No, you are not the one who subscribes to Replacement Theology. You are the one who subscribes to a racist theology, in spite of God's declaring quite the opposite.
Bible Contradictions (ever heard this one before from skeptics?)
- Thread starter Victoria
- Start date
If that were the case, then there would be no need for any version, English, Greek, Hebrew or any other. That you think that to be so explains why you get so much wrong in what the Bible says and means.
And you seriously believe those verses apply to you. How funny. How sad.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Your conclusions do not follow.
The Holy Spirit directs the believer to the truth of the Word of God. He doesn't use error to grow a believer.
God is a God of order. Confusion is not of God. And with the many hundreds of English translations out there translated from the Revised Version of 1881, confusion has entered the Church. Before that the translation authorized by God to and for the English-speaking people is the KJV.
Just one more example of your seriously confused rendering of God's word.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
There is no rationale to do any more. There comes a time when the only thing left do is to shake the dust off of the feet.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Your ignorance precedes you. You never do that to born-again Christians. That’s a sin against Christ.
Why is it you and @FreeInChrist don't know these elementary things? Even baby Christians I know are knowing of this.
You both talk a lot about the body of Christ but fall short in the things a true believer would know from the gate.
Last edited:
FreeInChrist
Active Member
You have condemned a lot of people here. You judge and you have been told not to. As far as @Jim goes... he is beyond reproach.
As far as I go... I have already added you to the list of those who claim I will never be saved.
But don't you ever challenge either one of us about falling short in knowledge.
We know so much more then you do it makes my head spin because your eyes are veiled and ears so clogged you cannot see it.
I don't think Paul spent much time trying to convince the Judaizers in his day of their ignorance of the gospel truths and I think I will mimic him as far as you, also a Judaizer lacking in the gospel truths, are concerned.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
I am a Biblical Christian. I am under instruction and guidance from Scripture to judge between good and evil:
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Hebrews 5:12–14.
Between true and false:
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1.
But you don't know these things. Your false Gentile theology you learned from mainline "Christianity" is not Biblical for if it was you would know these things.
I can tell you've never been discipled. That's too bad. You drink milk when you should be consuming meat and come under the anointing in your studies. But you are resisting of the deeper things of God. I can't help you.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
You still haven't shown me a Scripture of a covenant between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles.
Jesus taught the Law and the Prophets just as Saul did. Both were rabbis, both were Judaizers.
All the twelve disciples were Judaizers. And they didn't change after they became born-again.
Saul, for one, remained a rabbi and Pharisee until the day he died. You want proof? Let's see if you are honest with Scripture:
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. Acts 21:24.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
Ac 21:25–26.
Purification rites under the Law. What? I thought some said the Law was "abolished" and "obsolete"? Nope. Not according to Scripture.
14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: Acts 24:13–14.
5 Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. Acts 26:5.
23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. Acts 28:22–23.
Saul, like Jesus, taught out of the Law and the Prophets.
Tell me...am I lying?
No, I am not.
Your bias against Jesus and Saul because they taught out of the Law is to stand in opposition to God.
Victoria
Active Member
If you could show me the corruption on sound doctrine in the KJB, then we could go from there.
What's so racist about believing God is NOT a covenant breaker, an adulterer, unfaithful, & untrue?
Isn't it the other way around snuffing out national Israel? I would think so.
There's a huge difference between Biblical Zionism, & Political Zionism.
Fleshly speaking, I'm a Gentile, btw.
Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--
Eph 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Wrong.
In the early church, those who taught a combination of God’s grace and human effort were called “Judaizers.” The word Judaizer comes from a Greek verb meaning “to live according to Jewish customs.” The word appears in Galatians 2:14 where Paul describes how he confronted Peter for forcing Gentile Christians to “Judaize.”
Gal 2:11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
Gal 2:12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party.
Gal 2:13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"
"to live like Jews" Ἰουδαΐ́ζω [Ioudaizō] , i.e., Judaize
You do precisely what Paul opposed Peter for doing.
