Is God done with the Jews?

[placebofactor]

Exodus 3:2, “The angel of the LORD appeared unto (Moses) in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.” And so, Israel a bush burned with fire, yet not consumed. The chosen people of God, remain the apple of his eye They have been expelled, exposed to misery, persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, and murdered from the time of their captivity in Egypt to this very day, yet Israel lives as a nation. Have you ever asked yourself why, why have the Jews been persecuted so horribly, yet preserved as a people and nation?

God's Plan:
The LORD planned to use a descendant of Noah, from the line of his firstborn son, Shem, to separate a people for himself and create a nation. And through all their corruption, and foolishness, the Jews remain the “apple of God’s eye.” Here is the LORD’s explicit declaration to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, his twelve sons, and all the generations to follow.

Genesis 12:2, “I (the LORD) will make of you a great nation, I will bless you, and make your name great,” The promise of a nation assumes the existence of a national homeland.

Genesis 17:19, “Sarah your wife shall bear you a son indeed, and you shall call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an EVERLASTING covenant, and with his seed (his descendants) after him.”

Now because they sinned against God, the ten Northern tribes were overrun by the Assyrians in 790 B.C. The Babylonians murdered tens of thousands of Jews, and in 586 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the Temple and the city of Jerusalem. Around 465 B.C. the Jews escaped the ruin designed for them by Haman. They would suffer the onslaught of Ptolemy Lagus King of Egypt, the dispersion by Seleucus Nicator, the slaughter by Antiochus Epiphanes, the ravaging by Crassus the Roman General, and by Herod the Great.

After murdering the Lord Jesus, the scepter would temporally depart from Judah. But this was only the beginning of Israel’s calamities.
Deuteronomy 28:29, “And you (Israel) shall grope at noonday, as the blind grope in darkness, and you shall not prosper in your ways: and you shall be only oppressed and spoiled (be plundered continually) evermore, and no man shall save you.” See Mathew 24.

Matthew 27:25, As the Lord hung from the cross, the people cried out, “Let his blood be on us and our children.” The people put a curse on their own heads and the heads of their children. Thousands would be killed at Cesarea, Damascus, Bethshan, and Alexandria, by Vespasian, and by the Roman Legions led by Titus. In Jerusalem, over a million were killed, and at Masasada a thousand more died by their own hand. Then the Roman Catholics began their persecution of Jews, this followed by the Islamic hordes, the Ottoman, and most recently Adolph Hitler and his Nazi party who took the lives of 6 million. The LORD’s judgments upon the Jews have been terrible, extending to the people, their religion, and the land. Their ceremonies essential to their religion are no longer observed, except by the Orthodox Jews: also, no longer observed is their ritual law, for they remain without a Temple, altar, and sacrifice.

But the LORD has kept his promise, Ezekiel 37:24, “I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and all your idols, will I cleanse you.”

The time of cleansing had arrived: It began on May 14, 1948, when a generation of newborn babies came into the World. God’s promise, “This generation shall not pass away until all these things (Matthew wrote about) are fulfilled.” This generation is now 76 years of age. Israel is at war in the North, South and West. Antisemitism abounds throughout the world, and hatred against them is on the rise. There remains for them one friend, the community of Christians. We must continue to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

The bush of Moses, surrounded with flames, forever burns, yet it will never be consumed.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to The Third Eye in post #2]

You asked, "Are the Jews done with God?"

The Orthodox Jews remain in touch with Jehovah and the law but reject the Son, They believe Jesus existed, but only as a man. Hmm, that's exactly what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, imagine that.

That is a lie. We do not think that Jesus was only a man. He is the Son of God who came down from heaven, carried out his Father's instructions, then was resurrected back to life and is now in heaven at the right hand of God. He is NOW our King who is involved in organizing the preaching of the Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20)

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

[Capbook]

[Replying to The Third Eye in post #2]

You asked, "Are the Jews done with God?"

