Exegesis and Eisegesis. What Are These Terms?

[Pancho Frijoles]

Let's not forget Noah and Adam or Seth and the others.

Saul was a rabbi and Pharisee. He taught the Hebrew Scripture. The Hebrew Scripture records no covenant between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles and neither did Saul of the apostles teach salvation to non-Hebrew people because the basis of salvation is covenant, and Gentiles had none.

The Hebrew Scriptures presents in Genesis 9:8-17 a covenant between God and Noah and all descendants from Noah.
Men would respect life, and God would preserve life.
Since Noah represents a common root for mankind, every single human being is under this covenant. This is why every single civilization understands that respect for life is a divine standard, without the need of a commandment written in stone at Mount Sinai.

Nobody needs to know the Bible to be held accountable for either destroying life or defending life.

Oskar Schindler was under the same Noah's covenant.
Oskar didn't have to be circumcised or keep Sabath (which were part of Israel's covenant), but he had to defend life and he did it, putting his life at risk.
It is not that he "won" salvation through his acts. It is that he was already saved by God's undeserved grace, and therefore he acted that way.

 

[jeremiah1five]

The Hebrew Scriptures presents in Genesis 9:8-17 a covenant between God and Noah and all descendants from Noah.
Men would respect life, and God would preserve life.

Correct. But it is not a spiritual "preservation of life." It merely states God would not flood the earth again. The Noahic Covenant is significant because it represents God's commitment to preserving [physical] life and maintaining order in the world. It also serves as a reminder of the importance of human responsibility to care for the earth and all its inhabitants - including animal life.

Since Noah represents a common root for mankind, every single human being is under this covenant.

Noah is not "a common root for all mankind." That privilege belongs to Adam and his wife. And there is distinction among the Adamites. There are the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent and there is deep division between the seeds. One is obedient to God and the other is not. And at the time God instructed obedient Noah to build an ark he was the ONLY ONE to be in God's graces. Only Noah 'found grace in the eyes of the LORD.' And because of this relationship Noah's wife, their three sons and their wives were physically delivered from physical death despite the right of God to destroy all life. Including his. From Noah's sons and their wives two groups of people continued to 'fill the earth.' The family line of Shem from whom Abram the Hebrew was born, and the families of Ham and Japheth from whom men like Nimrod was born.

This is why every single civilization understands that respect for life is a divine standard, without the need of a commandment written in stone at Mount Sinai.

Every single civilization aside from Noah's descendants from Shem may understand Divinity but they copied such standards from Noah's experience with God. In a few short generations from Noah, Ham and Japheth's descendants again descended into lawlessness and disobedient - if they were ever obedient in the first place because the commandment of God was to scatter and fill the earth, but most decided to remain together. The result of that led to God's direct intervention to confuse the language into many which forced them to finally scatter from among themselves into separate communities. Shem's family was already separate from the rest of the Adamites. And they were blessed in their obedience.

Nobody needs to know the Bible to be held accountable for either destroying life or defending life.

No, they do have to know one thing which their conscience makes clear. There is a God, and they are accountable to Him. At this time there was no written laws. It was all word of mouth. And the knowledge of the Redeemer was slowly being lost with every succeeding generation born to Ham and Japheth. Shem and his descendants were among the seed of the woman and obedient to the God of Noah.

Oskar Schindler was under the same Noah's covenant.
Oskar didn't have to be circumcised or keep Sabath (which were part of Israel's covenant), but he had to defend life and he did it, putting his life at risk.
It is not that he "won" salvation through his acts. It is that he was already saved by God's undeserved grace, and therefore he acted that way.

Schindler was not Hebrew. Nor was he born-again. His actions were motivated by a combination of factors, including humanitarianism, self-interest, and perhaps a growing moral conscience. However, there is no historical record or credible evidence to support the claim that he had any personal connection to Judaism or Jewish traditions or was a born-again Christian.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Noah is not "a common root for all mankind."

For the purpose of the covenant being made, Noah represents all mankind.
"I establish My covenant with you, and with your descendants after you"

Your claim that God had never made a covenant with non-Hebrews is incorrect.

