had with the Black preacher one day, the supreme authority of the Torah was mentioned to him.  Instead of being pleased with a dialogue on the Tanakh, he was uninterested and rejected any idea of the OT having any relevance for us today. 

 

 

The Man’s Excuse 

 

This Black man was much like the previously discussed Marcion and his rejection of the OT and the OT MOST HIGH.  In trying to pin the Negro down on the “why” for his rejection (and thus, the why for his acceptance of Gnostic ideas), he said that he rejected the OT because of its comments about slavery. 

 

It is true that the Tanakh legislates questions of slavery for the people of Yisrael.  But it does so in a humane way and appears to largely provide for freedom for most or all slaves.  Certainly, the Hebrew slave was supposed to be freed in his seventh year.  Seemingly, there also was a type of release for certain others in the Jubilee year. 

 

In any case, the point was not belabored with the Colored preacher.  With his attitude and rejection of the OT, it was sort of a mystery to me that he would be willing to supposedly teach and keep the Seventh day Sabbath.  But he did. 

 

Otherwise, he was a typical Sunday morning Christian preacher who never understood that the NT was an extension and continuation of the theology of the OT.  Without the OT, the NT had absolutely no meaning at all. 

 

Like Christians, in general, this African preacher had supposedly found some humanism and theories about the brotherhood of man which he liked in the NT.  He tenaciously hung onto this thinking--never understanding that his ideas were totally inconsistent with truth and reality (humanism and the brotherhood of man will be assessed in later chapters.  Suffice to say, they are unscriptural beliefs). 

 

In thinking about this present topic, this writer has recalled this conversation with this Negro preacher and his rejection of the Tanakh (and perhaps even with some outright hostility and hate).  Again, it was a genuine mystery to me in those days how this man could apparently accept the Seventh day Sabbath--and yet, reject the Tanakh. 

 

By linking his situation with the outline in this chapter, it is easy to understand why this Christian man could not comprehend and grasp the reality of the Tanakh and what it actually said. 

 

The matter of race will be broached in the succeeding chapters.  Even the question of racial identity for the lost tribes of Yisrael will also be addressed in later chapters.  Suffice to say here, one can look at all of the races and ethnic groups in the world and find that there is only one people (Yisrael) alive and on earth today who are genetically capable of making advances into Scriptural truth. 

 

This may seem like a tough conclusion.  But it appears to be reality to this writer.  There is a definite linkage between genetics and religion (this fact will be pressed in the succeeding chapters which address race).  The ability to read and understand the Word seems to have a racial connotation (as hard as this is to grasp by modern, humanistic Christians). 

 

 

Another Case 

 

Subsequent chapters hereafter will address the Pentecostal-Charismatic movement.  There is no intent to try to assess that motion here.  But something happened one day in a conversation this writer had with some supposedly dedicated, White, Charismatic, Christian neighbors (a man and wife couple) which needs mention. 

 

In this conversation, the subject of race and calling was briefly brought up.  The Charismatic man said little about the subject.  But the woman lashed out to me about knowing one or more very “righteous and good” (the essence of her words) Black people--apparently fellow Charismatics, in some Christian Church which they attended in the Southern California area. 

 

In this woman’s view, these Black persons (whom she knew) were saved, just like she was saved.  Their religious practices (whatever they were) were evaluated by this woman in the context of her own religious views and standards about righteousness and good.  Since she thought that she was righteous and good, she believed that she saw similar manifestations in the other Charismatics in her brotherhood. 

 

Thus, this woman’s viewpoint was not based upon what is righteous and good, per the Book (which by the way are YHWH’s mitzwot in the Torah); but rather, upon what this Charismatic Church and her own experience defined as righteous and good (despite the fact that she was uncovered in my presence, very proud and vain in attitude and had a traditional, Sunday-keeping, Pentecostal, Christian perspective on truth). 

 

In effect, she simply didn’t know what righteousness is.  Consequently, she made a decision about righteousness and good in other people based upon her own limited, personal level of knowledge and comprehension.  Manifestly, if she truly was informed on truth, the argument can be made that her judgment and decision would be good. 

 

However, as she was sadly lacking in knowledge, understanding and obedience, it was patently clear that her judgment about righteousness, truth and good was seriously impaired.  In other words, she simply didn’t know what she was talking about.  Yet, she proudly was spouting off her mouth as if she did know and did understand the truth of her remarks. 

 

This is one of the great tragedies in trying to have dialogue with uninformed and very prejudiced Christians.  They will inevitably start shooting their mouths off about things which they simply know little or nothing about.  But they go on and brag, boast and talk as if they are experts and authorities. 

 

Tragically many of their listeners know as little or nothing from the Word and cannot challenge the surfacing nonsense which adds to the confusion.  Further problems ensue because too often anyone disagreeing with such blow-hards will only create strife and hard feelings.  Such people are simply uninterested in truth and cannot be told truth (of the Scriptures) in any form.  Their minds are already made up. 

 

 

A Clarification 

 

In mentioning the above remarks about Negroes, this writer is not judging or denigrating anyone or any race.  But by the authority of the Scriptures, it is abundantly certain that the elect race and group of people in the Book and to our time are categorically the people of Yisrael--whomever they are. 

 

If Black people are the people of Yisrael or are a part of the people of Yisrael, then they are of this chosen election.  If the Jews are Yisrael or are a part of Yisrael, then they too are in this elect grouping.  The same conclusion can be said for Anglo-Saxons, Italians, Greeks, Germans, Chinese and you name it.  Whomsoever Yisrael is--out there in the world--is YHWH’s election. 

 

But conversely, the people whomsoever who are not of Yisrael (who ever they are) are in a difficult position in trying to comprehend, understand and appreciate the truth of the Scriptures.  This is not the conclusion of this writer.  But rather, it is the indisputable reality of the Word. 

 

 

Yes, YHWH Decided Upon A Race 

 

Later chapters will address the Ishmaelites and the Edomites in more detail (as descending from Ishmael and Esau).  Like the Israelites, these people are manifestly present in the world today. 

 

Of course, the Ishmaelites are essentially Arab Muslims (which are present in twelve great nations or groupings of people--Gen 17:20).  Arabs fully understand their identity from Ishmael.  They will not argue otherwise with ignorant and uninformed Christians. 

 

However, the Edomites are somewhat diffused with many of them being non-Arab Muslims (i.e. like the Turks, Kurds, and the surviving states of the old Turkestan empire, etc) while others are Catholic Christians, Reform Jews, atheists or Satanists.  Some few are even Protestants, Eastern Orthodox or Buddhists. 

 

As pointed out earlier, can these people receive the promises and redemption in this age per the NT?  No, of course not (Rom 9:3-21; Gal 3:29; 4:23-31).  Can some of these individuals be good people by “human standards” of what is good?  Probably, the answer here is yes.  Misinformed humans might think that they are good.  But are they good per the Torah? 

 

This same reasoning must be applied to all peoples of all races, kinds, varieties and ethnic origins.  As hard as it is to grasp, the truth is that genetics have a powerful role to play in YHWH’s choice and will of the election for redemption in this current age.  This is not the idea of this writer.  It is the positive words of the NT. 

 

 

The Religion--Race Link 

 

In a possibly fantastic revelation of some truth, Earl F. Jones wrote about “DNA race memory” sometime ago in the Sep-Oct 1997 “Intelligence Newsletter” (p. 2).  Jones said that this DNA race memory is what causes some people to have a natural propensity for certain beliefs while others have other propensities.  Certain people seem to just know or be able to understand certain things while others do not. 

 

This condition brought out by Jones gains some credence when one looks at identical twins who had been separated at birth (to be raised by different families and under different socio-economic environments).  Several perceptive works have been produced to assess this situation.  But for now, Professor J. Philippe Rushton’s book “Race, Evolution, and Behavior” of 1995 will be cited. 

 

First, Rushton (ibid, p. xiv) confesses that he did not always believe in racial differences in society.  He said that for years he would have said that any differences in people was due to environmental considerations, but that data and findings from various sources had persuaded him to alter his belief to accept that races do differ because of genetics. 

 

In this context of racial differences due to ancestry, he offered whole chapters on different aspects of people which could be measured and evaluated.  In one instance, he focused on attitudes and used data on the study of twins raised separately.  He reported a definite positive correlation in religious attitudes, interests and values from two different studies on twins (ibid, p. 50). 

 

 

Neurotheology 

 

All of a sudden, in the very late 20th century, a new so-called scientific discipline has surfaced called neurotheology, which is reportedly the study of the neurobiology of religion and spirituality, per an article by Sharon Begley on “Religion and the Brain,” in the May 7, 2001, “Newsweek” magazine (p. 52-55). 

 

The essence of this effort is an attempt to ascertain which portions of the brain reacts and how it reacts during certain mystical/spiritual experiences and religious practices. 

 

Or put another way, Begley said that the present neurological research is an effort to determine what happens in our brains when we sense that we have encountered a reality different from--and in some critical sense and aspect, higher than the reality of everyday experience. 

 

Since Sharon Begley and many of her colleagues and sources on this theme appear to be evolutionary atheists or agnostics, the research is being pointed in the direction that the question of religious or spiritual experiences involve something happening in the human brain as a part of the normal and historical evolutionary development of man. 

 

Sharon focused this issue in the vein of a declaration that “one mystery that is unlikely to be resolved is whether our brain wiring creates the idea of God, or whether God created our brain wiring.”  Obviously, most evolutionists prefer the former thinking while some truly religious people would choose the latter. 

 

 

Matthew Alper 

 

A writer named Matthew Alper (or Halper) of Brooklyn, New York is another person who has been looking at this theme in recent years.  He was on the Art Bell Coast to Coast program on May 14, 2001, to discuss his study of this new research. 

 

Per Alper, the human being has a biological and emotional need for some forms of security, protection, contentment and satisfaction--which, per the evolutionary process, has come to be manifested in certain portions or functionings of the human brain in the vein of religious practices and/or spiritual experiences.  In other words, man finds a certain mental crutch in religion and/or spiritual experiences. 

 

 

A Distinction 

 

Although Begley did not really clarify the distinction between religion and religious practices from spirituality, Alper did in his discussion.  In the case of religion, humans/humanoids can find security and satisfaction in participating in some religious group or definition.  These entities have or involve certain religious rituals and rites which members participate in. 

 

But much of this sense of religion is very physical and mechanical and does not involve spirituality or mystical experiences.  Probably, the aspects of emotionalism or heartfelt reactions fit more into the definition of spirituality.  In other words, spirituality can involve feelings, joy, happiness, etc, more so than the outright practice of religious rituals or rites (as is commonly done in many Christian Churches). 

 

Per Matthew Alper, there is a section in one of the frontal parts or lobes of the brain which seems to generate activity in respect to religious practices (the matter of going to worship services and participating in denominational rituals).  Otherwise, Alper seems to suggest that mystical or spiritual experiences can surface in or produce activity in certain different sections of the brain. 

 

 

Kenneth L. Woodward 

 

The above cited May 7, 2001, “Newsweek” (p. 58) also had an article by Kenneth L. Woodward on “Faith is More Than a Feeling,” which likewise broached this theme.  Woodward brought out a most critical issue in trying to sort out an understanding of the role of religious practices and spirituality in human brains and lives. 

 

Woodward correctly notes that within the Catholic Church, so-called “sainthood” is predicated upon works of charity and not mystical experiences.  He also notes that Buddhist bodhisattvas are identified by their compassion and not by their spiritual athleticism.  And these remarks by Woodward perhaps focus upon the real issue involved in religion and spirituality. 

 

It appears that man (perhaps all men of all races and kinds) have some capacity for religion and religious practices (like joining a Christian Church and mechanically participating in the worship services on a ritual or rite level).  Many men (possibly of different races and kinds) also have a capacity to have mystical experiences which seem to transfer them mentally into another world and situation. 

 

In the case of these mystical or spiritual experiences, one must always stop and ponder whether they are really from The MOST HIGH, or alternatively, from demonic powers.  The world of demons has been previously broached and will be more fully addressed in later chapters.  Suffice to say, neither religion or spirituality spell out a true contact or relationship between a person and YHWH. 

 

So, what indicator does suggest a true relationship?  The answer is deeds, actions and fruits in one’s life.  Based upon Earl Jones’ comments, as discussed above, it is probable that indeed one’s life and deeds can be measured to some “possible” extent by the question of race and racial calling.  This option will be covered in later chapters on election. 

 

 

Psalms 106:34-41 

 

Although the subject of race (as outlined above) will be further assessed in some detail in subsequent chapters, there is a need to also look at it presently in the context of Psalms 106:34-41, which notes that the Israelites failed to destroy the inhabitants of Canaan (yes--men, women and children) upon their entrance into the promised land, as they had been commanded to do so by YHWH. 

 

As the Psalmist suggests (Ps 106:35), this failure to destroy the peoples in Canaan led to a situation whereby the Israelites mingled (Hebrew Arab) themselves with these alien peoples; just as the Jews did again upon returning from the Babylonian exile (Ezra 9:2) in their miscegenation with the nokri/nekar peoples, to be later described, and as the Adamic kind would also do over time (Jer 31:27; Dan 2:43). 

 

This mingling (racial integration, mixing and miscegenation) with these peoples of Canaan brought about a condition whereby the Israelites learned and adopted the ways of the heathen peoples of Canaan (Ps 106:35).  Yes, the bad rubbed off on them.  So they became defiled with these works and YHWH was angered (Ps 106:39-40). 

 

Later chapters will assess the whole question of racial miscegenation in the context of Yisrael.  Suffice to say, the Psalmist well demonstrated the problem or outcome of racial integration and amalgamation.  The set-apart kodesh people of Yisrael actually learned and will learn the ways of the heathen, as they mix and mingle with them. 

 

 

Dogs, Revisited 

 

In an earlier presentation on YESHUA’s commission of taking the Good News to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael, mention was made to the Syro-Phoenician woman whose young daughter had a bad spirit (Matt 15: 22-28; Mk 7: 25-30).  The MESSIAH effectively addressed her as a “dog.” 

 

In the Revelation, Yohanan also called certain persons dogs and put them in the class of bad sinners (Rev 22:14-15).  In the Tanakh, certain peoples likewise were called dogs by David and Yeshayahu (Ps 22:16, 20; 59:6; Isa 56:10-11).  Though this dog term could have a broad reference, it certainly, as a minimum, includes the Edomite Syro-Phoenicians, as per YESHUA’s remark to the woman (Matt 15: 22-28; Mk 7: 25-30).

 

A review of all of these references suggests that the humans/humanoids involved were at least a mixed race people (to be discussed in a later chapter)--mamzer and nokri/nekar peoples, although Yeshayahu’s use is not clear on this question.