The Orthodox Jews remain in touch with Jehovah and the law but reject the Son, They believe Jesus existed, but only as a man. Hmm, that's exactly what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, imagine that.

That is a lie. We do not think that Jesus was only a man. He is the Son of God who came down from heaven, carried out his Father's instructions, then was resurrected back to life and is now in heaven at the right hand of God. He is NOW our King who is involved in organizing the preaching of the Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20)

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to The Third Eye in post #2]

You asked, "Are the Jews done with God?"

The Orthodox Jews remain in touch with Jehovah and the law but reject the Son, They believe Jesus existed, but only as a man. Hmm, that's exactly what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, imagine that.

That is a lie. We do not think that Jesus was only a man. He is the Son of God who came down from heaven, carried out his Father's instructions, then was resurrected back to life and is now in heaven at the right hand of God. He is NOW our King who is involved in organizing the preaching of the Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20)

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

Of course it would be better to know Hebrew and Greek, but I don't and most people don't either. We do the best we can comparing Bible versions and reading the opinions of Bible scholars, and comparing verses in the Bible with other verses in the same version. A person can get the truth of the matters from doing this.

[placebofactor]

[Replying to The Third Eye in post #2]

You asked, "Are the Jews done with God?"

The Orthodox Jews remain in touch with Jehovah and the law but reject the Son, They believe Jesus existed, but only as a man. Hmm, that's exactly what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe, imagine that.

That is a lie. We do not think that Jesus was only a man. He is the Son of God who came down from heaven, carried out his Father's instructions, then was resurrected back to life and is now in heaven at the right hand of God. He is NOW our King who is involved in organizing the preaching of the Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20)

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

The Greek language went through three epochs. The first was that of the poets like Homer and Hesiod. It was called the days of Attic (Greek) elegant and pure. In the 2nd phase, the language declined after the Macedonian conquest, and again under Roman dominion when they broke up the independent states. It was then the various languages mingled together. The men who enlisted in the Roman Legions came from many conquered nations, and add to that the founding of new colonies, and cities. Add to that the variety of people who inhabited them, they came from every part of Greece and foreign lands. And so, the Greek language changed.

The later Greek language dominated only because the Jews came in contact with the Greeks after the Macedonian conquests. Except for Paul and Luke, the other writers of the N.T. were uneducated men, and like the rest of their countrymen, knew only the Greek language of the common people.

And how would you know what manuscripts the writers of the N.W.T. used? Sure, they listed everything from the kitchen sink to the toilet plunger. You have no idea who they were, no names, addresses, education, or the manuscripts they translated from. I am sure they were all Jehovah's Witnesses before they began their work of translation, they did not believe Jesus was God, there is no such person as the Holy Spirit, man does not exist in the body, and soul and spirit, those in their organization are the 144,000, there is no lake of fire, everyone is saved eventually, even the worst humans that ever lived will one day be saved. Hmm sounds like the Catholic teaching of Purgatory.

In the 1984 edition of the N.W.T., they compiled a list of 96 sources they claim to have used. They include the Textus Receptus. Here's my issue. If they used the Receive text of the K.J.B. as they claim, yet taught Jesus is not God, what they did was, they pick and choose from the 96 sources that agreed with their teaching. And so, the N.W. T. is a concoction, a brew of, "we agree with this, let's use it, but we disagree with that, let's not use it." And so, passages were changed like John 1:1, Revelation 1:1, and hundreds of others.

One thing I am sure of, the Witnesses used two of the most corrupted manuscripts ever found for their foundation text, the A. and the B., and surely not the Received Text of the K.J.B. as they claim.

[onewithhim]

That is a lie. We do not think that Jesus was only a man. He is the Son of God who came down from heaven, carried out his Father's instructions, then was resurrected back to life and is now in heaven at the right hand of God. He is NOW our King who is involved in organizing the preaching of the Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20)

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

The Greek language went through three epochs. The first was that of the poets like Homer and Hesiod. It was called the days of Attic (Greek) elegant and pure. In the 2nd phase, the language declined after the Macedonian conquest, and again under Roman dominion when they broke up the independent states. It was then the various languages mingled together. The men who enlisted in the Roman Legions came from many conquered nations, and add to that the founding of new colonies, and cities. Add to that the variety of people who inhabited them, they came from every part of Greece and foreign lands. And so, the Greek language changed.