That privilege belongs to Adam and his wife. And there is distinction among the Adamites. There are the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent and there is deep division between the seeds. One is obedient to God and the other is not. And at the time God instructed obedient Noah to build an ark he was the ONLY ONE to be in God's graces. Only Noah 'found grace in the eyes of the LORD.' And because of this relationship Noah's wife, their three sons and their wives were physically delivered from physical death despite the right of God to destroy all life. Including his. From Noah's sons and their wives two groups of people continued to 'fill the earth.' The family line of Shem from whom Abram the Hebrew was born, and the families of Ham and Japheth from whom men like Nimrod was born.

Every single civilization aside from Noah's descendants from Shem may understand Divinity

Certainly. And this is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit.
There is no virtue in any man or woman, Chinese or Mayan, that has not been the result of the grace of God acting in them.
Do you think that a bad tree can bear good fruits?

No, they do have to know one thing which their conscience makes clear. There is a God, and they are accountable to Him. At this time there was no written laws. It was all word of mouth. And the knowledge of the Redeemer was slowly being lost with every succeeding generation born to Ham and Japheth.

In fact, if it hasn't been by God's revelation to Zoroaster in Persia, it is highly unlikely that the Jews had either preserved or acquired the notion of a Divine Redeemer, a Final Judgement, and the existence of One Moral, Universal God.

Schindler was not Hebrew. Nor was he born-again. His actions were motivated by a combination of factors, including humanitarianism, self-interest, and perhaps a growing moral conscience. However, there is no historical record or credible evidence to support the claim that he had any personal connection to Judaism or Jewish traditions or was a born-again Christian.

The credible evidence that he had a strong, personal connection to God, is the fruits he produced.
If a person bears the fruit of the Spirit, is born from the Spirit.
You're looking in the wrong place to find the connection. It was not the religion Schindler formally confessed, but the religion he lived.

Let's listen to Jesus again:
"Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruit. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit. But a corrupt tree bears evil fruit. A good tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a corrupt tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore, by their fruit you will know them."

 

[jeremiah1five]

For the purpose of the covenant being made, Noah represents all mankind.
"I establish My covenant with you, and with your descendants after you"

Noah represented Noah. You are indoctrinated by Constantinian Gentile theology that makes things up when it serves their purpose. There is nothing in Scripture that says he represented "all mankind." All mankind wasn't even a term in use in his lifetime. They were called Adamites. And Noah represented himself. And the covenant was not a salvation covenant. It was only a promise God would not flood the earth.

11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.
12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:
13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.
Gen. 9:11–13.

Since all life except Noah and his family were destroyed this covenant has nothing to do with salvation, only that God would not flood the earth again. You're adding to the bible things not in the text.

Your claim that God had never made a covenant with non-Hebrews is incorrect.

God never made a covenant of salvation with Gentiles. The Noahic Covenant has nothing to do with salvation from sin and death.

Certainly. And this is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit isn't even mentioned. You're adding to the bible.

There is no virtue in any man or woman, Chinese or Mayan, that has not been the result of the grace of God acting in them.
Do you think that a bad tree can bear good fruits?

God's grace where salvation is concerned had nothing to do with Noah. The blessing was that God would not flood the earth again. He also blessed Noah and his sons with the command to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Sin and death were not addressed in this covenant promises of God to not flood the earth.

In fact, if it hasn't been by God's revelation to Zoroaster in Persia, it is highly unlikely that the Jews had either preserved or acquired the notion of a Divine Redeemer, a Final Judgement, and the existence of One Moral, Universal God.

You are way off base. God has always had His obedient people on earth. Follow the family line from Adam to Seth, etc. These were the sons of God referred to by God in Genesis 6. But they became unequally yoked with the seed of the serpent which daughters they married, and their children grew up lawless. They were bullies and tyrants who rejected God and His rule over them. This led to God flooding the earth and destroying everyone except Noah and his immediate family. When the floods receded, Noah built an altar and worshiped God. This evidences relationship between Noah and God.

The credible evidence that he had a strong, personal connection to God, is the fruits he produced.
If a person bears the fruit of the Spirit, is born from the Spirit.

Until sin was dealt with by the Son, no one was born-again. The Spirit being poured out came much later and only upon Israel.

You're looking in the wrong place to find the connection. It was not the religion Schindler formally confessed, but the religion he lived.
Let's listen to Jesus again:
"Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruit. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit. But a corrupt tree bears evil fruit. A good tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a corrupt tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore, by their fruit you will know them."