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith
Php 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith
FreeInChrist
Active Member
My oh my..... You are sounding more Catholic every day.,
There is a clear biblical example of a covenant between God and all humanity, including non-Hebrew Gentiles: the Noahic Covenant in Genesis 9:8–17.
God established this covenant explicitly with Noah, his descendants, and "every living creature" after the flood, promising never again to destroy the earth with a flood (symbolized by the rainbow). This is a universal covenant applying to all people, not limited to Hebrews (who descend from Abraham centuries later).
While later covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, New) are primarily with Israel or its descendants, the Abrahamic Covenant includes a promise of blessing extending to Gentiles: "in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed" (Genesis 12:3; repeated in Genesis 18:18, 22:18). The New Testament interprets this as fulfilled through Christ, bringing salvation to Gentiles by faith (Galatians 3:8–9, 14).
In the New Covenant prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31–34 (with the houses of Israel and Judah), Gentiles participate through faith in Christ, becoming "fellow heirs" and grafted in (Ephesians 2:11–19; 3:6; Romans 11). However, no other direct covenant is made exclusively or primarily with non-Hebrew Gentiles as a group in Scripture ...the Noahic is the main universal one.
Jesus established (or inaugurated) the New Covenant during the Last Supper.
According to the New Testament accounts, Jesus explicitly referred to a covenant when sharing the cup of wine with his disciples.
In Luke 22:20, Jesus says: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."
In 1 Corinthians 11:25 (recalling the same event), Paul quotes Jesus: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."
In Matthew 26:28 (and parallel in Mark 14:24), Jesus says: "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Some manuscripts and interpretations add "new" here, linking it to the prophesied new covenant.
This "new covenant" fulfills the prophecy in Jeremiah 31:31–34, where God promises a new covenant written on people's hearts, with forgiveness of sins—unlike the old covenant made through Moses (involving animal sacrifices and the law).
At the Last Supper, which we all know was a Passover meal or we should, Jesus reinterprets the bread and wine as symbols of his body and blood, instituting the Lord's Supper. His words indicated that his impending death on the cross would seal this new covenant through his sacrificial blood, providing permanent forgiveness and a direct relationship with God.
FOR ALL WHO BELIEVE AND HAVE FAITH. That covered both non-Hebraic Jews as well as those who came to know and understand who Jesus was and what the importance of His shedding Hois blood.
The covenant was announced and symbolically enacted at the Last Supper, but it was fully ratified by Jesus' death and resurrection shortly after. This event marks the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant in Christian theology.
This is something that you, @jeremiah1five may not understand for as search assist tells us. I actually doubt you would call yourself a Christian simply because your mind is set well before these datse.
The term "Christian" was first used in reference to Jesus's disciples in the city of Antioch, as recorded in the Bible in Acts 11:26, which dates to around 40-50 AD. This name was given to them by others, not by the followers themselves.
The New Covenant begins with Israel (as prophesied), but through Jesus' death and resurrection, its spiritual blessings—forgiveness of sins, the indwelling Holy Spirit, and direct knowledge of God—are extended universally to all who believe, regardless of ethnicity.
At the Last Supper, Jesus shared this with his Jewish disciples in a Passover context, but the apostles (e.g., Paul ministering to Gentiles in 2 Corinthians 3:6) applied it to the church, which includes both Jews and Gentiles.
Some dispensational views hold that the New Covenant is primarily for a future restored Israel, with Gentiles benefiting indirectly through the church. However, the dominant historic Christian interpretation (across Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox traditions) sees the church as the fulfillment where Jew and Gentile are united in one body under this covenant.
In summary, the covenant Jesus established is for all believers—starting with the Jewish people as promised, but graciously including Gentiles through faith in him. There is no distinction in access to its core promises.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Saul wrote his letter to Jews and Jewish Christians living in Gentile lands (Ephesus.) But because you believe in false Constantinian Gentile theology which has taken everything Hebrew and made it Gentile (white Jesus, for one) you are twisted in your thinking.