The later Greek language dominated only because the Jews came in contact with the Greeks after the Macedonian conquests. Except for Paul and Luke, the other writers of the N.T. were uneducated men, and like the rest of their countrymen, knew only the Greek language of the common people.

And how would you know what manuscripts the writers of the N.W.T. used? Sure, they listed everything from the kitchen sink to the toilet plunger. You have no idea who they were, no names, addresses, education, or the manuscripts they translated from. I am sure they were all Jehovah's Witnesses before they began their work of translation, they did not believe Jesus was God, there is no such person as the Holy Spirit, man does not exist in the body, and soul and spirit, those in their organization are the 144,000, there is no lake of fire, everyone is saved eventually, even the worst humans that ever lived will one day be saved. Hmm sounds like the Catholic teaching of Purgatory.

In the 1984 edition of the N.W.T., they compiled a list of 96 sources they claim to have used. They include the Textus Receptus. Here's my issue. If they used the Receive text of the K.J.B. as they claim, yet taught Jesus is not God, what they did was, they pick and choose from the 96 sources that agreed with their teaching. And so, the N.W. T. is a concoction, a brew of, "we agree with this, let's use it, but we disagree with that, let's not use it." And so, passages were changed like John 1:1, Revelation 1:1, and hundreds of others.

One thing I am sure of, the Witnesses used two of the most corrupted manuscripts ever found for their foundation text, the A. and the B., and surely not the Received Text of the K.J.B. as they claim.

I am sure that the JWs used sources that were not corrupt. Their version of the Bible is the most pristine of any version. Passages were NOT changed. They adhered to the original language and the proper way to translate Greek into English which the KJV did not do.

And we do not say that "everyone is saved eventually." Where do you get some of your ideas about JWs? You don't know a good portion of what we believe. We certainly do not believe that everyone will be saved eventually. There are many scriptures that speak of the wicked being destroyed.

Psalm 2:4,5
Psalm 37:1,2,9,10, 38.
Proverbs 1:32
Isaiah 26:10-14

There are so many I can not cite them all. It is clear that the wicked will be utterly destroyed.

[placebofactor]

What do you mean by the Son of God? And what's the difference between that and Jesus being called the Son of man? You teach that the devil is a son of God, and men are sons of God, so how in your mind does Jesus differ? What form is Jesus now in? If he came down from heaven what would Jesus look like?

In Acts 3:13, the N.W.T. changed Son to Servant.

In Acts 8:37, the N.W.T. left the numbers 37-38 in, but removed the whole verse (its blank) that contains the following, "And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

In Acts 13:33, the N.W.T. changed "Son" to "son," lowercase.

In Romans 1:3, the N.W.T. put Son in, but left out, Jesus Christ our Lord," And I can go on and on. I bet they never left out or changed the name Jehovah in any verse. But when it comes to Jesus, different ball game.

Revelation 22:18-19, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life,"

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

The Greek language went through three epochs. The first was that of the poets like Homer and Hesiod. It was called the days of Attic (Greek) elegant and pure. In the 2nd phase, the language declined after the Macedonian conquest, and again under Roman dominion when they broke up the independent states. It was then the various languages mingled together. The men who enlisted in the Roman Legions came from many conquered nations, and add to that the founding of new colonies, and cities. Add to that the variety of people who inhabited them, they came from every part of Greece and foreign lands. And so, the Greek language changed.

The later Greek language dominated only because the Jews came in contact with the Greeks after the Macedonian conquests. Except for Paul and Luke, the other writers of the N.T. were uneducated men, and like the rest of their countrymen, knew only the Greek language of the common people.