 

On this theme, it is interesting that modern Americans call mixed blooded dogs--mongrels, while Second Temple Jews called certain mixed blooded people--dogs.  Is there a connection? 

 

The situation with the woman’s race clearly is stated as Syro-Phoenician (thus, an Edomite, per Josephus).  Therefore, it is not difficult to determine her precise racial situation as a nokri/nekar mixed person which prompted the dog description.  For ages, Jews have routinely referred to various non-Jews as dogs or cattle.  Later chapters herein will assess this question more extensively. 

 

 

Matthew 7:6 

 

But otherwise, there is another most fascinating little remark made by YESHUA about dogs in His famous Sermon on the Mount.  At that time, He instructed His followers to “not” give that which is the Hebrew kodesh (separated and set apart, but translated as holy) to the dogs or cast one’s pearls before swine, lest they trample upon them and turn to attack you (Matt 7:6). 

 

Trying to interpret these things that are kodesh and/or pearls is not as simple as one might first suppose.  Kodesh, of course, is regularly linked to The HIGHEST and those people and things that are associated with Him or belong to Him.  For pearls, “Wilson’s Dictionary of Bible Types” (p. 346) believes that they are “the precious truths of God and the beautiful revelations of His Word.” 

 

“The Expositor’s Greek Testament” (v. I, p. 129) interprets Matthew 7:6 by saying that there “are things which are sacred and precious for a man or woman, and which natural feeling teaches us to be careful not to waste or expose to desecration.”  Evidently, this source does not differentiate between the pearls or kodesh things. 

 

The other Scriptural uses of dogs communicate that they are certain mixed-race, nokri peoples so often found in association with Yisrael, both ancient and modern.  As demonstrated in previous comments herein, the case can be made that the word dog applies specifically to the generic Edomite descendants of Esau. 

 

Swine (Hebrew “khazir”) is a little more complicated, but Psalms 80:13 suggests that they were symbolically the enemies of Yisrael (this is one of the most important characteristics of swine).  Significantly, swine also seem to connect to certain, more specific, Edomite children of Esau (who will be revealed in a later presentation). 

 

Suffice to say, the dogs seem to refer to Edomites in general while swine is more specific with a particular class of Edomites.  This whole theme of Scriptural dogs and pigs will be discussed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein. 

 

 

The Dead Sea Scrolls Connection 

 

The Dead Sea Scrolls seem to have had a similar focus.  One Qumran document noted that one should not reprove or argue with the Men of the Pit (demon guided people?) about proper Scriptural understanding. 

 

On the contrary, one should conceal his own insight into the Torah when among perverse men and save true knowledge and righteous judgment for those choosing the way--obviously the election (“The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation,” p. 406). 

 

The point of this marvelous text written by Mattityahu (Matt 7:6), as just cited above, seems to do several things.  First, it further confirms that the Good News message was only for the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael as the NT so firmly establishes.  Also, it appears to suggest that all of the Scriptures (both OT and NT) are essentially only for Yisrael and not for other peoples. 

 

And last, this message seems to raise questions about sending out missionaries and witnesses, especially to the nokri/nekar peoples or even the behemah and chaiyah humanoids (Hebrew identifications) as Christian Churches delight in doing (to be described in later chapters). 

 

Maybe, the kodesh pearls of truth are not to be presented to these persons.  Maybe, they are only for Israelites who can understand and appreciate them. 

 

 

Zechariah 9:1 

 

The prophet Zekharyah was a House of Yehudah prophet who came upon the scene after the exile and the Jewish return from Babylon.  Along with Haggai, his mission included a call to the people to resume the building of the Temple.  His work was furthermore significant because much of it was prophetic in terms of the age end (this will be considered in future chapters in this work). 

 

But for the present, it is useful to note an amazing statement made by Zekharyah in this post exile environment in Palestine.  It occurs at Zechariah 9:1 where the prophet began a series of judgments on certain contemporary nations and peoples. 

 

However, his initial statement of The ELOHIM’s Word made mention effectively of the fact that YHWH’s eyes are upon both Adam (translated as man in the KJV) and all the tribes of Yisrael. 

 

The point being of this message was that though Yehudah had returned to Palestine and though the ten tribes of Yisrael were still out in the Diaspora (somewhere), YAH still had (has) His eyes on them, as well as Adam in the collective sense. 

 

 

The Scriptures Are For Yisrael 

 

With the correct understanding that the Scriptures are effectively to and for Yisrael, it is possible to arrive at some conclusions on the previous discussions herein on the great commission to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael (Matt 10:5). 

 

Since the Scriptures have been written to and for Yisrael and since the words goy-goyim-ethnos-ethne-ethnon-ethnesi-gentiles and so forth can mean nations and peoples in the generic sense (to include the lost sheep or tribes of the House of Yisrael in the Diaspora), it is manifestly clear that the typical and predominant NT uses of the Greek ethnos-ethne-ethnon-ethnesi must refer to the lost tribes and sheep of Yisrael, unless the context demands another interpretation. 

 

Yisrael is the subject of the Scriptures and it is mandatory that a proper interpretation be focused upon this reality, unless there are clear reasons to depart into a different mode.  Assuredly, the Greek ethnos-ethne-ethnon-ethnesi must be usually interpreted as the lost sheep or tribes of Yisrael. 

 

 

Some Final Words 

 

Finally, the reality that the collective Scriptures are essentially a presentation by Israelites, to Israelites, about Israelites and for Israelites has caused a lot of soul searching and burning of midnight oil within Christendom over the years. 

 

Now, a paradox arises because Christendom has wanted to believe that the Scriptures are to, about and for Christians.  After all, it really takes such a theory to justify raising vast amounts of money to support a massive evangelical outreach to all the humans/humanoids in the world. 

 

Incidentally, this global outreach concept is correctly predicated upon a theory called the brotherhood of man--which by the way is not a Scriptural idea at all, as will be proven later herein.  Manifestly, global evangelism to all humans/humanoids can’t be justified from YESHUA’s commission in the NT. 

 

 

Christian Ideas

 

In any case, this Christian wish on Yisrael has been impossible to defend from the literal Word.  Therefore, Christianity invented a theory years ago called Replacement or Displacement theology which exists on the premise that Christianity replaced or displaced (whichever way the various savants wish to describe it) Yisrael in the Word. 

 

Hence, whenever a reader reads about prophetic Yisrael and often generic Yisrael in the Scriptures, he or she is supposed to understand that the reference is to Christendom and not literal, physical Yisrael. 

 

This Christian thinking of reading one thing, but understanding something entirely different, was all well and good when reading about the abundant life, blessings, riches, good, benefits, promises, rewards, heaven, afterlife, future, glory, etc which were all supposed to be for Christians.  But then, another paradox arose because there are a host of Scriptures which outline something entirely different. 

 

Yes, there are numerous texts which describe the evils, sins and wickedness of Yisrael and the condemnation, punishment, hurt, curses, chastisement, etc which will come on Yisrael (like in Lev 26, Deut 28 and Ezekiel, to be described later herein). 

 

So, long ago, Christians modified their Christian replacement or displacement theology.  They added a little twist or alteration to it which said that when reading something good about Yisrael the reader must understand that the text really means Christianity.  But in reading something bad about Yisrael, the reader must understand that the reference is to the Jews. 

 

If it’s good, it’s for Christians.  If it’s bad, it’s for Jews.  While most Christian scholars would never dare write it or publicly express it just that way, the reality in Christendom has been precisely that way.  Christian preachers, priests and theologians will inevitably define Yisrael in this context in the real world. 

 

Regardless, the merits for Christian replacement/displacement theology will be assessed in some detail in a succeeding chapter. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 55--A Particular People

 

 

The Scriptures

 

The King James or Authorized Version of the Scriptures has an interesting reference to a peculiar people (as mentioned in preceding commentary). 

 

On the surface, one is immediately struck with the background and understanding on this strange choice of words to describe a group of people (and especially in the sense that they are The ELOHIM’s people and not just the totality of so-called humanity). 

 

As outlined earlier, it has to be significant that in the Tanakh this reference appears (in English) in YHWH’s references to His people Yisrael (Ex 19:5; Deut 14:2; 26:18; Ps 135:4; Eccl 2:8).  Not only does The MOST HIGH use this terminology, but He uses it as something good, treasured and valuable, in contrast to something cursed, condemned and bad. 

 

Since the OT is the foundation for the NT, it was only natural and correct that certain NT writers would pick upon the same idea.  Both Shaul (Titus 2:14) and Kefa (I Pet 2:9) had some of the same thinking in mind about people--again, in a good vein and not something bad (since the term is used in obvious reference to the election, as outlined in the NT). 

 

 

Some Definitions 

 

Young’s “Analytical Concordance” says that the OT Hebrew word for peculiar is “segullah,” which means peculiar treasure, enclosure--while the Greek word involved is “periousios,” meaning peculiar, beyond ordinary.  The reference in I Peter 2:9 is from the Greek “peripoiesis,” a cognate, meaning “for acquisition,” per Young’s (p. 737). 

 

Therefore, what one has is a reference to the Israelite election identified in the NT in the vein of being a peculiar treasure of YHWH.  As noted earlier, and to be further addressed in succeeding chapters, the OT elect/election is always the people of Yisrael.  Otherwise, the NT election will be further defined and described below and in chapters to follow. 

 

The “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” (TDNT, v. vi, p. 57-58) says that periousios is used in the Septuagint for segullah, which indicates that the verb means “to heap up” --it involves the basic sense of not just property, in general, but “rich possessions.” 

 

TDNT adds that these persons are the crown jewels of The HIGHEST.  Because Yisrael is the precious stone, the pearl in His possession, she has a duty to avoid idolatry and to keep His commandments and statutes, per the TDNT. 

 

In the NT, TDNT says that in the work of redemption, The EL has created for Himself a people who are a costly possession.  This source stresses the ethical practice of religion and a life full of zeal and good works, or “a sober, righteous and godly life.” 

 

The “Theological Workbook of the Old Testament” (TWOT, v. ii, p. 1462) gives one a more detailed definition of the Hebrew “segullah,” which is the key word in understanding both the Old and New Testament references.  This source says that the basic meaning of the noun is “personal property.” 

 

TWOT adds that “Those who fear the Lord become his peculiar possessions whom he will never forget, even in that time of great judgment” (does not this remark bring to mind the loyalty aspect of the Hebrew hesed, as discussed earlier?). 

 

Thus, Yisrael was The ELOHIM’s personal possession (Ps 135:4).  Therefore, as TWOT communicates, “Israel should reflect God’s holiness and live out his commandments (Deut 14:2ff), reflecting his standards in a life of wholehearted compliance with the terms of the covenant made at Sinai (Ex 19:5-6) and renewed at their entrance into Canaan.” 

 

 

A “Holy” People 

 

Just as Yisrael in the OT and the election in the NT are called a peculiar people, there are also references to them in the KJV as being a “holy” people (Ex 19:6).  This remark in Exodus 19:6 is cast in Hebrew parallelism with the peculiar people of Exodus 19:5.  Clearly, the peculiar people are also the “holy” people. 

 

This English word “holy” comes from the Hebrew kodesh or qodesh (however it is to be transliterated) and the Greek “hagios.”  Young’s “Analytical Concordance” (p. 487-488) gives the meaning of qodesh as “separation, object set apart” and a similar meaning for the Greek hagios, but with an addition of the word “holy.”  Now, a dilemma surfaces. 

 

As discussed elsewhere in several places herein, the English “holy” in no way means the same thing as the Hebrew kodesh.  The word holy implies pious and sanctity while the Hebrew kodesh clearly means set apart and separation (yes, segregation--see Lev 20:26; I Kg 8:53).  This distinction will be focused upon in a later chapter addressing Scriptural words and how Christianity addresses them. 

 

In any case, some further checking of definitions will help the student of truth approach the basic problem at hand--an understanding of these peculiar people.  TWOT (v. ii, p. 787) attaches qodesh to the awe and character of The ELOHIM, as being totally good and entirely without evil. 

 

Thus, qodesh objects are those with no cultic pollution which is symbolic of moral pollution.  They are not only those that are dedicated, but those dedicated to what is good and kept from evil.  So, as The ELOHIM reveals Himself as ethically qodesh, He calls men to the same state as His own, per TWOT. 

 

For the adjective qadosh, TWOT says that it connotes a distinction from the common or profane.  Thus, The ELOHIM is intrinsically qodosh and calls His people to the same standards of obedience (Lev 19:2).  Per TWOT, that which is qodesh is not only distinct from the profane, but in opposition to it as well. 

 

For the Hebrew qodesh, the TDNT (v. I, p. 89) adds that the word is hard to determine etymologically, but then goes on to suggest “to divide,” in the sense of marked off from the secular.  The antithetical term is “profane” or in common, as distinct from the cultic.  TDNT says that anything related to the cultus can be brought under the term qodesh (whether The EL, man, things, space or time). 

 

TDNT (v. I, p. 90-91) makes a very important observation by declaring that qodesh denotes a state and not an action, and that there is a sense of dedicate, not with the implication of cultic qualification; but rather, of transfer to the possession of The EL, to whom the person or thing dedicated, now exclusively belongs. 

 

For the NT “hagios,” the “Dictionary of New Testament Theology” (DNTT) says that it contains an ethical element and an emphasis on the duty to worship the hagios (evidently, in the sense of The MOST HIGH).  Going on, DNTT adds that it indicates the “divine” commandment and providence; on the other, human obligation and morality. 

 

 

Hesed, Revisited 

 

A former chapter discussed at some length the dilemma over the Hebrew “hesed,” which is often incorrectly translated to the English mercy.  Contrariwise, the word loyalty is probably a better single word idea and meaning. 

 

Without repeating that extensive presentation, it must be noted on the present discussion that the concept of hesed applies to YHWH’s people Yisrael in the Tanakh and to the Israelite election in the NT. 

 

Perhaps it has been this linkage of the Hebrew hesed to the people of The ELOHIM to prompt the development and perpetuation of the Hasidic Jewish sects, as cited earlier and to be described later herein. 

 

In any case, any discussion of the NT election must include the relevance and importance of hesed to the people involved (along with kodesh and segullah).  Certainly, the idea and concept of loyalty is extremely significant to the people who make up the election in the OT and NT (both in their relationship with each other and in their personal relationship with The MOST HIGH). 

 

 

The Relationship Concept 

 

In the Jul-Sep 2000 “Hebrew Roots” (p. 6), editors Dean and Susan Wheelock quoted the previously cited Dr Marvin Wilson’s book on “Our Father Abraham” --on the question of YHWH’s relationship with His people. 