Even within the early Church in Jerusalem, there was a distinction made between "Hebrews" and "Grecians."
And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Acts 6:1.
The Grecians were Jews of mixed-race who the Jews did not call Jew because they were of mixed-race. These were Jews of the Diaspora. They spoke Greek and had adopted Greek culture. To the "strict" Hebrews, these "Grecians" were often seen as "compromised" or "lesser" Jews because of their Gentile-like lifestyle. They were called "Gentile" in the NT and not Jew because they were mixed-race just as Jews called the mixed-race offspring of the northern kingdom tribes and Gentiles (Assyrians, etc.), "Samaritan" and not Jew just as Jews called the southern kingdom tribes mixed-race Jews "Gentile" and not "Jew." They were the subject of the Jerusalem Council and the question of whether these uncircumcised mixed-race Jews should be circumcised after being "born-again" by the Holy Spirit of Promise PROMISED TO ISRAEL (Joel.) Timothy was an example. In the eyes of strict Jewish Law (Halakha), identity Timothy eventually became tied to the mother, but in the first century, a child of a mixed marriage was in a "gray area."
1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: Acts 16:1.
The Diaspora was a time of Jewish exile into Gentile lands due to defeat by the Assyrians and Babylonians and their exile into Gentile lands. This went on for 29-35 generations of Jews in 700 years before Jesus' birth. In 29-35 generations, any ethnicity transplanted and accepting of their new and foreign conditioning would certainly be assimilated into their new demographic locations. But you don't learn this. You take "Gentile" as non-Hebrew in the New Testament without studying the question and this is what has your theology twisted. The Jews knew God made covenant with Abram the Hebrew and his Hebrew seed (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob married into their Hebrew families) and that the Mosaic Covenant was made by God between God and the Hebrew offspring of the patriarchs, and that the New Covenant that was to come is between God and the House of Israel and the House of Judah - NO non-Hebrews (Gentiles) included.
Jesus taught the Law and the Prophets, and Saul taught the Law and the Prophets. They didn't teach Capitalism or Democracy. They taught Jews from out of the Law of Moses and their Prophets.
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: Matthew 5:26–27.
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:27.
14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: Acts 24:14.
As rabbis, both Jesus and Saul taught Judaism, which came into its own without a Temple based upon their holy days and their calendar while exiled in Assyria, but mostly Babylon, where the southern kingdom tribes (Judah and Benjamin) were exiled.
James, Jesus' half-brother was a Judaizer as was Peter and Saul and the rest of the disciples. Judaism came into its own in Babylon where the two southern kingdom tribes of Judah and Benjamin were exiled with the ten northern kingdom tribes mixed-in due to Babylon defeating the Assyrians in 612 BC and took many of the tribes and mixed-race tribes back into the Babylonian Empire (Gentile) lands. Pay attention:
42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.
44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.
45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.
46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. Acts 13:42–46.
Verse 42. Gentiles did not go to the synagogues on the Sabbath Day. These were mixed-race Jews of Gentile descent.
Verse 45. Jews were jealous because a rabbi (Saul) was teaching mixed-race Jews of Gentile descent ON THE SABBATH. No Jew would ever seek to teach the Law of Moses to uncircumcised, non-Hebrew Gentiles. These "Gentiles" were called "Gentile" by Jews with the same prejudice the Jews called mixed-race Jews "Samaritans" and not "Jew." No Jew would ever seek to circumcise non-Hebrew Gentiles because every Jew knew their covenants were between God and the Hebrew people. But your Gentile theology books twist the truth of the Word of God in order to take part in the Hebrew covenants while remaining uncircumcised and without following the Law and the Prophets. It is very convenient for them but as Scripture clearly records God's covenants - Abraham, Mosaic, and New - are between God and the Hebrew people.
And when I asked you to show me a covenant between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles I meant show me from the Hebrew Scripture (Law, Psalms, and Prophets = 38/9 "books"), not from the New Testament. There were no non-Hebrew Gentiles at Jesus' last Passover. They were ALL JEWS at the Passover in the upper room. Why are non-Hebrew excluded or missing from this all-important meal where Jesus states His body and blood are "given to YOU" (Jews.)