And how would you know what manuscripts the writers of the N.W.T. used? Sure, they listed everything from the kitchen sink to the toilet plunger. You have no idea who they were, no names, addresses, education, or the manuscripts they translated from. I am sure they were all Jehovah's Witnesses before they began their work of translation, they did not believe Jesus was God, there is no such person as the Holy Spirit, man does not exist in the body, and soul and spirit, those in their organization are the 144,000, there is no lake of fire, everyone is saved eventually, even the worst humans that ever lived will one day be saved. Hmm sounds like the Catholic teaching of Purgatory.

In the 1984 edition of the N.W.T., they compiled a list of 96 sources they claim to have used. They include the Textus Receptus. Here's my issue. If they used the Receive text of the K.J.B. as they claim, yet taught Jesus is not God, what they did was, they pick and choose from the 96 sources that agreed with their teaching. And so, the N.W. T. is a concoction, a brew of, "we agree with this, let's use it, but we disagree with that, let's not use it." And so, passages were changed like John 1:1, Revelation 1:1, and hundreds of others.

One thing I am sure of, the Witnesses used two of the most corrupted manuscripts ever found for their foundation text, the A. and the B., and surely not the Received Text of the K.J.B. as they claim.

I am sure that the JWs used sources that were not corrupt. Their version of the Bible is the most pristine of any version. Passages were NOT changed. They adhered to the original language and the proper way to translate Greek into English which the KJV did not do.

And we do not say that "everyone is saved eventually." Where do you get some of your ideas about JWs? You don't know a good portion of what we believe. We certainly do not believe that everyone will be saved eventually. There are many scriptures that speak of the wicked being destroyed.

Psalm 2:4,5
Psalm 37:1,2,9,10, 38.
Proverbs 1:32
Isaiah 26:10-14

There are so many I can not cite them all. It is clear that the wicked will be utterly destroyed.

97% of over 5500 known manuscripts agree with the Received Text of the K.J.B. Don't believe me, check it out for yourself.

[onewithhim]

Your disagreements are sour grapes. JWs believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God who was sent to the earth by his Father to save mankind from sin and death. Others can be "sons" of God but not in the same sense as Jesus Christ. Any changes in verses are those that do not destroy the meaning of the verses.

Acts 3:13 is translated the same as the NWT by other versions: The NASB says "servant" instead of "Son" as well, so don't come down on the NWT as if it was the only one.

Acts 8:37 in the NWT shows in a footnote that some manuscripts include "'If you believe with all your heart, it is permissible.' In reply he said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The NWT left it out because certain early manuscripts had not included it. (Leaving it out does not mean that JWs don't agree with it. We certainly do.) The NASB says in a footnote that "early mss do not contain this verse."

Romans 1:3: The words "Jesus Christ our Lord" is absent from the NASB as well as the NWT. It's not just the NWT that has these various differences. The NIV leaves out those words also. So does the Revised Standard Version. I could go on and on.

There is no different ball game when it comes to Jesus. He is shown to be the Son of God, our Lord and King, throughout the NWT.

Jesus is now in the same form as that of God---Spirit. (John 4:24) He is at the right hand of God, so how could he be a physical Person? Flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God (I Corinth. 15:50). As it says in the Scripture: "'The first man Adam became a living soul.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit." (I Corinthians 15:45, The New American Bible; King James Version; American Standard Version and many more.) If he came down from heaven he would materialize a body that looks like a well-dressed and -groomed man, the way men look at our Kingdom Halls.

Why are you so intent on going after the NWT? What do you get out of it? It has not changed the meanings of anything, and follows what innumerable other versions have done.

Why? Because of the history of the manuscripts the N.W.T. uses, as do most every modern-day Bible as their foundation text. If you examined the history of the A. and B. texts honestly, you would have the answer to your own question. But you won't because your organization tells you not to, which to me is NUTS! That's why I left the Catholic church; I don't need any Pope or bishop or father to do my thinking. I can think for myself, I don't need anyone to make decisions for me, or how to understand what is. Some people do because they're weak. There's nothing wrong with being weak, but the weak should not be teaching. Why? Because they are weak!