Schindler was not Hebrew, he was German. And since the Holy Spirit of Promise was PROMISED TO ISRAEL Schindler was not born-again nor was he in covenant with God being Gentile.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Schindler was not Hebrew, he was German. And since the Holy Spirit of Promise was PROMISED TO ISRAEL Schindler was not born-again nor was he in covenant with God being Gentile.

Then you are testing Schindler’s spiritual condition and fate based on his ethnicity and not on his fruits.
You are following a test method that is NOT the one Jesus asked us to follow.
Ignoring Jesus method unfortunately leads to a tragic and false conclusion.

Nazis also thought in the justice of eliminating persons with the wrong ethnicity, regardless of their fruits.
Please think about it.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Then you are testing Schindler’s spiritual condition and fate based on his ethnicity and not on his fruits.

Unbelievers don't have fruits. Unbelievers would show compassion and care if they saw a wounded animal (cat or dog) in the middle of the street after being hit by a car. They would have works if they took it to a vet for medical care. Unbelievers would not have fruit because the fruit that God approves of is that which is anointed, not that which is not anointed and whose prayer is sin not having the Holy Spirit which is necessary before anyone come into the Presence of the King.

You are following a test method that is NOT the one Jesus asked us to follow.
Ignoring Jesus method unfortunately leads to a tragic and false conclusion.

As above. Believers and unbelievers can express or exhibit longsuffering, patience, forgiveness, but unless those acts or qualities are done under the anointing God sees it all as sin.

Nazis also thought in the justice of eliminating persons with the wrong ethnicity, regardless of their fruits.
Please think about it.

As above.... only believers can have fruits, but you are misrepresenting the fruits that come from the Spirit and those that come from the flesh for anything an unbeliever does that mimics a believer's fruit are all done in the flesh with no anointing. God does not recognize those acts for they are not fruits of the Spirit but acts of the flesh. So, right there your statement or premise is incorrect. Believers have fruits and unbelievers have works. And the ones that God recognizes and accepts are those that are fruits of the Spirit. Unbelievers cannot have fruits. All they have are works (of the flesh.)

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Unbelievers don't have fruits.

Therefore, if someone bears what is obviously good fruit, that person is NOT an unbeliever.
It seems to me that you are trying to judge the person according to his theological orthodoxy or ethnic origin.
That's not the method given to us by Jesus.

My brother, you are confused about the meaning of "believer".
A believer in Christ is a person who acts according to the Message revealed by Christ, regardless of whether that person has heard about Christ or not... or whether that person thinks Christ is a Rabbi, a Prophet, The Messiah, The Son of God, or God.
An unbeliever is a person who does not act accordingly, regardless of his genetic, ethnic, social or doctrinal affiliations.

Unbelievers would show compassion and care if they saw a wounded animal (cat or dog) in the middle of the street after being hit by a car. They would have works if they took it to a vet for medical care. Unbelievers would not have fruit because the fruit that God approves of is that which is anointed, not that which is not anointed and whose prayer is sin not having the Holy Spirit which is necessary before anyone come into the Presence of the King.

As above. Believers and unbelievers can express or exhibit longsuffering, patience, forgiveness, but unless those acts or qualities are done under the anointing God sees it all as sin.

If a person exhibits longsuffering, patience, forgiveness, etc. it is because such person is anointed by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit nor viceversa.

If someone accuses a person who is relieving the suffering of others (like Schindler with the Jews) of doing that by the power of Beelzebub, that person is committing the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Do you agree, or do you need me to show it to you on Scripture?
Only the Holy Spirit can transform a life... be it it the life of a Jew, a Muslim, a Mormon, a Sikh or a Jehovaf Witness.

As above.... only believers can have fruits, but you are misrepresenting the fruits that come from the Spirit and those that come from the flesh for anything an unbeliever does that mimics a believer's fruit are all done in the flesh with no anointing.

If fruit could be mimicked so easily, Jesus wouldn't have given us the instruction to tell a false teacher from a true teacher based on their fruit. Do you agree? Jesus would have rather handed us a quiz of 10 questions or so to test the theological orthodoxy of such a teacher.
The fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self-control; against such there is no law"

God does not recognize those acts for they are not fruits of the Spirit but acts of the flesh.

The acts of the flesh are evil, such as adultery, impurity, hatred, etc.
If we are unable to distinguish between fruit of the spirit and works of the flesh... what is the value of our theology? It would be less dangerous and more entertaining to play a game of chess, rather than have a debate on Internet about God's covenants.