 

The Wheelocks perceptively noted that within Christendom, people are more concerned about what one thinks (the Greek focus on doctrine); while in Judaism, the approach is on how one behaves (in terms of obedience of the Torah).  However, it is important to note that it is this Jewish concept of duties and obedience which prevails throughout the Scriptures (both OT and NT).  

 

Quoting Wilson (p. 138)-- “Jewish anthropologist Raphael Patai has observed that because the Hebrews liked the concrete and tended to avoid the abstract, the idea of doctrinal formulation was alien to their mind.  In Hebrew thought, the essence of true godliness is tied primarily to a relationship, not to a creed.” 

 

“Hebrew Roots” concluded that what is important is the relationship the worshipper has with The MOST HIGH and his fellowman in contrast to what one thinks about The MOST HIGH and his fellowman (as people express themselves in memorized church creeds).  Thus, the focal point in the relationship with The HIGHEST occurs in prayer and in good deeds (good deeds, as defined by the Scriptures). 

 

Wilson (p. 138) adds:  “For the Hebrews, personal or individual relationship has always been far more expressive of the heart of religious faith than mere intellectual assent to abstract statements and religious ideas.” 

 

The writer of this study at hand agrees whole-heartedly with the remarks of both Marvin Wilson and the Wheelocks.  It is absolutely true that the Scriptures (both the OT and the NT) teach and advocate a relationship of the people of The ELOHIM with Him and one to another.  This relationship is founded upon works and actions of deeds, based upon obedience of the Torah and loyalty (described earlier). 

 

Assuredly, it is false Christian worship which is predicated upon words that sound religious (like humanistic words of love and good deeds for each human/humanoid), but are far removed from the real world of Scriptural righteousness.  Conversely, the real relationship with YHWH is founded upon acts of obedience from the Scriptures--vis-à-vis the believer to The ELOHIM and with each other (in the vein of loyalty). 

 

 

One More Concept 

 

There is still one more idea in the Tanakh which is profoundly important in trying to assess the character of the people of the New Testament election.  In the Book, The SOVEREIGN calls Yisrael “My people Yisrael” (Jer 7:23; 11:2-4; Hos 4:6; Amos 7:8, 15; 8:2). 

 

Obviously, the Israelite election in the NT are The ELOHIM’s people (Jo 10:14-27).  It is a great honor and blessing to be called YHWH’s people. 

 

 

Putting This Together 

 

These several words and definitions can be put together.  It is manifestly clear that the people of the election are called out of the world, the profane and the common--to be set apart, separate, distinct and segregated from the rest of the world.  They are to be on an ethical and moral plane approaching perfection in terms of character, actions, ideas and thinking. 

 

Clearly, the concepts of obedience of the Torah and loyalty to each other and to The MOST HIGH must characterize their mentality.  In the sense that when the election starts obeying the Torah, they will quickly be at odds with and in contrast to the rest of the profane and secular society. 

 

Just like the Jews were called names, cussed and hated by the Greeks in Second Temple days (because of their rejection of the Greek religion, culture, gods, names, holidays, customs, foods, and so forth, as will be described in some detail in later chapters herein), so also will YHWH’s election earn the same hate, hostility and condemnation from the secular society. 

 

Once the election is truly set apart and separate from the rest of the secular civilization, the word “peculiar” will be attached to them.  Worldly people, ignorant of YAH’s Words, will look upon these people of The ELOHIM as oddballs and indeed as nuts and freaks.  What a privilege it is to be hated by others for righteousness’ sake. 

 

Of course, it is these hated people who are thought to be so weird and peculiar that YHWH YESHUA will look upon them as “My people.”  In His eyes, they will become like a precious treasure in the sense of segullah. 

 

 

The Torah in Romans 2:12-13 

 

For a bottom line on this issue, Shaul wrote that those who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all those who sin under the law will be judged by the law (Rom 2:12, “Return of the Remnant,” p. 60).  Of course, the theme here concerns the Torah.  Truly, those who sin outside the Torah have no hope for the after-life (because the future of man is only assured by the Torah). 

 

YHWH’s peculiar people must adopt the Torah as a way of life once they enter into the status of a betrothal to the marriage covenant with The ELOHIM. 

 

Once entering this relationship, the believer is bound by the Torah and its role of ethics and righteousness.  When embarking upon this path, the believer becomes an outcast and a peculiar person in terms of the surrounding secular society. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 56--YHWH Selects for His Kingdom

 

 

The Problem 

 

If The ELOHIM’s purpose is to save all of Adam (as discussed previously) and/or some part or all of the other created kinds and orders of humanoids (this word will be defined in a later chapter), why then was not YESHUA commissioned to go to all of these prospective candidates for salvation? 

 

Why was his charge only to the lost sheep of the House of Yisrael (as was described at length in prior chapters)?  And these are good questions that will be answered in this section. 

 

The Apostle Shaul wrote a short, crisp, little statement which pretty well sums it up.  For an introduction, he said that all of Adam would be saved, and then he added-- “but” every one of them in their own order, MESSIAH, the firstfruits and others at His coming (I Cor 15:22-23). 

 

The point Shaul is making here is that there is an order, sequence or chronological arrangement to salvation.  Everybody is not saved all at once or at the same time.  Of course, YESHUA The SON OF ADAM was the first of many later sons of Adam to receive life. 

 

But in all cases, that life will be granted to people in a given order and as foreordained and determined by The MOST HIGH.  In short, it’s not a question of whether the Adam kind will be saved; but rather, it is a question of “when,” as mentioned earlier.  When YHWH is ready, all of Adam will be saved. 

 

This background then opens the door to a most magnificent and wonderful concept found repeatedly in the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments.  That concept is one of selection, also called election (which has been broached in previous chapters).  Hence, those selected become the “elect” with The ELOHIM YHWH making the selection or election. 

 

 

Christian Confusion 

 

The very introduction of this idea of election and the concept associated with it throws the student of truth into a point of conflict with traditional Christian theology. 

 

As most students know, the Christian position on salvation is that persons alive in this world are able to make their own personal choices, selections or elections for salvation and the choices of becoming followers of the person they call Gee-Zeus (or some other deity, as the case may be). 

 

Actually, this thinking seems to predominate in all or almost all religions of the world--in modern times and all the way back to the old sun cults in ancient history.  For some strange reason, man likes the idea that he makes the choice and decision on the circumstances and actions for salvation. 

 

That’s why people like Billy Graham can have an hour of decision in which persons in Graham’s audience can be encouraged, pushed, prodded and motivated (generally, on the basis of emotions) to “stand up for Gee-Zeus.”  Graham and multitudes of other Christian preachers have followed this practice on the premise that man makes the decision. 

 

Many churches have what they call an altar in the front of their worship facilities.  People are encouraged, pushed, prodded and motivated (again, by emotional factors, usually induced by sanctimonious music and songs) to stand up and move down the primrose lane (aisle) to come to that altar and supposedly receive Christian salvation, happiness and joy. 

 

All of this may sound well and good to the typical Scripturally illiterate Christian.  But it is not in the real world of the Word, YHWH YESHUA and reality.  In fact, one can’t find altar calls and standing up for somebody in the Book, in the context of receiving reconciliation and salvation.  It just doesn’t happen that way--despite Christendom’s push of this method. 

 

 

The ELOHIM Decides 

 

The typical Christian can never begin to grasp the fact that it is The MOST HIGH Who makes the choice.  In fact, The MOST HIGH does everything for the person He chooses for salvation.  And this brings up the important concept of election (as briefly mentioned in previous commentary). 

 

The idea of election first surfaced in the OT Scriptures when the term was associated with Yisrael, an elect race or people, as discussed earlier (Isa 45:4; 65:9, 22).  It is manifest that The ELOHIM selected Yisrael to be His first collective nation/peoples to taste salvation from the flesh in these past 6,000 years.  Therefore, the Book repeatedly says that salvation is for Yisrael and that Yisrael will be redeemed. 

 

It’s not that the rest of Adam will not be saved.  They will.  It’s just that the first large group of Adamites to be saved have been and will be Israelites.  In time, perhaps even in some far away distant age and place, YHWH will ultimately save the rest of Adam.  He starts with Yisrael and appears to use Yisrael as a priesthood in some way to ultimately accomplish His purpose for Adam. 

 

It’s highly probable that when the time arrives to resurrect to life the mass of dead Adamites (non-Israelites) in order for them to be redeemed and saved, The SOVEREIGN will use resurrected, changed, converted Israelites to be priests, teachers and leaders in that future work and environment. 

 

And while The HIGHEST has essentially started with Yisrael, in the national and collective sense, the truth is that He has not taken any actions so far to save all (100%) of Yisrael.  Instead, the Scriptures are plain that He has selected for salvation only a very small portion of Israelites and evidently a few other Adamites in the past 6,000 years.  So even the bulk of Israel’s salvation is still future. 

 

 

An Election Out of the Elect Yisrael 

 

This reality gives rise next to the fact that of the elect race of Yisrael, YAH has chosen and selected only a small parcel of them for salvation in this life and time since the creation of Adam.  These few are called the election in the NT.

 

They are the people whose names are written for sure in the book of life (Dan 12:1; Rev 3:5; 21:27).  And in terms of the New Testament assemblies, they are the “called out ones” (in Greek, the “ekklesia,” translated as “church” in the KJV). 

 

One of the great texts in the Book is at Romans 8:28-39 which is often quoted by Christians who typically never realize what all is involved in that message.  As Christendom sees it, all things work together for good to those who love The ELOHIM. 

 

These are wonderful and comforting words.  But one should look at the rest of that text because it qualifies and limits the promise “to them who are the called according to His purpose.”  Verse 29 goes right on to outline YHWH’s foreknowledge in the context of predestination for those He calls (in verse 30). 

 

Romans 8:33 then tops the whole dialogue off by proclaiming that those foreknown, predestined and called out ones are The ELOHIM’s “elect,” who are to be justified.  Shaul concluded this section by saying that “nothing” can separate those elect from the love of The ELOHIM (Rom 8:35-39). 

 

Therefore, in the Apostolic Assembly environment and in terms of YESHUA’s commission, there was a group of Israelites who were predestined to be the “election” in the NT age (Rom 8:28-39).  They didn’t make the choice. 

 

YHWH made the choice at the foundations of the world by the process of the lot, as suggested by the former Dr Ernest Martin (now deceased) in his “ASK Communicator” for July 1995 (Jud 1:3; Ps 16:5-6; 105:11; 125:3; I Chron 26:13; Jo 14:2; Col 1:12; I Pet 1:4). 

 

Beyond this group of elected people in the first century CE, mention will be made shortly of an earlier group of chosen ones in OT times and another special group to be selected (evidently also by lot) for salvation here in the age end--just before the return of The MESSIAH and the establishment of His kingdom on earth for the millennium.  With His return, He will evidently then save the rest of Yisrael and Adam. 

 

 

Some Words 

 

With this backdrop on the concept of YHWH making His decision on who to save and when (correctly redeem), it would be well to now look at some of the Scriptural words involved.  The NT uses the Greek word “eklektos” (an adjective) to mean the elect and the Greek word “ekloge” (a noun) to mean the election in a number of Scriptures.

 

The “New Analytical Greek Lexicon” (p. 128) outlines for eklektos-- “chosen out, selected; in N.T. chosen as a recipient of special privilege, elect, Col. 3:12, et. al.; specially beloved Luke 23:35; possessed of prime excellence, exalted, I Tim. 5:21; choice, precious, I Pet. 2:4, 6,” while ekloge means “the act of choosing out, election,... the aggregate of those who are chosen, the elect.” 

 

The point of this last definition is that the concept of election refers both to the process of choosing or electing as well as to the body of people chosen in that process. 

 

The New International “Dictionary of New Testament Theology” (DNTT) and the “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” (TDNT) both link the two words to the Greek “eklegomai.”  The DNTT (v. I, p. 536) gives the meaning for “eklegomai” as “pick out for oneself, choose out,” while the TDNT (v. iv, p. 144) defines it as “to choose something for oneself, to make one’s choice.” 

 

The DNTT (v. I, p. 538) makes the point that in both the Greek and Hebrew terms involved (the Hebrew will be shortly addressed), the emphasis is totally on the “action of God” in making the election.  The contextual uses of the words in the NT convey the same thinking. 

 

Manifestly, it is The ELOHIM Who makes the selection or election.  See Mark 13:20, John 15:16-19, Acts 13:17, I Corinthians 1:27-28, Ephesians 1:4, and James 2:5, where the message is quite precise that The MOST HIGH has made the choice (Greek “eklego”) of the election. 

 

 

More Words 

 

Before moving on, the point must be made that besides “eklegomai,” there is another Greek word which also seems to carry a similar meaning, but has only a limited use.  It is “haireomai” (Young’s “Analytical Concordance,” p. 164).  “Haireomai” is found at II Thessalonians 2:13 and a few other texts. 

 

In looking at these words and definitions, one is immediately struck with a realization that they are closely connected to the Greek “ekklesia,” which is commonly translated as “church” in the KJV and most other English translations.  Per DNTT (v. I, p. 291), “ekklesia” is derived via “ek-kaleo,” which was used for the summons to the army to assemble,” and from “kaleo,” meaning “to call.”

 

Other Greek lexicons give ekklesia as the assembly of the called out ones.  In this sense, it refers to people and not to a building, as the English word church implies.  Later chapters herein will focus upon the word church and upon the assembly in the context of being a body of believers. 

 

Interestingly, the Greek word “synogoge” is derived from “synago,” which means “bring together” (DNTT, v. I, p. 292).  “Synogoge” is commonly translated from the Hebrew qahal and edah (which will be addressed in some detail in a later chapter). 

 

DNTT goes on to suggest that while the word synogoge can mean the bringing together of people, it seems to have gained use in Judaism as the place of the assembly--just as has been true within Christianity for ekklesia/church. 

 

But for now, the point can be made that the assembly or congregation of believers is connected to the election.  Thus, it is the elected or selected persons by YHWH who make up the assembly or congregation in the ekklesia. 

 

 

The Hebrew 

 

The TDNT (v. iv, p. 145) makes the point that the Greek “eklegomai” and its cognates correspond for the most part to the Hebrew bhr (bachar).  Commonly, the idea of bachar is used to define the status of Yisrael.  And always, it is The ELOHIM Who has made the choice and election of Yisrael (and of David and the OT prophets as well). 

 

In I Samuel 12:22, the KJV makes the case that YHWH was pleased (Hebrew “yaal”) to make Yisrael His people.  The TDNT (v. iv, p. 147) clarifies this issue by saying that the verb of willing (hi used in the sense of hi-yaal) means “to insist upon.”  While it has many graduations, it always denotes a resolve of the “will of God,” per the TDNT. 

 

Thus, the truth is that The ELOHIM has insisted upon making Yisrael His people (I Sam 12:22).  Obviously, the people of Yisrael had absolutely nothing to do with His choice (bachar).  It was strictly His choice, will and resolve. 