Many others would not consider us "weak." JWs think for themselves. We don't take anybody's word for anything until we can research it for ourselves,"

That's true, But, you have no idea of the education of those who claimed to be Hebrew and Greek scholars who translated and put together the N.W.T. Also tell us why the Witnesses now deny Taze Russel as the founder of your organization yet claim to be several hundred years old?

It is obvious what the translators of the NWT have in line with the Hebrew and Greek texts. If you have really checked out the NWT and its footnotes you could see how intricate the renderings are. They really know their stuff. Look at a study Bible, the large Bible. Don't cast aspersions if you haven't really studied the NWT Bible.

You don't understand the reasoning behind the fact that we don't call Charles Taze Russell the "founder" of our organization? The founder of our organization is Jesus Christ himself, as we hold him as our exemplar in all things truly Christian, even before the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church was controlling everything. We just continue to teach what Jesus taught and do things the way his direct followers did things. Charles Russell merely re-invigorated the organization in 1879 when he had questions about what the churches were teaching. They didn't teach about the Ransom---the major teaching of Christ's true followers from the beginning. He was correct in bringing up that subject. He faced other doctrines that the churches were teaching as fact when the Bible didn't teach them. The Scripture says that indeed, in the end the knowledge of the truth would be understood. JWs are spreading that knowledge. (Daniel 12: 4,9)

I hope that other people will find some sense in my post above. It is Scriptural and reasonable. I hope that folks will read it before casting aspersions.

What would you prefer to base your study, original Hebrew or Greek text or to the translations of it of which many varies.

The Greek language went through three epochs. The first was that of the poets like Homer and Hesiod. It was called the days of Attic (Greek) elegant and pure. In the 2nd phase, the language declined after the Macedonian conquest, and again under Roman dominion when they broke up the independent states. It was then the various languages mingled together. The men who enlisted in the Roman Legions came from many conquered nations, and add to that the founding of new colonies, and cities. Add to that the variety of people who inhabited them, they came from every part of Greece and foreign lands. And so, the Greek language changed.

The later Greek language dominated only because the Jews came in contact with the Greeks after the Macedonian conquests. Except for Paul and Luke, the other writers of the N.T. were uneducated men, and like the rest of their countrymen, knew only the Greek language of the common people.

And how would you know what manuscripts the writers of the N.W.T. used? Sure, they listed everything from the kitchen sink to the toilet plunger. You have no idea who they were, no names, addresses, education, or the manuscripts they translated from. I am sure they were all Jehovah's Witnesses before they began their work of translation, they did not believe Jesus was God, there is no such person as the Holy Spirit, man does not exist in the body, and soul and spirit, those in their organization are the 144,000, there is no lake of fire, everyone is saved eventually, even the worst humans that ever lived will one day be saved. Hmm sounds like the Catholic teaching of Purgatory.

In the 1984 edition of the N.W.T., they compiled a list of 96 sources they claim to have used. They include the Textus Receptus. Here's my issue. If they used the Receive text of the K.J.B. as they claim, yet taught Jesus is not God, what they did was, they pick and choose from the 96 sources that agreed with their teaching. And so, the N.W. T. is a concoction, a brew of, "we agree with this, let's use it, but we disagree with that, let's not use it." And so, passages were changed like John 1:1, Revelation 1:1, and hundreds of others.

One thing I am sure of, the Witnesses used two of the most corrupted manuscripts ever found for their foundation text, the A. and the B., and surely not the Received Text of the K.J.B. as they claim.

I am sure that the JWs used sources that were not corrupt. Their version of the Bible is the most pristine of any version. Passages were NOT changed. They adhered to the original language and the proper way to translate Greek into English which the KJV did not do.

And we do not say that "everyone is saved eventually." Where do you get some of your ideas about JWs? You don't know a good portion of what we believe. We certainly do not believe that everyone will be saved eventually. There are many scriptures that speak of the wicked being destroyed.