There was a time when you were a child and, as such, a citizen of the Kingdom of God. At that time you knew very well what was right and what was wrong. What happened to that child? That child is still in you.

 

[synergy]

Therefore, if someone bears what is obviously good fruit, that person is NOT an unbeliever.
It seems to me that you are trying to judge the person according to his theological orthodoxy or ethnic origin.
That's not the method given to us by Jesus.

My brother, you are confused about the meaning of "believer".
A believer in Christ is a person who acts according to the Message revealed by Christ, regardless of whether that person has heard about Christ or not... or whether that person thinks Christ is a Rabbi, a Prophet, The Messiah, The Son of God, or God.
An unbeliever is a person who does not act accordingly, regardless of his genetic, ethnic, social or doctrinal affiliations.



If a person exhibits longsuffering, patience, forgiveness, etc. it is because such person is anointed by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit nor viceversa.

If someone accuses a person who is relieving the suffering of others (like Schindler with the Jews) of doing that by the power of Beelzebub, that person is committing the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Do you agree, or do you need me to show it to you on Scripture?
Only the Holy Spirit can transform a life... be it it the life of a Jew, a Muslim, a Mormon, a Sikh or a Jehovaf Witness.


If fruit could be mimicked so easily, Jesus wouldn't have given us the instruction to tell a false teacher from a true teacher based on their fruit. Do you agree? Jesus would have rather handed us a quiz of 10 questions or so to test the theological orthodoxy of such a teacher.
The fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self-control; against such there is no law"


The acts of the flesh are evil, such as adultery, impurity, hatred, etc.
If we are unable to distinguish between fruit of the spirit and works of the flesh... what is the value of our theology? It would be less dangerous and more entertaining to play a game of chess, rather than have a debate on Internet about God's covenants.

There was a time when you were a child and, as such, a citizen of the Kingdom of God. At that time you knew very well what was right and what was wrong. What happened to that child? That child is still in you.

I'm definitely on your side as opposed to Jer15's Ethnic Cleansing side. You know, the Early Church thought as you do and didn't fine tune their beliefs. Along came heretics and started to tear at the Gospel. When such things happen, one doesn't just sit around, do nothing, and roll out the red carpet for them. The Gospel is at stake. That's why it took that long for the Church to finetune the faith.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Therefore, if someone bears what is obviously good fruit, that person is NOT an unbeliever.
It seems to me that you are trying to judge the person according to his theological orthodoxy or ethnic origin.
That's not the method given to us by Jesus.

It is the method given by Christ.
And the Author of the Scripture is Christ. We learn that "fruit" corresponds to the Holy Spirit. Fruit is particular to born-again believers, not to the unsaved. Believers that are of Christ should have "fruit OF THE SPIRIT" as they grow in Christ as opposed to an unbeliever who only has "works of the flesh" and Christ, the Author of Scripture, makes that distinction:

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, avariance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Gal. 5:19–21.

By your misinterpretations of Scripture and your heresies, you show works of the flesh.

BUT

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Gal. 5:22–25.

IF YOU WERE of the Spirit you wouldn't post error and heresies because the Holy Spirit is the One that teaches God's people in the things of God and He doesn't teach lies and falsehoods about what is written in Scripture as you do.
IF YOU WERE truly born-again and given your age you should have crucified those lies and heresies a long time ago and as Saul says, "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." Heb 5:12.

The Holy Spirit OF TRUTH does not teach heresies and lies, so where does your heresies and lies come from? Not from Scripture and that's for sure. It comes from your works of the flesh. Seems someone needs to teach you the first principles from Scripture and not from those foul commentaries you post and regurgitate here.

My brother, you are confused about the meaning of "believer".
A believer in Christ is a person who acts according to the Message revealed by Christ, regardless of whether that person has heard about Christ or not... or whether that person thinks Christ is a Rabbi, a Prophet, The Messiah, The Son of God, or God.
An unbeliever is a person who does not act accordingly, regardless of his genetic, ethnic, social or doctrinal affiliations.

You're the one confused. A believer is a born-again man or woman who is the seed of Abraham. They MUST be born-again. An unbeliever is one who is not born-again. Everything else follows this truth.