 

In looking at the “Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament” (TDOT, v. ii, p. 73), one finds some remarks on the literature of the ancient Middle Kingdom of Egypt where the Egyptian stp (which links to bachar) is used to mean “to choose, i.e. to choose someone or something out of a larger group.”  Again, this implication takes one back to the ekklesia, meaning the called out ones of a larger group. 

 

In regards to bachar, the TDOT (p. 74) says that the Hebrew root bhr means “A careful choice occasioned by actual needs, and thus a very conscious choice...”  In relationship to persons, bhr denotes choice out of a group (generally, out of the totality of the people in the group), so that the chosen one discharges a function in relationship to the group (TDOT, p. 82-83). 

 

Quoting OT scholar C. Vriezen, the TDOT (p. 87) notes for bhr that “in the OT the choice is always the action of God, of his grace, and always contains a mission for man; and only out of this mission can man comprehend the choice of God.”  As TDOT (p. 87) concludes, only YHWH Himself “can produce in one the sense of being chosen.”  Assuredly, bachar represents YHWH’s choice by resolve and determination.  

 

 

Truth Sets The Elect Apart 

 

The former mention of the lot, as probably being the very instrument or method used by YHWH (at the foundations of the world) to select (elect) the chosen and called out ones, brings up another valid consideration.  Beyond YHWH’s choice, by the lot, what is it or what factor or quality is detectable in those persons elected to salvation? 

 

Put another way, what is it that really sets this election apart in this life and age?  This writer has spent an enormous amount of time thinking about this issue and studying the Word in an effort to answer that question.  Without being dogmatic, the evidence seems persuasive that the single most important ingredient setting the elect apart is their attitude and response toward “truth.” 

 

YESHUA said that a person must believe truth in order to be a child of truth (Jo 8:45-47; 12:36-41).  Later, The MESSIAH was more explicit in charging that the elect “accept” truth (Jo 17:8) and that they (the elect) are “set apart” by truth (Jo 17:17-19). 

 

Additionally, Yohanan, the writer of these remarks, added that he could recognize the elect by their response (and how receptive they were) to truth, and that true representatives of YHWH were set apart by truth (I Jo 4:1-7). 

 

Yohanan also wrote that the elect must worship in truth (Jo 4:24) and love in truth (I Jo 3:18) because it is truth that will make men free (Jo 8:32).  Few people alive and functioning in this age can ever begin to grasp it, but religious bondage (causing sin by false religion and worship) is one of the greatest of evils in terms of bondage and slavery.  Truth sets one free from the shackles of false religious beliefs and worship. 

 

In still one more most fabulous and fantastic statement, the Apostle Shaul was to add that the election has been chosen for salvation (in the Apostolic age and assuredly also here in the age end) by their belief in truth (II Thes 2:10-14).  Their acceptance of truth sets them apart from other people who either do not have truth or will not accept it, even if it is presented to them. 

 

The point being here is that the elect, called out ones have been and will be individuals who have the right attitude toward truth (obviously given to them by The RUACH HA KODESH). 

 

They love truth, seek it, and obey it; are fervent, passionate and zealous for it; and are ready to go all the way (to include spending all of their money, wealth and resources), as necessary to obtain it (Prov 23:23; Matt 13:44-46; Col 3:23; II Pet 2:5-8).  Question--does the reader know anyone like that? 

 

 

The Role of Money 

 

The thing on money is most important.  As noted earlier, some people are religious hobbyists.  They will often take “free” literature (true or false) which doesn’t cost them anything.  But if money is called for, then they tend to have “evil eyes” (which also was mentioned previously). 

 

For sure, there aren’t many people around who will spend “any” of their money on truth and certainly not “all” or even much of their wealth, money and resources to obtain it. 

 

Yes, there are a few people out there who would probably read part or all of this production if it didn’t cost them any money.  In other words, if the publisher sacrificed and spent money to publish this work and gave it away, then there are some persons (not many, but some religious hobbyists and perhaps a few others) who would read part or all of it.  However, if they would have to lay some money out, forget it! 

 

Most people won’t even spend any of their own money on themselves, in terms of acquiring truth. 

 

And one can just about bank on it that the bulk of so-called humanity could care less about other people and even their own children, in terms of them having truth.  Since they won’t spend money on themselves to obtain truth, they assuredly don’t care that much about it.  Truth is just not high on their agenda. 

 

Obviously, if people won’t spend their own money to obtain, acquire and possess truth, they are in no mood to spend money for others to have truth.  There is no way that these people would give and donate money for the production and dissemination of truth.  For most, money is far more important than truth. 

 

A point of clarification is furthermore needed here.  Paying tithes and offerings to a false preacher or teacher is not the same as expending resources for truth.  Obviously, a false teacher is only going to spread false teachings to gullible people. 

 

What is needed is an expenditure of money for study material which will allow one to study to obtain truth.  Of course, when something of truth is found, then the person loving it should support it and spend money on it because it is truth. 

 

 

It’s All a Matter of Timing 

 

The only conclusion that a student of the Book can come to on this theme is that when it comes time for a particular person to be saved, as scheduled and ordained by predestination from the foundations of the world, then that person is going to be saved and will be subjected to whatever trials, afflictions and punishments (corrective) as is necessary for him or her to obtain the gifts of faith, repentance and life. 

 

Of course, the sinner’s attitude will then change toward truth.  With real conversion, truth becomes important.  It is no longer something to be indifferent and apathetic about. 

 

While sun worshippers historically (including many Christians) have supported the theory that each human being is independent and sovereign in his own life and can therefore choose to become a believer or not, the truth is that by the Word man is not independent and sovereign.  Instead, YHWH is SOVEREIGN, and He makes the choice and does the calling of those to be saved.  It’s entirely in His hands. 

 

Like the Book says, every knee will bow.  Be assured that when The MOST HIGH is ready for a particular knee to bow, He will see to it that that knee bows.  His purpose will not be blocked, halted, thwarted or interfered with in any instance.  He will have His way with all of the creation, whether any of us like it or not. 

 

The Book outlines several powerful texts which place the question of salvation into the hands of YHWH YESHUA, ALONE, when He said "all that the Father giveth me shall come to me" (Jo 6:37); "no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father" (Jo 6:65); and "ye have not chosen me but I have chosen you" (Jo 15:16). 

 

Moreover, Yohanan the Baptist had earlier remarked that "a man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven” (Jo 3:27). 

 

The point of this is that in the different ages, YHWH has preordained and determined (predestined) certain persons to salvation in that age or time frame.  The New Testament Apostolic Assembly was one group of them.  In this group, they were called the firstfruits.  This word now brings up another new concept from the Book which will be discussed shortly. 

 

 

The Very Elect 

 

Before leaving the subject of election, one more type of election needs mention.  The NT outlines a reference to a particular group of people called the “very elect” (Matt 24:24).  Diane Mastropaulo of Fort Smith, AR pointed this intriguing little remark out to me many years ago, in the vein that this was a category different from just the election. 

 

This writer has studied that reference and now interprets it to mean that of the age end “election,” there will be a further sub division or part of them that will be known as the “very elect.”  In other words, the very elect are an elite, special part of the election. 

 

 

Men of Good Will 

 

The NT also has one more interesting reference which could be applied to this very elect group or perhaps the election, in general.  This one surfaced at YESHUA’s birth when the angel and the heavenly host praised The EL and said “on earth peace, good will toward men” (per the KJV, Lu 2:14). 

 

This expression “good will toward men” has never made a lot of sense to some students of the Book.  Accordingly, some scholars have examined the underlying text in some detail and have come up with a variant reading of “among men of good will.”  Modern translators of the Greek New Testament usually translate that verse by using the second variant. 

 

 

The Qumran Community 

 

Dr Randall Buth, a translator with the Wycliffe Bible Translators in Africa and a member of the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, has studied Luke 2:14 extensively in an effort to recover the original Hebrew words and Second Temple Jewish culture which produced this text some 2,000 years ago.  Buth turned to the Dead Sea Scrolls which also contain an expression very similar to that one used by Luke. 

 

The Scrolls contain expressions which read men of favor, sons of His favor and the elect of favor all used in the context of the supposedly “saved” people of the Qumran community of believers.  On this, Buth found that some of the ancient translations of the Word contained the pronoun “his” (such as Ben Sira and the Coptic). 

 

All of this research prompted Buth to conclude that the original statement was likely peace to the sons of his favor.  The Wycliffe translator went on to offer his personal translation as being on earth peace for God’s people (per the “Jerusalem Perspective,” Nov/Dec 1989). 

 

Students of truth are acutely aware of the fact that the Qumran community (supposedly Essenes) believed that they were living in the last days of the age (the age end) when The MESSIAH would come to establish His kingdom.  Buth concluded that the previously discussed sons of light were the sons of His favor. 

 

To Buth’s excellent work, it can be perceived that the elect of His favor could be the entire election or it could have the more limited meaning of the “very elect.”  This writer prefers the latter in view of the New Testament’s mention of these descriptive words. 

 

As outlined earlier, the Essene sect not only used those descriptions for themselves, but they were quite adamant in believing that they were The ELOHIM’s chosen people by the process of “divine election” and “predestination” (per the Jul/Aug 1990 “Jerusalem Perspective,” p. 15).  Thus, they were true Scriptural fatalists! 

 

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that the Qumran community probably had much in common with what one would expect to find in the very elect (which apparently will be a communal community much like the Essenes).  Clearly, there is no mentioned New Testament criticism of the Essenes and/or Qumran people (although the Essenes did have certain problems which must have separated YESHUA from them). 

 

 

The Harvests 

 

To further progress on this election discussion, the reader needs to come to an understanding that the agricultural harvests in ancient Yisrael (linked by The MOST HIGH to religious festivals prescribed in the law--Lev 23) prefigured the eventual harvest of the people of Yisrael. 

 

This linkage is particularly evident in the New Testament where the subjects of salvation are frequently linked to grain and fruit to be harvested and to The MOST HIGH as The REAPER or HARVESTER of that grain and fruit (Matt 9:36-38; 13:1-30; Mk 4:29; Lu 8:4-15; 10:1-2; Rev 14:15-19). 

 

There were three harvests/festivals--Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles (as cited earlier).  The first cutting of the spring barley harvest was destined to constitute the wave sheaf offering (Lev 23:9-14).  Many students of the Word are cognizant of the fact that The MESSIAH was The WAVE SHEAF (I Cor 15:20).  He was clearly the first of the coming harvests of Israelites and Adamites (Matt 13:33; 16:12; Gal 4:26). 

 

 

The Better Resurrection of Passover 

 

Beyond YESHUA, the Book similarly identified the balance of the early spring, Passover harvest (Ru 1:22), in a very definite manner (c30 CE), by describing the resurrection from the dead of a number of Old Testament, saved ones (Matt 27:52-53).  Additionally, another text (Heb 11:35) outlines a resurrection of a number of Tanakh persons of faith which was defined as a “better” resurrection. 

 

The writer of this study at hand believes these two references connect.  In other words, this “better resurrection” appears to have been the balance of the Passover harvest of Adam, although there is some question about David who may not have been included or received his reward until later with one of the other resurrections (Acts 2:29, 34; Heb 11:32). 

 

While some Israelites (and thus Adamites) are named in this elect body, the group also included a number of OT Adamites who could never be linked to Yisrael under any circumstances. 

 

On this, mention can be made of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Avraham, Sarah and Yitzhak (Heb 11:4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 20).  Of course, Yisrael and Israelites all came about with the entrance of Yakov Yisrael who succeeded Yitzhak.  Yet, all of those persons named were Adamites. 

 

The likelihood is that these saved, resurrected individuals of the Passover harvest are present in the scene of the large group of people at Revelation 7:9.  Assuredly, they are there as resurrected persons, and not as immortal souls floating around in heaven.  In addition, this host probably includes, as well, the saved, elect ones of the Pentecost harvest. 

 

 

Pentecost (Shavuot) Harvest 

 

Pentecost (the Feast of Weeks--which came seven weeks to the 50th day away from or after the first High Sabbath of Unleavened Bread) was a festival in celebration of the firstfruits of the wheat harvest in Yisrael (Lev 23:15-21).  It included a bread offering (from the first of the harvested wheat) which was named the firstfruits (Ex 23:16-19; 34:22;  Lev 23:17; Num 18:12; 28:26). 

 

Of all of YHWH’s annual festivals, it is likely that the determination of Shavuot is one of the most complicated because of at least two problems.  There is first the question of which Sabbath to count from and the next issue is how to count fifty days. 

 

These difficulties have separated and divided any number of feast day observers over the years--starting with the Jews in Second Temple days and proceeding forward to modern times with the several Sardis groups which have kept the annual festivals as a point of doctrine (the Sardis assemblies will be assessed in a later chapter herein). 

 

The subject of the annual festivals and their dating complications, particularly with Shavuot, will be addressed in a subsequent chapter devoted to that theme.  Therefore, there is no urgency presently to broach it at this time.  Suffice to say, Pentecost is the second major harvest festival which required all Israelite males to make an appearance in Jerusalem at the place where YHWH put His name. 

 

 

The NT Firstfruits 

 

In the New Testament, the elect individuals chosen for salvation are repeatedly called the firstfruits which clearly ties them to the Pentecost offering of the firstfruits (Rom 16:5; I Cor 16:15; II Thes 2:13; Jas 1:18).  Their identification effectively started on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1). 

 

It is patently obvious that allegorically the firstfruits harvest in the NT is the same as the firstfruits of the wheat harvest in the Tanakh (Ex 34:22).  In other words, the firstfruits harvest of Yisrael in the NT was a fulfillment of the prophetic features of the OT Pentecost harvest. 

 

The NT is filled with an abundance of Scriptures suggesting the imminent return of YESHUA (Matt 10:23; Mk 9:1; Rom 13:12; I Cor 7:29-31; 10:11; 15:51-52; II Cor 5:16; Phil 1:6; 1:10; 2:16; 4:5; I Thes 1:9; 2:19; 4:13-18; 5:9-10; 5:23-24; II Thes 1:6; 1:10; I Tim 6:14; II Tim 4:6; Titus 2:12-13; Heb 9:26, 28; 10:36-37; Jas 5:5-7; I Pet 1:3-5, 20; 4:7; 5:4; II Pet 3:9; I Jo 2:18; 3:2; Rev 1:1, 3; 2:5, 16, 25; 3:11; 22:7, 10, 12, 20). 

 

Often, the context of YESHUA’s presentations were also of the closeness in time of the heavenly phase of the Kingdom.  For example, Matthew 4:17 communicates that fact from the time He began to preach and say “Repent:  for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”  He clearly was not referring to some time frame 2,000 years away.  Since He said “at hand,” He must have meant soon. 