Psalm 2:4,5
Psalm 37:1,2,9,10, 38.
Proverbs 1:32
Isaiah 26:10-14

There are so many I can not cite them all. It is clear that the wicked will be utterly destroyed.

97% of over 5500 known manuscripts agree with the Received Text of the K.J.B. Don't believe me, check it out for yourself.

What do you mean? The verses I cited are in the KJV. Did you look them up?

[Capbook]

Is God done with the Jews?

As a nation , yes, as in the national group or political States of Israel no longer have a special relationship with God.

That said , INDIVIDUALS from any national group (including the natural/biological descendants of Abraham) can come into divine favor if they accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour and worship the True God Jehovah.

The modern day State of Israel does not have divine backing and will be destroyed at Armageddon along with all the other political States of this world.



RELATED POSTS

Who make up "spirituual" Israel ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 11#p900111

When Paul said "all Israel" would be saved was he refering to fleshly /natural Israel or SPIRITUAL Israel ? [Onewithim]
viewtopic.php?p=875857#p875857

Replacement theology: Who are the present day people of God?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 58#p857158

Did God reject his "chosen people"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p857250

Who are the REAL twelve tribes of Israel ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 7#p1023147

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SPIRITUAL ISRAEL , BORN AGAIN CHRISTIANS and ... THE 144, 000

I believe Israel shall be recovered from their rejection; be restored to the divine favor; become followers of the Messiah, and thus be saved as all other Christians are. (Rom 11;25-28)

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

[JehovahsWitness]

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written...

Paul is speaking about SPIRITUAL Israelites not fleshly Israel.


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS




RELATED POSTS

Who make up "spirituual" Israel ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 11#p900111

When Paul said "all Israel" would be saved was he refering to fleshly /natural Israel or SPIRITUAL Israel ? [Onewithim]
viewtopic.php?p=875857#p875857

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SPIRITUAL ISRAEL , BORN AGAIN CHRISTIANS and ... THE 144, 000

[onewithhim]

Is God done with the Jews?

As a nation , yes, as in the national group or political States of Israel no longer have a special relationship with God.

That said , INDIVIDUALS from any national group (including the natural/biological descendants of Abraham) can come into divine favor if they accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour and worship the True God Jehovah.

The modern day State of Israel does not have divine backing and will be destroyed at Armageddon along with all the other political States of this world.



RELATED POSTS

Who make up "spirituual" Israel ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 11#p900111

When Paul said "all Israel" would be saved was he refering to fleshly /natural Israel or SPIRITUAL Israel ? [Onewithim]
viewtopic.php?p=875857#p875857

Replacement theology: Who are the present day people of God?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 58#p857158

Did God reject his "chosen people"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p857250

Who are the REAL twelve tribes of Israel ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 7#p1023147

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SPIRITUAL ISRAEL , BORN AGAIN CHRISTIANS and ... THE 144, 000

I believe Israel shall be recovered from their rejection; be restored to the divine favor; become followers of the Messiah, and thus be saved as all other Christians are. (Rom 11;25-28)

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Rom 11:27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

This is referring to SPIRITUAL Israel, as Peter wrote about in his first letter to Christians in Asia, and Paul wrote about to the Galatians.

"You are a 'chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession, that you should declare abroad the excellencies' of the one that called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. For you were once not a people, but are now God's people." (I Peter 2:9,10)

"You are all, in fact, sons of God through your faith in Christ Jesus....There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one person in union with Christ Jesus. Moreover, if you belong to Christ, you are really Abraham's seed, heirs with reference to a promise." (Galatians 3:26-29)

Jesus said himself: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her, --how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks together under her wings! But you people did not want it. Look! Your house is abandoned to you." (Matthew 23:37,38)

"The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits." (Matthew 21:43)

James, the brother of Jesus said: "Symeon [Peter] has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name." (Acts 15:14)

So it's not about physical Israel anymore. It is clearly CHRISTIANS who are now God's people, from all lands and languages and cultures.