After all your years of study you never came under the discipleship of the Holy Spirit and taught what Jesus taught and that is the Law and the Prophets. You follow a false Constantinian Gentile theology that is false and I think the "great delusion" sent by God upon THE WORLD - NOT upon Israel.
Racist garbage.
FreeInChrist
Active Member
FreeInChrist
Active Member
SMH.... How does one get one to read and understand why they are wrong before anyone thells them they are.
First point.... the Claim About the Audience of Ephesians
You assert that Saul wrote solely to "Jews and Jewish Christians" in Ephesus, implying an exclusively Jewish context.
You are wrong and this is why. The epistle was addressed to a mixed church community in a Gentile-dominated city.
And here is how we know that...
Ephesus was a major port city in Asia Minor (modern Turkey) with a significant Jewish population, but by the time of Paul's writing (around AD 60-62), the church there included both Jewish and Gentile converts.
Actually, Paul's letter to the Ephesians was written to a diverse church in a Gentile city, including both Jewish and non-Jewish believers. The epistle itself talks about reconciling Jews and Gentiles into one body through Christ (Eph 2:11-22), which wouldn't make sense if it was only for Jews. Saul/Paul was commissioned to preach to Gentiles (Acts 9:15), so this fits his overall mission, not some later 'Gentile twist.'"
Funny that you see oblivious to the fact that Saul's name was changed to Paul after God chose him for the "Gentiles".
You keep talking about Saul, yet you ignore what God chose him to do.. Oh well, just another jab at God.
Now, let's address your accusation of .... 'False Constantinian Gentile Theology'
You seem to think that Emperor Constantine (AD 306-337) corrupted Christianity by making it a state religion, shifting it from its Jewish roots to a 'Gentile' (non-Jewish, imperial) framework. While Constantine did influence Christianity's public role, this claim exaggerates his theological impact and ignores that Gentile inclusion started much earlier.
Fact: I have studied this.... Christianity's expansion to Gentiles began in the 1st century with Paul and the apostles (e.g., Acts 15's Jerusalem Council decided Gentiles didn't need to follow all Jewish laws). Constantine converted around AD 312 and ended persecutions via the Edict of Milan (AD 313), making Christianity tolerated and later favored. He convened the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) to resolve doctrinal disputes like Arianism, but he didn't invent core beliefs...he helped standardize them for unity in the empire. Myths like Constantine 'creating the Bible' or making Christianity the state religion are debunked; the canon was forming before him, and Theodosius I made it official in AD 380. 'Hellenization' (Greek influences) predates Constantine, starting with the New Testament written in Greek.
Another fact is "Constantine's role was more political—he stopped persecuting Christians and promoted unity, but he didn't create a 'false Gentile theology.' Gentile inclusion in Christianity started with Paul in the 1st century (Romans 11:13), not Constantine. The New Testament itself is in Greek, reflecting early outreach beyond Jews. Labeling this 'false' ignores the apostles' own decisions at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15)."
Did you catch this????? Gentile inclusion in Christianity started with Paul in the 1st century (Romans 11:13),
Now, lets look at your racist comment of " 'White Jesus' Example as Evidence of Gentile Corruption
Jesus was a 1st-century Jew from Galilee, likely with Middle Eastern features (olive skin, dark hair). Early Christian art (2nd-4th centuries) often showed him as a beardless youth or shepherd, influenced by Roman styles, not explicitly 'white.' Byzantine icons (post-Constantine) depicted him with darker features. The 'white Jesus' trope emerged in medieval/Renaissance Europe (e.g., Albrecht Dürer's self-portrait-like Jesus in 1500), reflecting artists' cultural contexts. In other cultures, Jesus is portrayed as Black (Africa), Asian (East Asia), or Indigenous—it's adaptive, not doctrinal. The Bible doesn't describe his appearance (Isaiah 53:2 says he had "no beauty"), so art isn't prescriptive.