 

There is absolutely no question about it.  The MESSIAH came quickly just like He said. The problem that the student of truth now faces is to try to determine when He did come for the Pentecost (Shavuot) harvest.  And that’s not as hard as one may first suppose because of three good reasons. 

 

 

The Thessalonians 

 

The first clue is the dating of the NT books and particularly the dating of the two epistles to the Thessalonians.  Of course, the entire Apostolic Assembly was very expectant about the soon return of YESHUA--obviously to harvest them to their reward. 

 

The Thessalonians were a prime example of this anticipation.  In fact, so much so, that Shaul had to write both of his letters to them in the context that YESHUA’s return was still future and had not yet happened, even by the time of his composition of the two letters.  It is quite evident from those writings that some of the people believed that YESHUA had already come (I Thes 4:15-18; II Thes 2:2-6). 

 

Based on the availability of present scholarly research, the evidence is substantial and convincing that the NT writings were generally compiled about 40 to 66 CE.  In fact, probably most were written or had acceptance by 65 CE.  Certainly, The MESSIAH did not return until after those dates and writings. 

 

With the coming of a great tribulation (c66-70 CE) and the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, there are a lot of good reasons to become suspicious of that period as a second good cause to date His return at about 70 CE. 

 

This linkage is most evident when considering The ANOINTED ONE’s remarks in Matthew 24 and the then “time of trouble.”  Was Nero an ante-type or sample (666) of the age ending Beast man?  Probably yes. 

 

 

Some More Proofs 

 

The early Jewish historian Josephus gave us a third reason to date YESHUA’s return at c70 CE when he wrote about the fall of Jerusalem and suggested that “before sunset” on the 21st day of Ziw of 70 CE, a strange phenomenon occurred when “chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running around the clouds” and on the following Pentecost there was a quaking and great noise in the Temple and a hearing of the words “let us remove hence” (“War of the Jews,” book 6, chapter 5, section 3). 

 

The writer of this study at hand is convinced that YESHUA’s soon return happened around 70 CE--perhaps following a 40 years time of trial for Yehudah after The MESSIAH’s impalement in 30 CE.  All of this reasoning fits together nicely. 

 

So it would appear that when He returned, those alive in the faith were translated to meet Him, along with a resurrection of the elect dead.  Where did this Pentecost harvest go?  Surely, they went to heaven just as the earlier elect had done in the Passover harvest. 

 

The book of Revelation, perhaps written around 65 or 66 CE, gives us some good information on the Pentecost group along with the Passover elect, as described above.  Likely, the Pentecost firstfruits are the 144,000 males (and probably a comparable number of females) seen on Zion with YESHUA in preparation to return to earth in the still future time of the age end (Rev 14:1-4). 

 

These 144,000 are spiritual virgins who have never committed fornication with harlot women, the false Christian Churches (Rev 17:5), which evidently came upon the world scene, sometime before the fall of Jerusalem. 

 

Furthermore, this 144,000 of the Pentecost harvest probably were illustrated in Revelation 7:1-8 (although this writing seems to belong to the typical Tabernacles harvest); and thus, were surely numbered as 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Yisrael (less Dan, which may have been omitted because of sin). 

 

 

Sukkot 

 

As these lines are being written in the early 21st century, the great, end of year harvest of Tabernacles (Sukkot), is still future.  But in timing, it could well be very close at hand, in just a few years. 

 

In writing about the harvests, Moshe seems to have stipulated a firstfruits offering associated with the Feast of Booths, in addition to the named firstfruits offering at Pentecost (Ex 23:16-19; Lev 23:34-36; Num 18:12).  Of course, this makes sense. 

 

It would appear that this is the most immediate next harvest of Yisrael.  Probably, Yohanan’s record of the sealing of the 144,000 applies to this group, as the coming typical fulfillment of the prophecy (Rev 7:1-8).  It is also evident that they will constitute the first of the Tabernacles harvest and resurrection of age end Israelites (Rev 20:4). 

 

This 144,000 can perhaps be broken down into two parts.  This writer feels that 7,000 of them are probably of the Philadelphia Assembly and are the very elect, mentioned earlier, who have not bowed their knees to the sun god (I Kg 19:18; Rom 11:4; Rev 3:7-13). 

 

It is probable that the balance of this harvest, the 137,000 remaining, have some problems, but can be identified with the overcomers of the other six Congregations of believers identified in Revelation (2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 21). 

 

 

Sealed With the Name of YHWH 

 

It seems plausible that both groups of 144,000 (from Shavuot and Sukkot) are very similar.  Probably, both are sealed with the pronunciation and understanding of the Tetragrammaton (Rev 14:1). 

 

Going back to the previous discussion on Cornelius and the fact that he was a ELOHIM fearer (Acts 10:2), the “Expositors Greek Testament” (v. II, p. 250-251) says that Cornelius was a proselyte who had “learned the name and the fear of the God of Israel.” 

 

Obviously, true reconciliation and conversion has to include an understanding of both the pronunciation and meaning of the Tetragrammaton.  It is interesting that while Yehudah retained the knowledge of this most important single word in the universe, the House of Yisrael lost it completely because of the divorce, as will be addressed in later chapters herein. 

 

While most Jews cannot pronounce the name and do not understand its meaning, some important few do.  Conversely, probably no one in Churchianity has any idea at all on its meaning or pronunciation. 

 

Most ignorant and uninformed Christians suppose that The Name (Ha Shem in Hebrew) is pronounced as “Lord, Jehovah, Yahvah, Yahovah, Yahuvah, Yahweh, Yahoweh, Yahuweh, Yahowah, Yahuwah, or something very similar.”  Actually, these words are all unscriptural and wrong.  As for as its meaning, Christendom is utterly lost. 

 

The writer of this publication is acquainted with a number of Sardis Sacred Namers who believe the Tetragrammaton to be Yahvah or Yahweh (or some variation of these two words).  It seems that almost without exception, these Sacred Namers become very proud and vain over their supposed knowledge.  What a paradox it is that they don’t know it at all, despite their vanity. 

 

Beyond the name, it is certain that both groups of the 144,000 are numbered and identified as men, age 30 or over (Rev 14:3).  As the student of truth probably understands, age 30 (or older) seems to be the identified time of conversion and reconciliation (Lu 3:23) and clearly the age of maturity for set apart work in the priesthood and Temple (Num 4:3, 23, 30, 35, 39, 43, 47). 

 

 

Timing of the Sealing 

 

This sealing of the age end 144,000 is dated by Yechezkel as near the national destruction of the governments of the House of Yisrael, and preceding or near the spread of the coals of fire over Jerusalem (Ezek 9:4; 10:2)--when most of the Israelites then living will die or be taken into slavery and great tribulation. 

 

To link this sealing to possible aspects of Revelation, it seems that Israel’s final national punishment constitutes seals 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Revelation 4-6 and ties back to Ezekiel 4-7.  Thus, the sealing of the election and the spreading of coals over Jerusalem take place, perhaps near the time that the stars (Yisrael) fall (Rev 6:13; 7:1-8; 8:5). 

 

The place one can come to on this is that the New Testament was written essentially to and about the 144,000 apparent males (and probably a like number of females) of the Pentecost harvest.  Perhaps it applies to the similar firstfruits of the age end in type or as an example since prophecy is dual or repetitive. 

 

The final issue on this theme needing some remarks is the matter of the future fulfillment of Tabernacles proper.  This writer believes that there is Scriptural evidence suggesting that the harvesting of the balance of Yisrael occurs probably during the millennium when YHWH YESHUA rules His coming earthly kingdom. 

 

Possibly, during the millennium, all of the remaining Israelites, dead in their graves, will be resurrected to life and led by The RUACH HA KODESH into faith and repentance.  Since The MOST HIGH is A True SOVEREIGN, He will take whatever action is necessary to lead (or force) these people into a state where they can become reconciled (in the context of the ultimately complete Sukkot harvest). 

 

 

The Salvation of Adam 

 

Now, how about the rest of the Adam kind that are dead in their graves awaiting their hoped for gifts of life?  It appears that if they aren’t resurrected, judged and changed during the millennium, then such works of restitution would have to come in still some other future age or time frame. 

 

There is an amazing prophecy in the Good News accounts which could have some particular relevance here on the just discussed 144,000 elect at the age end.  YESHUA made mention of the grant of life (salvation) to some in the context that many of the first shall be last and the last shall be first (Matt 19:30). 

 

Some students of the Word relate this prediction to the future time period when the huge numbers of remaining Adamites are saved during the millennium or in a subsequent period.  In that situation, it could mean that the last people living in the age end would be resurrected first to receive reconciliation and that the first Adamites living on earth (perhaps pre flood) would receive reconciliation last. 

 

But in regards to the 144,000 of the firstfruits of Sukkot, the prophecy seems to have a clear reference.  Truly, this 144,000 out of the age end will receive life and salvation at the time of YHWH YESHUA’s return for His millennial rule.  Conversely, many of the early Adamites living before and immediately after the flood will be saved later. 

 

 

Pas Laos Revisited 

 

Some previous discussion was presented on the Greek “pas laos” (every people), in Revelation 5:9-10 and 7:9, with a suggestion that probably the subject of those texts were Adamites only and thus, not generic in terms of humans/humanoids at large.  With the above background on the harvests, that fact seems more likely. 

 

Some comments can now be made on those texts and their evident limitation to no one beyond Adamites.  The primary basis for this assertion rests with the apparent Scriptural promises of the ultimate reconciliation and salvation for Adamites, as discussed earlier (Rom 11:32; I Cor 15:22-23). 

 

Additionally, a likelihood for all humans/humanoids in those texts remains doubtful for still other reasons.  For example, the word structure in Revelation 5:9-10 most certainly refers to the four beings and the 24 elders before the throne of YHWH.  Now, who are these four and 24 elect ones from earth? 

 

Possibly, the 24 are Israelites (hence Adamites), primarily because they are a kingdom of priests (Rev 5:10); which, of course, ties back to Israelites (Ex 19:6).  Since 24 divided by two equals twelve, one might also appreciate that the 24 link in some fashion to the twelve tribes.  Perhaps these elders are the twelve patriarchal sons of Yakov Yisrael and the twelve apostles (who are to rule over the 12 tribes). 

 

The four beings in Revelation 5:10 could be the patriarchal fathers (and thus, Adamites) or perhaps just some definition of Yisrael. 

 

Revelation 7:9 probably focuses on Adamites (to include numbers of Israelites) because of a more complicated justification based upon the just completed discussion of the agricultural harvests in ancient Yisrael.  These agricultural harvests prefigured the eventual harvests of Adamites and particularly so in the New Testament where people are likened to grain. 

 

Finally, the “Theological Dictionary of the New Testament” (v. ix, p. 245-250) was quoted in that phule involves a clan or group of people bound together by common descent or blood relationship.  In the Septuagint and the NT, phule is often used for the Israelites.  Obviously, too, phule could easily refer to the collective Adamites. 

 

As noted earlier, Dan Gayman of Schell City, MO teaches that phule defines all else to follow.  Since the Greek kai is commonly used in the several texts using phule in Revelation, it is highly possible that those texts do refer to every Israelite of every language, people and nation in the world, as Gayman teaches. 

 

The point from this is that Revelation 5:9 might be limited to essentially Yisrael while Revelation 7:9 might be a broader description of Adamites.  The other verses in Revelation on pas laos are more complex and could require still other definitions. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 57--Numbering the Election

 

 

More on the 144,000 

 

As discussed in the preceding chapter, the Apostle Yohanan wrote about a sealing of 144,000 Israelites (12,000 each from each of 12 tribes) and the presence of another 144,000 spiritual virgins in the context of the harvests of Yisrael (Rev 7:2-8; 14:1-5).  Though some interpreters might confuse the two references, this writer holds that they are essentially referring to two groups of 144,000 each, as outlined earlier herein. 

 

While these two entities are two different groups, strictly speaking, there remains the possibility of some linkage between them.  The first reference appears to be for the firstfruits of Sukkot (the 144,000 election here in the age end), as discussed previously.  However, it might be a dual prophecy as well with some ante-typical application to the earlier Pentecost harvest. 

 

The second of these references in Revelation assuredly connects in some fashion to Shaul’s remarks to Agrippa (Acts 26:1-32--commented upon earlier) where the apostle clearly communicated that he had done his job and had reached the designated elect persons of the Pentecost (firstfruits) harvest with the Good News message. 

 

Shaul and the other disciples apparently were tasked by YESHUA to reach this 144,000 elect in Pentecost. 

 

Certainly, it was these first century persons of the election who qualify as spiritual virgins because they have had no fornication with spiritual women (Christian Churches), as has or will happen with the 144,000 election in the firstfruits of Sukkot. 

 

 

YESHUA’s Commission, Revisited 

 

On this linkage of Yohanan’s and Shaul’s references, the writings may bear a reasonably close date.  Perhaps Shaul’s address took place around 60-64 CE and Yohanan's Revelation was recorded assuredly by 64-66 CE.  So it well might be that Yohanan's second group of 144,000 Israelites constituted the exact people whom YESHUA was sent to reach in the first century CE (Matt 10:5-6). 

 

Remember that when The MESSIAH commenced preaching, c26 CE, His message was about the Good News of the coming Kingdom of/in Heaven--which probably was the preliminary phase of the coming Kingdom of EL on earth during the millennium and which would clearly apply to the Pentecost group of 144,000 Israelites. 

 

Surely, all of the chosen apostles and evangelists did do their job of reaching the elect, called out ones of the Pentecost age, as seems patently clear from the Book.  Therefore, it is certain that Shaul reached the elect of the lost House of Yisrael then in Europe and Asia Minor. 

 

In mentioning the first referenced 144,000 Israelites (the sealed ones, likely of the firstfruits of the Tabernacles harvest, as well as possibly applying to the Pentecost harvest--in ante-type) from all of the tribes of Yisrael (except possibly for Dan which is interestingly absent), it is relevant to note that Yohanan immediately thereafter wrote about a vast multitude of people in heaven, possibly of certain Adamites which might be the Passover and Pentecost harvests, as discussed earlier (Rev 7:9-17). 

 

 

Revelation 7 Recapped 

 

To recap the interpretation of Revelation 7, as presented in this production, it might be that verses 3-8 directly pertain to the future sealing of 144,000 male Israelites of the firstfruits of the Tabernacles harvest in the age end, now approaching in the early 21st century. 

 

Perhaps this sealing could be dual in fulfillment and include the 144,000 apparent male Israelites sealed and selected for the Pentecost harvest in the Apostolic age (closing c70 CE). 

 

This background and environment takes us next to the heavenly scene of resurrected, elect, saved people in a future setting from when Yohanan saw them in vision (when he wrote the book of Revelation). 

 

Thus, Revelation 7:9-17 might include quite a number of Adamites, as just mentioned a few lines back in connection with the Passover harvest, plus the Israelites in the Pentecost harvest.  Perhaps this host is sufficiently large that Yohanan, in vision, could not number it.  Of course, that does not mean that the number is infinite. 

 

All of the Adamites that have ever lived can be numbered and are finite.  It’s just that in looking at a large group of people in a crowd (of thousands or tens of thousands), one could not begin to count them and would not know their number, unless it was given by the messenger involved. 

 

Thus, there is the reality that this group of people standing before the throne represents the totality of both the Passover and Pentecost resurrections. Since their presence involved two different time frames, it might be that this factor precluded Yohanan from numbering them. 

 

In “Deliverance In The Whirlwind” (p. 61), E. T. Tennyson wrote that they could not be numbered because they were unorganized, isolated, and unknown even one to another.  In short, these verses in Revelation could be describing the “Kingdom of/in Heaven” phase at hand during YESHUA’s ministry (c26-30 CE). 

 

Of course, at the close of this present age and perhaps just a few years away from 2003, this Kingdom, initially set up in a heavenly environment, will transfer to or come to earth to become the nucleus of the future Kingdom of El on earth for the millennial rule of YHWH YESHUA over the entire planet. 

 

While the remarks by Yohanan (in Revelation) clearly concerned future prophetic events, it certainly does open the door to a possible reconciliation for other Adamites--beyond just Israelites, depending upon how one might read and interpret Revelation 7:9 in the Greek and in tying it back to the rest of the Scriptures. 

 

 

288,000 in Total 

 

Incidentally, this juncture is a good place to mention that the two groups (firstfruits of Shavuot and Sukkot) of 144,000 male Israelites each (288,000 in total) likely were/are the precise, elect, called out men that YESHUA was sent to preach to about the Good News of the coming Kingdom in the apostolic age and in the present age end. 

 

This 288,000 Israelite men will surely be the kingdom officials and leaders in the eventual Kingdom of El on earth during the millennium.  The basis for this 288,000 number, their positions and future jobs was laid out, in ante-type, during the time of King David when he organized the Kingdom of Yisrael with 288,000 officers and kingdom officials (I Chron 27:1-22). 

 

As YESHUA correctly alluded, the apparent 144,000 recipients of the Good News (the elect) in the first century CE, were instructed and trained for the Kingdom of or in Heaven (Matt 13:52--per the “Amplified Version”). 

 

Furthermore, it seems manifest that the remaining 144,000 elect ones (firstfruits) of the Sukkot harvest are to be instructed and trained in the age end to join in with the 144,000 from the Pentecost harvest to form the nucleus of the leadership and governing body in the Kingdom of EL when it is on earth for the millennium. 

 

Clearly, man is in the age end now.  Some Scriptural teaching and instruction is commencing presently with a fantastic explosion of truth (Dan 12:4). 

 

Incidentally, it is possible that there are other significant groupings of 288,000 people in the Scriptures and this author just lacks knowledge about them.  However, there is one interesting reference to 288 Levites instructed in the music (Psalms) of YHWH, as organized by David (I Chron 25:7). 

 

 

Women in the Kingdom 

 

While the focus so far has been on the elect, male Israelites, it is extremely likely that there will be a similar number of 144,000 women, perhaps also over age 30, in each of the two harvests of Shavuot and Sukkot (288,000 in total). Certainly, the Apostolic Assembly had a host of very sincere and dedicated women present who were named and seemingly placed in the same category of salvation along with men. 

 

The distinction here between men and women should be fairly obvious to any students of the Word in any age--except possibly in Yisrael in the post WWII scenario with the rise of the feminist movement and the prevailing state of ignorance and confusion over the role of women in society. 

 

Women are absolutely unique and wonderful.  But today’s women are badly out of place and out of their proper spheres in a generic sense.  It is inconceivable that women will be officers, officials or priests in YHWH’s Kingdom, as will be the men.  Saved, elect women may be helpers and assistants to the 288,000 elect men fulfilling those duties, but they will never rule over men under any condition (I Tim 2:12). 

 

Therefore, there is no reason to expect them to have an appreciable leadership and ruling role in the kingdom at large; except, perhaps in some capacity over the fleshly women and children present. 

 

While it seemed entirely possible to number the election from the firstfruits of Shavuot and Sukkot (at 288,000 males), some problems still remained over the Passover harvest, and of course, the resulting total of all three ensuing harvests.  This writer had been troubled over trying to come up with these numbers for some time. 

 

 

The Importance of the Tabernacle 

 

Then, one day, in a conversation with a friend in Council, Idaho (named Dennis Dickinson), the numbers came together. 

 

Dennis suggested that beyond the 288,000 kingdom officials organized by David (I Chron 27:1-22), he had at one time found that the enclosure around the tabernacle in the wilderness also had some 288,000 pieces of silver (out of the total redemption price of the Israelites) in the Tabernacle in a particular arrangement. 

 

A study of Exodus on the Tabernacle reveals these incredible findings.  Moshe broached this issue by stating that the Tabernacle was to be constructed with a large, tent like screen around a rectangular structure. 

 

This screen was held in place on the North, South and West sides and corners with 48 vertical stakes, boards, shafts or frames of shittim wood which were held in place by two sockets of silver under each board--apparently at the bottom (Ex 26:15-37). 

 

Since there were some 48 boards involved in the count on these three walls or sides, then by arithmetic one can easily calculate that some 96 sockets of silver were used to secure the boards (40 sockets each on the North and South sides and 16 sockets on the West side).  This number will become extremely significant as one reads on in Exodus. 

 

The entrance to the Tabernacle was on the Eastern side.  Its construction does not seem to be very clear in Exodus--except that it was fairly large and was hidden from the Eastern exterior by another separated, outer screen which was placed horizontally in front of the entrance to cover or shield it from the outside. 

 

The next instruction issued to the Israelites was that each and every male among them of age 20 or more was to make or pay a ransom or redemption price for his self of one half shekel of silver (Ex 30:11-16). 

 

The number of male Israelites, over age 20, was put at 603,550 persons (discussed earlier) in a census taken on the first day of Ziw of the second year (Num 1:2-48).  Thus, the total redemption price was 301,775 shekels of silver. 

 

Thereafter, Moshe went on to summarize the redemption silver for the 603,550 men as a hundred talents and 1,775 shekels (Ex 38:25-26).  Thus, the shekel value of a talent of silver can be easily calculated.  The “Soncino Edition of the Pentateuch and Haftorahs” (p. 385) gives it at 3,000 shekels per talent. 

 

 

Use of the Redemption Silver 

 

With this background out of the way, The MOST HIGH decreed that the 100 talents of silver obtained from the redemption of the male Israelites was to be employed in the construction of the 100 sockets of silver (one talent for each socket) to be used to hold the Tabernacle boards around the sides in place (Ex 38:26-27). 

 

However, the student of truth will remember at this junction that only some 96 sockets of silver were employed to hold the Tabernacle boards on the North, South and West sides.  It appears that the other four sockets were utilized with other stipulated metals in the facility on the Eastern side of the configuration. 

 

Incidentally, this 100 talents of silver might also allegorically link to the 100 (96+4) pomegranate tree figures around the pillars of the later Temple (I Kg 7:18-42; II Chron 3:16; Jer 52:23). 

 

It appears that 96 of these pomegranates were visible while four were next to the building and were not visible.  Actually, there seems to have been two rows of 100 each pomegranates on each of the two pillars at the front of the Temple (making a total of 400). 

 

Beyond the 100 talents of silver for the Tabernacle, Moshe described the use of the remaining 1,775 shekels in the making of hooks for certain pillars (Ex 38:28).  With these prescribed quantities and uses for the redemption of Yisrael, one can now do a few more calculations and come up with some most fascinating findings. 

 

 

301,775 Shekels of Silver 

 

At 3,000 shekels per talent/socket, it is certain that the 96 sockets of the North, South and West walls totaled 288,000 shekels (3,000x96).  Another 12,000 shekels seems to have been used for four sockets on the evident Eastern side.  Finally, the remaining 1,775 shekels were made into hooks for the pillars.  The total of the redemption shekels remained at 301,775. 

 

When Moshe wrote those words about using 301,775 shekels of silver to redeem Yisrael, he was not just filling up space.  Those numbers must have some profound meanings.  Of course, in the first place, the 288,000 shekels used on the mentioned three walls must have had some allegorical value or linkage to the 288,000 elect of the firstfruits of Shavuot and Sukkot. 

 

That leaves 13,775 shekels made up of 12,000 shekels apparently at the entrance on the Eastern side and a final 1,775 shekels for the hooks.  Could this 13,775 be indicative of the number of the early Passover harvest mentioned by Mattityahu (Matt 27:52)? 

 

Could the distinction between the 12,000 and the 1,775 numbers have some significance in the possible Passover harvest?  Maybe so!  This writer is unsure of what the significance is of these two numbers.  But there is a possibility that they involve some distinctions of those groups in the context of the Kingdom. 

 

Too, it’s plausible that the 12,000 represent Israelites in the Passover harvest while the remaining 1,775 link to non-Israelite Adamites saved in that harvest.  In view of the linkage of 12 to Yisrael and the fact that this 12,000 is of the same type as the 288,000 (sockets of silver who definitely were Israelites), one might speculate that indeed this 12,000 were Israelites. 

 

If true, then the remaining 1,775 are clearly identified as being (non-Israelite) Adamites. 

 

 

301,775 Elected Kingdom Officials 

 

If these shekels of silver each represent one person of the election to salvation, then it is evident that these three harvests will ultimately be made up of 301,775 males (selected by lot, as outlined previously).  Obviously, since the 288,000 are men, it is likely that the other 13,775 are men as well. 

 

There is no question about the role of these 301,775 converted and changed men in the Kingdom of EL on earth during the millennium.  They will all be leaders, priests, kings, governors, etc over the Kingdom, but under The MESSIAH (Matt 25:34; Lu 19:12-19; Rev 2:27; 3:12, 21; 5:10; 12:5; 19:15; 21:7).  What a fantastic future it is that awaits these people. 

 

Now, if the three described harvests included a similar number of females, as is most plausible, then one can project that there will be a total of 603,550 men and women elected to salvation in the 6,000 years spanning the creation of Adam to the age end and the return of YHWH YESHUA to rule planet earth. 

 

In short, the 603,550 Israelite men redeemed in the Exodus were physical ante-types of the eventual 603,550 saved persons in the three harvests. 

 

 

Other Possibly Important Numbers 

 

The student of truth at this place might wish to go back and check David’s organization of the 38,000 Levites to oversee the Temple (I Chron 23:3--5), the 1,700 overseers West of the Jordan (I Chron 26:30) and the 2,700 overseers East of the Jordan (I Chron 26:32).  Of course, these figures must be relevant. 

 

Furthermore, it should be noted that “at least” 340,852 Israelite men came to Hebron to make David king (I Chron 12:23-38).  Actually, this number might be a little conservative since it is evident that there were more than 30 men already present at Hebron beyond those who came later (I Chron 11:15).  This group could also have some relevance as ante-types in the coming Kingdom of El under YHWH YESHUA. 

 

 

The Very Elect Revisited 

 

Two more remarks on the very elect must be made at this time.  First, overcomers (the apparent very elect) of the Philadelphia Assembly, identified by Yohanan, are scheduled to become “pillars” in the millennial Temple of El (Rev 3:12). 

 

In a second important Scripture, David allocated 7,000 talents of refined silver to overlay the walls of Shlomo’s Temple (I Chron 29:4).  Does this 7,000 connect in some fashion to the earlier described 7,000 Israelites who did not bow their knees to the sun god Baal (I Kg 19:18)? 

 

In other words, is it possible that this text merely describes the later placement of some portion of the election in the construction of the Temple (like the very elect)? 

 

The Scriptural evidence is massive that indeed the generic election in the first century CE and again in the age end will be liken to refined silver.  The election in general will surely include the totality of the definition to likely include the very elect (which might could number 7,000 males plus a like number of females--Job 1:3; I Kg 19:18 and I Kg 20:15). 

 

As will be discussed in a later chapter on reconciliation, there will also be a definition of certain people in the category of refined gold (Isa 13:12: I Pet 1:6-7).  Lamentations 4:2 is very precise in describing the precious sons of Zion, as being refined gold and the work of the hands of the potter (which most often refers to the very elect). 

 

Putting this all together, is it possible that the very elect number of 7,000 can also be compared to refined gold?  Well certainly, it’s possible.  Of course, it must be allowed that the refined gold could be some other definition of the election.  The reader may make his/her own interpretation of these messages in relation to the election and the very elect. 

 

 

Thomas Jones Once More 

 

Writer Thomas Jones, in his previously mentioned book “The Elect:  Who Are They?--A Scriptural View,” made a reference to YESHUA’s remarks that “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt 22:14).  This far reaching text is enormously important and pregnant with a fantastic revelation if one can properly interpret it.  

 

Jones analyzed the literal Greek text which he relates as “Many for are called few but chosen” (for salvation).  He went on to relate that the message is a riddle which links the Greek words “kletoi” (called) and “eklektoi” (chosen).  Jones quotes the “American Standard Version of the Bible” as noting that the word called is correctly “called in word.” 

 

With this background, Jones then progressed to “Many people describe themselves in word as ‘called,’ but (in reality) few are chosen;” which can better be stated “For many are in their own words ‘called,’ but in reality few are the ‘Chosen.’”  Jones then goes on to relate this called and chosen to false and true physical Israelites which may or may not have merit. 

 

However, the interpretation offered by Jones is extremely significant when one relates it to the fact that in the real world, many people have claimed and do claim to be the called out ones (billions in Christianity during the last 1,960 years). 

 

Whereas, in fact, the Apostolic age and this present age end will apparently produce no more than the earlier described 288,000 male Israelites and a probable like number of females (hence, a few chosen ones--the election). 

 

 

One More Group 

 

Also, one may wonder about the number of people over the ages (both Christians and Jews) who have lived some portion of their lives in the context of trying to achieve reconciliation; but never actually achieving it (because they were not a part of the true election for Passover, Pentecost, or firstfruits of Sukkot)--although most of them probably thought they had received salvation in this lifetime. 

 

Persons in this category would have come to express faith and belief and be very dedicated commandment keepers (to some extent).  Yet, they died never realizing true reconciliation and salvation.  These such individuals will be addressed in some detail in later chapters herein.

 

In any case, it might be that some of these persons will represent a priority resurrection (in the future, remaining, great, Sukkot harvest) with extra blessings among the Adam kind. 

 

After all, one must remember that salvation is a free gift of grace.  But rewards will be made to saved people on the basis of works and deeds of righteousness.  Hence, works (of obedience) does not determine salvation.  But works do determine rewards to accrue to saved persons in the kingdom. 

 

 

The Two Olive Trees 

 

A future chapter will address the final two witnesses who allegorically are olive trees.  But since the subject of the Tabernacle and Temple has come up presently, in connection with the election, it would be well to note that the two doors and door posts of Shlomo’s Temple were evidently made from olive trees (I Kg 6:31-33). 

 

Obviously, the two doors and door posts were of symbolic significance to the future coming two witnesses. 

 

 

Palm Trees 

 

Another interesting feature of Shlomo’s Temple, which seems to have some relevance to the question of election, is the palm tree. 

 

The Word says the walls of the Temple, both within and without, and the doors and ledges were adorned with carved images of cherubims, flowers and palm trees (I Kg 6:29-35; 7:36; II Chron 3:5).  Yechezkel’s millennial Temple will likewise have palm trees associated with it (Ezek 40:16-41:26). 

 

This writer was unable to number these palm tree figures depicted on the physical Temple from the Book.  Certainly, there was a huge number of them which surely would reach into the hundreds and/or thousands and perhaps even hundreds of thousands.  However, there were a few other related texts in the Scriptures which might give the student of truth some perspective of what was involved. 

 

First, during the wilderness wanderings at the Exodus, the children of Yisrael dwelt for a period of time at Elim where they found 12 wells of water and 70 palm trees (Ex 15:27; Num 33:9). 

 

Obviously, the 12 water wells link in some fashion to the 12 tribes of Yisrael and the 12 apostles; and the 70 palm trees connect to the 70 Israelites who went down to Egypt (Ex 1:5), the 70 elders of Yisrael (Ex 24:1, 9; Num 11:16-25) and the 70 evangelists sent out by YESHUA (Lu 10:1-17). 

 

While there can be some question about the meaning of the palm tree otherwise, the prophet Yeshayahu may have provided an important clue of identification.  He wrote about palm branches (Isa 9:14) in the context of individual Israelite peoples who were (or more correctly, who will be) cut off in an Assyrian invasion of the House of Yisrael. 

 

All of these texts combine to suggest that palm trees or branches might refer to Israelites in the collective sense--both good and bad. 

 

In a second important allusion, the palm trees evidently were indicative of the righteous (Ps 92:12).  And who are the righteous in this context, and can they be numbered?  Of course, no one person on his/her own could ever be the righteous.  But through the work of The RUACH HA KODESH, some appear to be able to be cleaned up and evidently qualify.  Who are these?  Why the election, of course.

 

Consequently, for the last 6,000 years of Adam, it would appear that the just described 301,775 males (and likely, the 603,550 men and women) constitute the collective “body” (the congregation) of the righteous (as suggested by the Bride in the Song of Songs 7:6-8).  Could the Temple have had this many figures (or calculation) of palm trees? 

 

 

The Apple 

 

The prophet Joel (Yoel in the Hebrew), at Joel 1:12, connects the apple tree to the various trees discussed so far of allegorical importance in the Scriptures.  Also, on several occasions, the Word makes reference to the “apple” of The ELOHIM’s eye (Ps 17:8). 

 

While YHWH’s Torah is alluded to as being as precious as the “apple” of His eye (Ps 7:2), the reality is that it is the nation of Yisrael which is symbolically the apple of YAH’s eye (Deut 32:10; Lam 2:18; Zech 2:8, per “Wilson’s Dictionary of Bible Types”). 

 

At one time, Yakov Yisrael was described as being the apple of YHWH’s eye (Deut 32:10).  In the Song, it seems that YHWH YESHUA is One Apple among the other apple sons of Yisrael (S of S 2:3).  The conclusion one must come to is that the apple evidently symbolizes individual Israelites--perhaps as olives link to converted and changed Israelites. 

 

 

The Pomegranates 

 

As noted a little earlier, the pomegranate (Hebrew “rimmon”) tree or fruit seems to be additionally connected in some fashion to some form of an election or elect people, as was the silver and possibly as Yoel suggested (Joel 1:10-12).  Even ancient Jewish legends tied the pomegranates to Yisrael.  One legend noted that upon leaving Egypt, Yisrael was a flourishing orchard of pomegranates (“The Book of Legends,” p. 71). 

 

Therefore, a study of this tree and its fruit could likewise render some valuable insight into the make up of the elect of Yisrael in the age end. 

 

In terms of the construction of Shlomo’s Temple, it appears that there were two rows each of 100 (96 visible and four not visible) figures of pomegranate trees at the top on brass “chapiters or capitals” on each of the two pillars (Boaz and Jachin) at the front of the Temple (I Kg 7:18-42; II Kg 25:17; II Chron 3:16; 4:13; Jer 52:22-23).  Hence, it seems that some 400 pomegranate figures actually adorned the two pillars. 

 

Besides being depicted on Temple pillars, the pomegranate fruit was also elaborately embellished on the robe of the high priest (Ex 28:33-34; 39:24-26).  It was one of the seven choice fruits of the land of Yisrael (Num 13:23; Deut 8:8) which was not available in the wilderness wanderings (Num 20:5). 

 

While the pomegranate tree itself was not much to behold, its flower and fruit were wonderful for many good reasons.  “Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v.13, p. 842) offers this description-- “beautiful red flowers, decorative fruit, and its delicious favor was especially beloved by the poet of the Song of Songs” (S of S 4:3, 13; 6:7, 11; 7:12; 8:2). 

 

 

Quantifying the Pomegranates 

 

Aside from the count of 400 pomegranates on the Temple pillars, it is well to also note that king Shaul spent some time under a pomegranate tree at Gibeah, along with some 600 of his men (I Sam 14:2).  Furthermore, the pomegranate tree or fruit is associated periodically with other trees, as well--like the vine, olive, apple and fig trees, as noted above (Num 20:5; Deut 8:8; Jer 52:20-23; Joel 1:12). 

 

Finally, to go back to the situation involving the number of Israelites who will go to the land of Yisrael in the age end to help in the rebuilding of a Third Temple, as noted in previous remarks, it is appropriate to note that this entourage will include some “pomegranates” (Hag 2:19).  Still more will be said about this return in yet one more future chapter in this book. 

 

But for the present in this discussion, is it possible to relate any of these numbers to the elect people of Yisrael?  While Shaul’s 600 men may or may not be important, one would have to suppose that the 400 trees on the Temple pillars could have some particular relevance depending upon their meaning. 

 

If one talent of silver is equal to 3,000 shekels of silver (and 3,000 elect male Israelites) and if one pomegranate tree relates to one talent of silver, could 400 pomegranates equal 1.2 million (3,000 times 400 and 100,000 times 12) of what?  The reader can make his/her own interpretation of this number at this point, although it will be broached again in a later chapter. 

 

 

Putting the Trees Together 

 

There are several Scriptures which put several of these different trees or fruits together in one presentation.  A good illustration of such a combination occurs at Judges 9:7-15, which will be discussed and described in some detail in later chapters. 

 

The books of Haggai and Zechariah are extremely important for the age end because they lay out much of the excruciating reality of the count down to the age end and particularly in the vein of events in Jerusalem and Palestine (in association with the building of the Third Temple). 

 

Not only did these two wonderful, post-exile, prophetic books lay out many of the specifies, but they also dated them at least in a generic sense.  Hence, these books are extremely important and valuable in order to understand the age end.  Though these prophets will be addressed in some detail in subsequent chapters, they need some comment here. 

 

One of the interesting prophecies by Haggai seems to suggest a fulfillment on or sometime immediately following the 24th day of the 9th Scriptural month--as will be described in detail in a subsequent chapter (Hag 2:10, 15, 18-23). 

 

With the passage of time, it seems clear that this prophecy did not take place in the year 2000, although it is interesting that some important events did occur in the 6th, 7th and 8th months of that year which might seem to be ante-typical fulfillments of what is to ultimately come in a later year.  These possibilities will be assessed in the subsequent chapters and also in Appendices D and E. 

 

The Haggai 2:18-19 prophecy deals with events to evidently follow the actual commencement of work at the site of the Third Temple   Haggai seems to say that whereas things had been bad in Palestine before the building started, things will definitely improve thereafter. 

 

 

To Produce Fruit? 

 

Specifically, it appears that YHWH will bless the vine, fig, pomegranate and olive trees to produce fruit.  Now, since the date of this effort was the late 9th month, it means that it must occur late in the year and near the start of winter.  For a first survey, one would likely suppose that the production of this fruit will occur the next agricultural year, starting the next spring--at least in the physical presentation. 

 

“The Soncino Books of the Bible” (“The Twelve Prophets,” p. 263) qualifies this remark by saying that The MOST HIGH’s “promise would soon be brought to the test, as the autumn rains were now due.”  While Soncino’s interpretation is insightful, there could be a far more profound issue involved in this prophecy and especially in the vein of the reality that those fruit trees represent definitions for Yisrael. 

 

The context of Zekharyah after the 11th month quickly passes to the very elect and/or the election in the prophecies dealing with the daughter of Zion (Zech 2:10) and with the golden candlestick (Zech 4, Rev 1-3).  It’s not hard to see that Haggai’s words address the production of fruit in terms of YHWH’s selected and elected people for service in the age end. 

 

Immediately, it must be acknowledged that the 144,000 election, generally, and more certainly the likely 7,000 of the very elect, particularly, are involved in Haggai’s words.  There is also the obvious in terms of the need for a certification or authentication of the priesthood and the appearance of the two witnesses on Mount Moriah and the four carpenters mentioned in Zechariah 1:20. 

 

The election generally will come out of the vine (although some could come from the fig tree).  A restored priesthood must surely come from Yehudah, the fig tree.  Certainly, the final two witnesses (and maybe all four carpenters) are olives.  As discussed in previous comments in this chapter, the pomegranate also plays a role in determining an elect group of Israelites (to be further described in a later chapter). 

 

The point is that Haggai must be referring to the commencement of the recognition, identification and/or designation of various classes of persons who will be in one of the elect categories in the coming (almost) three and one-half years that the Third Temple operates.  Manifestly, that seems to be the basis of Haggai’s words. 

 

 

More on the Trees 

 

Of possible final significance to the election and the future, the prophets Yoel and Amos connect the palm tree to the apple tree, the fig tree, the vine, the olive tree and the pomegranate tree; all of which were to be withered and dried up along with the wheat, barley and other agricultural harvests that also were to perish from a locust invasion (S of S 7:7-8; Joel 1:10-12; Amos 4:9). 

 

These prophetic remarks might be indicative of the age ending demonic invasion to surface--just about the time of the start of the great tribulation (Rev 9:1-11).  This catastrophic event will spell trouble for all the trees and grains for an apparent three and one-half years of the predicted great tribulation--occurring just before YESHUA returns (perhaps by Yechezkel’s 37th year). 

 

This coming eventuality might be what Yirmeyahu had in mind in his remark on the barren grape vines and fig trees (Jer 8:13).  These possibilities will be discussed more fully in future chapters. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 58--Qara-Hineni-Berit Hadashah-Hesed

 

 

A Relationship

 

The Scriptures, both the Old Testament and the New Testament, describe a relationship between The ELOHIM YHWH and His people.  That’s the essence of the entire Word that is available for study and contemplation by anyone of us in the world today.

 

It is not just any relationship.  But it is a particular relationship.  And more importantly, it is not with just any people or nation.  But it is with a particular people (as noted earlier).  Actually, as described in the former presentations, it is with the collective people of Yisrael and their legitimate ger converts. 

 

This chapter will briefly look at the overall concept of the relationship involved between YHWH and His people.  Earlier presentations and subsequent chapters have or will focus on the details of this relationship. 

 

Suffice to say, on this discussion in this production of 36 volumes of some 6,000 pages of material, this relationship and the people involved are considerably different in actuality than what the world has come to suppose.  Christianity has taught a bad message about this whole theme--a message which is simply false and wrong. 

 

 

The Four Ideas 

 

This chapter is entitled “Qara-Hineni-Berit Hadashah-Hesed.”  These are Hebrew concepts not really understood in the Christian world; although Christians talk about and belabor the berit hadashah words, which mean the “new or renewed covenant.”  Berit hadashah has been addressed in a preceding chapter and needs really nothing further here. 

 

The concept of hesed is a more complicated issue.  It was also addressed to some length in a previous chapter and requires no particular attention now.  As discussed earlier, the word probably means something close to “loyalty.” 

 

Perhaps a more full description for hesed might be that “it is a concept of a mutual, bilateral and reciprocal relationship between parties; which involves loyalty manifested in emotional feelings, attitude and deeds and actions of care, concern, love, kindness and affection on a reciprocal basis, as typically found in entities formalized and existing in covenant agreements (contracts).” 

 

Please note that hesed is a bilateral, mutual process.  It is not limited to simply one party to the agreement.  It involves duties, deeds and requirements from both parties. 

 

 

Qara

 

Qara simply means call or a calling (Young’s “Analytical Concordance,” p. 136).  “Vines Complete Expository Dictionary” (p. 29) gives it as “to call, call out, recite.”  Thus, it is plain to see why the NT election’s group name involved the “called out ones” which is the meaning of the Greek ekklesia and Hebrew qahal.  These two terms will be discussed at length in a later chapter herein.   

 

In the “Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period” (p. 111), Jacob Neusner gives the idea of qara as “the act by which God appoints a person to a particular role, status or task.”  It was used by The EHOHIM for the appointment of the prophets and other chosen people in the Tanakh.  The related Greek word is “kaleo” (meaning to call), as was discussed in preceding commentary. 

 

Manifestly, qara (and the Greek kaleo) completely underlies the whole concept of election and choice of people in the New Testament.  In fact, in Kefa’s famous dissertation on the need to repent, be baptized and receive the RUACH HA KODESH (Acts 2:37), the apostle went on to place his words in the context of those who are called (Acts 2:39). 

 

The ELOHIM’s calling is precisely involved in His action of making His selection of the people to make up the election, as was described in the former chapters. 

 

 

Hineni

 

But it is the next word in the series, hineni, which must receive some attention now because it completely underlies the whole concept of a calling, covenant and loyalty. 

 

In the call of Avraham, and with so many others, the response expressed by the called out one in the Hebrew is the word “hineni” (Gen 22:1; Ex 3:4; Isa 6:8; Acts 9:6).  Hineni means “Here am I” (Jan-Mar 2000 “Petah Tikvah,” p. 59).  It involves the acceptance of a commission, charge, choice or election. 

 

Hineni expresses eagerness to accept the commission or election at hand.  Thus, it is more than just “Here I am,” but it is “Here am I, eager and willing to do Your Will YHWH.”  Yes, pick me (in the reality that it is His choice and decision). 

 

Although this writer may not have the complete right slant on hineni, it seems logical that it is the final point or culmination in the conversion process (the conversion process will be addressed at length in later chapters herein). 

 

Thus, YHWH makes the call, and as rebellious, stubborn and evil as some of us are, it may be that from the time of the call it may take some changes in the lives of the elect before they finally can stand up and say hineni.  Consequently, hineni probably marks the final and true point of conversion. 

 

While the Scriptures are not clear that the concept of hineni was present in and came forth from each and every person in the election, that option is clearly implied. 

 

In other words, it is almost a foregone conclusion that each person in the election had to have or develop the attitude of hineni at some point of time.  In a sense, it is a type of eager acceptance of the calling and choice made by YHWH, as manifested in particular people (pointed out to me years ago by Messianic Jew Simha Pearlmutter).

 

 

Thus

 

Therefore, when we put the four ideas together, we come to a process of a calling to a covenanted relationship with YHWH, the response to the call and the resulting loyalty that the parties to the covenant will exhibit in their subsequent relationship.  In short, it involves a “calling, answer, covenant and loyalty.” 

 

What this amounts to is that the whole process or procedure is kicked off when The HIGHEST makes His choice and issues His call (qara) to an elected person which will invoke the response of hineni.  The chosen person then enters a covenanted relationship with The ELOHIM which then raises the need for loyalty from the parties involved in the contract or agreement. 

 

 

Some Examples 

 

In a way, the four part concept involved possibly first surfaced in the garden with Adam and Eve.  But they both rejected their opportunity and went into immediate sin.  For sure, they were then rejected from the election.  But will they be restored in the future?  Probably the answer is yes since all of Adam will be ultimately saved and cry out with hineni.   

 

Surely the situation with Noah was the next one where the call went out and Noah obviously responded with hineni.  He entered into a covenanted relationship with YHWH which demanded loyalty from the participants thereafter. 

 

The classic illustration of this process happened with Avraham in Genesis 22:1; although it is also implicitly present in Avraham’s’ first calling in Genesis 12:1.  Avraham confirmed the covenant with his actions regarding Yitzhak.  He received the call and he responded with hineni as the Scriptures declare.  He entered into the covenant with YHWH and thereafter the issue of loyalty persisted. 

 

Certainly, this process repeated with Yitzhak and Yakov Yisrael and on down the line to Moshe (as stated in Exodus 3:4) and the other called out Israelites in the Tanakh.  It seems to be a integral part and parcel of the whole idea of election and choice as made by The SUPREME ONE.  Everybody in the election must ultimately be called and respond with the attitude and motivation of hineni. 

 

 

The Promised Blessings and Curses

 

The Book has a number of promises of rewards, blessings and benefits to accrue to YHWH’s people who accept His calling and are loyal to the covenant. 

 

There are a huge number of texts which clearly communicate that the person called or chosen by YHWH will not only receive rewards and blessings in the world to come, but also rewards and blessings in this physical life and age here on earth.  A few will now be cited to prove the point. 

 

The best illustration occurred in the second commandment in the Decalogue (Ex 20:4-6).  This mitswah promises curses for disobedience to the third and fourth generations of such persons.  Conversely, blessings are promised to thousands of generations to those who obey Him. 

 

Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 present the Tanakh’s classic outline of the blessings (to certainly include health and healing, either as stated or implied) and curses to come on Yisrael for obedience or disobedience.  While these presentations are undoubtedly national in scope, they certainly read like individual pronouncements as well. 

 

Isaiah 53:5 is the powerful promise of healing to certain people from the beating of YESHUA.  By His stripes, “we” are healed.  Question, who is the “we” in this text--the very elect? 

 

In John 10:10, YESHUA declared that He had come that “they” might have life and have it more abundantly.  Question, who is the “they” in this presentation--the very elect?

 

Shaul’s beautiful words in Romans 8:28 make it plain that all things work together for good for those who love The ELOHIM and are called according to His purpose.  It is a fact of life that many readers of this text understand the idea of a calling and loving The MOST HIGH.  But they never seem to grasp the need for a calling according to the purpose of YHWH. 

 

By the way, Romans 8:28 is a part of a larger involved presentation by Shaul on the issue of predestination and how it ties into the question of the election.  Obviously, the elected ones are predestined, as Shaul perceptively reported. 

 

Of course, the above citations only scratch the surface in terms of the promises of healings, blessings, etc in the Word.  The Book is replete with those messages. 

 

As a minimum, from the fleshly point of view, the blessings must include the issue of health and healing since this theme is so paramount among people living a life in the flesh on planet earth.  Yes, a person sick and in pain and need for physical health is hardly concerned with any benefits to be derived from money, property and wealth.  Manifestly, health and healing must be man’s most important needs in the flesh. 

 

Thus, it is very logical that the promises to certainly the very elect in this context does not address material wealth, money, gold, etc, as they might be needed to exist and survive in this wretched world.  That’s why the need for healing, health, happiness, joy and other more important intangible needs assume center stage in any focus on the promises. 

 

 

Christian Reality

 

Thus, it would seem that with a calling and its acceptance (which must occur at the ultimate point of true conversion), the called out ones enter into a covenanted relationship with YHWH which requires loyalty on the part of the parties involved (suggesting that The ELOHIM must indeed be The HEALER of His people in the covenanted relationship, as allowed in the Word). 

 

On this subject, two points surface at once.  First, anyone familiar with Christianity knows at once that Christians have seized the promises and blessings promised Yisrael and applied them to Christians and Christianity (as will be addressed later herein). 

 

But that thinking will simply not correlate to reality.  The message of election in this present age is to Yisrael and not Christianity.  So, if these promised blessings, healings and benefits are for Yisrael, why is that Christians constantly try to apply them to Christianity? 

 

Secondly, in the real world, does The ELOHIM become The HEALER of so-called Christian believers? 

 

Well, some Christians, like the Pentecostals and Charismatics, claim that YHWH heals them.  But is this true?  Of course, when Pentecostal and Charismatic people seem to obtain healing results in their healing campaigns (like with the well known Oral Roberts who used to have large healing meetings), some persons immediately associate the Scriptural promises of healing to the Christian ministry involved. 

 

But are these healings the ones promised in the Word?  Are they valid from The HIGHEST?  This writer suggests that the ones occurring in Christendom are not those promised in the Word.  This reality is discussed at length in chapters hereafter. 

 

Previous remarks on the Torah demonstrate that there is an enormous problem of obedience within Christendom.  Christianity is far removed from the obedience taught in the Word.  Obviously, blessings to people who obey cannot encompass disobedient and rebellious Christians.  Something else is needed. 

 

 

The Real World 

 

If a young, healthy, 20-year man becomes exposed to asbestos fibers and inhales them (either in an unprotected building or from the once sold Kent cigarettes with their asbestos filters, as this writer once stupidly did), the sad fact of life is that some 40 or so years later, the person will certainly come down with lung cancer.  It seems almost inevitable and unavoidable. 

 

When Shaul wrote in the NT about the sin connections to injuring or damaging the body (I Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; to be later addressed herein), it is clear that his admonition included the breathing of asbestos fibers (however it happens).  Thus, when we sin that way, we can expect to be cursed for disobedience. 

 

It is an assured fact that eventually we will die from our sin, unless we die from some other cause earlier.  That’s the reality of life. 

 

Now, let us suppose that the above cited person (breathing asbestos fibers) is converted in Christendom or even Judaism or some other religion at age 30.  The worldly presumption is that with religious conversion, the past sins are forgiven.  Will the man’s earlier sin of breathing poisonous asbestos fibers be forgiven?  Or will he still face the inevitable lung cancer? 

 

Obviously, if a person did sin against his body and bring on an injury which will eventually cause death; then, per the Scriptures, that person would be forgiven and healed by The ELOHIM if he is truly converted.  But true conversion is limited to a calling, a response, acceptance of the covenant and loyalty to it. 

 

So, if the man sins at age 20, is converted and responds at age 30, it just seems, per the Word, that he will be in good health after true conversion.  He will not face lung cancer and death from his sins later in life at age 60 or so. 

 

Obviously, something is profoundly wrong in this option--either in the way the promises of healings and blessings are present in the Word, or the promises to health and healing in this life don’t apply to persons in general who decide on their own that they are called and supposedly converted. 

 

No, the promises of healings, health and blessings are for people who indeed have faced the call, conversion with hineni, living the covenant and practicing loyalty (which involves obedience of YHWH’s mitzwot). 

 

These things are simply not present in the world today.  For sure, they are absolutely not a part of Christianity, Judaism or any other known religion.  Indeed, they have not been present since the days of the Apostolic Assembly.  Thus, for the last 1930 years, any person breathing asbestos fibers (from Kent cigarettes or however) can count on eventually coming down with lung cancer (maybe 40 years later), if he lives that long. 

 

So-called religious conversion will mean nothing to alter that destiny.  Standing up in  a Christian meeting, being baptized or performing some other Christian work will not alter the future death.  Thus, there is no forgiveness of the contributing sin--at least not in the sense of living this life in the flesh after supposed true conversion. 

 

Of course, there then has to be a question about the promises of health and healing from YHWH to His people.  Are they valid?  Or is there something missing in this equation and discussion? 

 

 

Some Observations

 

This writer is now an old man.  For the last thirty years or so, my contact with so-called believers has been limited with a few Sacred Namers, Christian Identity types and Messianic Jews.  While these definitions have had and do have enormous problems over obedience, they are at least far more obedient than the rest of so-called Christendom. 

 

Many of these persons are Sabbath keepers, feast day observers, and at least have brains enough to eat Scripturally clean foods.  While they don’t make much effort to obey all of the Torah, they do make some effort to obey some of the important things in the Torah. 

 

Yet, even among these better believers (in the sense of them being more obedient than others out in society), there is no real evidence of blessings, healings, etc coming to them in this life--beyond the fact that obedience of the Torah does, in itself, bring forth blessings and benefits in the here and now (thus, if you obey the Torah and don’t breathe asbestos fibers, you will not be cursed with asbestos lung cancer). 

 

The problem arises that when we stupidly sin and transgress the Torah, there then never seems to be any forgiveness and restoration in this life and age.  Thus, our sins will bring forth punishment, curses and hurt upon us and we can never escape this coming eventual punishment here in the flesh (in terms of the present system which seems to exist on earth). 

 

 

My Sardis Friend

 

A later chapter herein tells the story of a Sardis Church leader this writer knew for years in Southern Idaho.  Without repeating those comments, it is useful to note that he had roots with the historic Sardis Church of God Seventh Day motion with the addition of keeping the feasts of Leviticus 23.  He always seemed like a fine gentlemen to me; although it was clear that, in his ignorance, he did not obey all of the Torah. 

 

This man had three beautiful Adamic daughters.  Soon, a holy roller, mamzer type male moved in on this family and its church group and married one of the girls.  He introduced/promoted the demonic holy roller nonsense to the whole group after the death of my friend (the holy roller evil will be described at length in later chapters herein). 

 

The result has been catastrophic to this family and indeed the entire church group which my friend led for years.  It is difficult if not impossible to perceive any blessings to my friend’s descendants in the future with the curses which came to them.  Instead, the curses will certainly last three or four generations. 

 

So here we have a fairly obedient person, at least in terms of traditional Christendom, and disaster comes to his family and church group simply because of one primary stupid mistake (of ignorantly allowing a mamzer holy roller into fellowship with his group).  Of course, Moshe had to pay dearly for his one mistake also, as noted elsewhere herein. 

 

 

Death of Religious Friends

 

In the last several years, this writer has had several friends die following long periods of prolonged illness, suffering and hurt.  Most of them became bedfast and were in great pain.  These friends were all extremely obedient to the Word; although they were, like me and all other persons known to me, carnal and fleshly people (the problem with carnality and the flesh will be addressed in later chapters herein). 

 

While it would have been marvelous if my religious friends could have died in peace (as happened with Avraham and Moshe), without any suffering and hurt, this is not the way it worked out.  They underwent much illness and many health problems before finally dying (of cancer, strokes, etc)

 

It is not clear why their illnesses happened; although the probabilities are that each of them (as well as yours truly) either had genetic problems or environmental problems which resulted in damage to their human bodies (thus, with some presence of sin on the part of themselves or their parents).   

 

After being supposedly converted and living in some measure of faith and obedience for years, they were never able to find healing and restoration to health.  They never found forgiveness in the flesh.  It just seemed that their lives knew many curses and much suffering and pain instead of healings, blessings and abundant living. 

 

Other presentations herein have outlined the dilemma of trying to obey YHWH’s mitswot in this wretched world of living.  The problem is that society is simply not in tune with the Torah.  It is not that man cannot obey the Torah.  But rather, it is that collective society makes it hard to obey the Torah. 

 

For my friends, it meant that they not only had major health problems but problems of simply living in this world while trying to be obedient to YHWH. 

 

In mentioning these friends of this writer, there is no intent to suggest or imply that their obedience will not ultimately be rewarded. 

 

As discussed elsewhere herein, believers cannot earn salvation from works (this reality is repeated over and over in this presentation).  But they can earn rewards in the future life from works here in this life.  Surely, YHWH will one day reward each of my friends for his works--just as He will reward all of Yisrael. 

 

 

The Bottom Line 

 

The bottom line on this discussion is that the calling, response, covenant and loyalty described in the conversion process is something that is vastly different from what we limited humans/humanoids might suppose. 

 

So all of my friends, who died without being in the election, did not realize the benefits and healings promised in the Word here in the flesh (the issue here is not on the promises cited in Hebrews 11:13, which addresses the promises of the land grant, as presented in the Lamsa translation.  Instead, as noted above, the subject is the promised healings, health, etc available to true people of faith in contact with YHWH).  

 

It is crystal clear that healings and some measure of blessings, benefits and abundant living (as cited above, this surely does not focus on material wealth, money, etc) should accrue to the true persons in contact with The HIGHEST--that is, after the initial conversion process which might entail a series of very trying, painful and difficult experiences, as will be addressed in subsequent chapters herein. 

 

But the blessing/healing ideas have to be to those people who are truly converted (the real called out ones--the ones who are called and who do respond with hineni and the covenant and the practice of loyalty after conversion). 

 

In other words, there are reasons to believe that a calling and covenanted relationship may have to be involved and exist for the promised blessings to accrue.  In the absence of this precise election and choice by YHWH and the needed true conversion and hineni, the supposedly converted person cannot necessarily expect good health and healing after the supposed conversion. 

 

The greater problem now is simply that all of this process now seems absent from the world presently (at least, as this writer now sees it).  Assuredly, it will come to a group of people in future days which will make up the age end very elect.  It’s just that it is not now present--at least not in 2003.