If a person exhibits longsuffering, patience, forgiveness, etc. it is because such person is anointed by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit nor viceversa.
If someone accuses a person who is relieving the suffering of others (like Schindler with the Jews) of doing that by the power of Beelzebub, that person is committing the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Do you agree, or do you need me to show it to you on Scripture?

Everyone suffers. But, as Peter said, does one suffer as a believer (born-again) or as an unbeliever (not born-again) because there is a difference. As I said above everything else follows that condition in a person. People that are not born-again can be patient, or longsuffering, or even gracious towards another. That is not a sign of a believer. A true believer is one who is possessed by the Holy Spirit of Truth, and this one does not publish lies, error, and heresies about the One True God as you do.

Only the Holy Spirit can transform a life... be it it the life of a Jew, a Muslim, a Mormon, a Sikh or a Jehovaf Witness.
If fruit could be mimicked so easily, Jesus wouldn't have given us the instruction to tell a false teacher from a true teacher based on their fruit. Do you agree? Jesus would have rather handed us a quiz of 10 questions or so to test the theological orthodoxy of such a teacher.
The fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self-control; against such there is no law"

So, how does that apply to you? You post lies and heresies. I've already pointed those things out above and on other posts you made. Anyone can post Scripture as you do but not everyone is born-again from above. A person born-again from above has one foremost responsibility and that is to doctrine, to say the same thing as God and to be able to explain what one believes is taught of God by the Word of God. You interpret "Greek" in Galatians 3:28 as "Gentile" and that's incorrect. You interpret Saul's words in Galatians 3:23-29 as though Saul is writing to Gentiles and that also is not true. Now, you want to post about fruit of the Spirit, and you say that even unbelievers (not saved) have fruit of the Spirit because in your words, if they have fruit, they must also have the Spirit and that also is not true. First and foremost, for every born-again believer is to have their understanding of God and this "so-great salvation" correct and in line with Scripture because what one believes as true move about and have their being based upon what they believe is true.

Every Hebrew child born is taught the Law of God. Both boys and girls are taught the Law of God. Then comes their bat or bar Mitzvah, the age of accountability in which at the age of 13 and 14 they are treated as adults with adult responsibilities and accountabilities. At those ages these young men and women KNOW what God's Word says and are now at that age able to handle the Word of Truth. The 13-year-old young man can now have discussions with aged adults about Scripture and biblical doctrine just as Jesus did at the age of 12 in the Temple. But it is doctrine that is what guides any true born of God believer in their lives because doctrine is the foundation that becomes the pattern for the rest of their lives and God will hold every one of His sons and daughters accountable to what and how they understand what He has said in His Word.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Timothy 3:16–17.

The Hebrew Scripture - for that is what Saul is referring to - is profitable first and foremost for doctrine.
And if you hold to false doctrine the Scripture is supposed to reprove you, and correct you for one reason:
"That the man or woman of God be complete and throughly furnished unto all good works" in the Spirit for no flesh shall glory when the Spirit is Present nor does the heresies that come from works of the flesh emmanate from a true born-again believer for that believer has their doctrine in line and in accordance with Scripture for what one believes is true is what guides them in all they do.

The acts of the flesh are evil, such as adultery, impurity, hatred, etc.
If we are unable to distinguish between fruit of the spirit and works of the flesh... what is the value of our theology? It would be less dangerous and more entertaining to play a game of chess, rather than have a debate on Internet about God's covenants.

You have it backward. It's not "works" or "fruit" that determines our doctrine, but our doctrine that shows our work or our fruit for only the Holy Spirit can grow fruit in the tree of life in every believer.

There was a time when you were a child and, as such, a citizen of the Kingdom of God. At that time you knew very well what was right and what was wrong. What happened to that child? That child is still in you.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 1 Cor. 13:11.

The childish things are the lies I spoke based upon what I understood and thought as a child because from out of the mouth flow the issues of life (and death.)

It's more important to say the same thing as God than to have fruit, for in the believer who has their doctrine correct the fruit will naturally follow.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It is the method given by Christ.
And the Author of the Scripture is Christ. We learn that "fruit" corresponds to the Holy Spirit. Fruit is particular to born-again believers, not to the unsaved. Believers that are of Christ should have "fruit OF THE SPIRIT" as they grow in Christ as opposed to an unbeliever who only has "works of the flesh" and Christ, the Author of Scripture, makes that distinction:

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, avariance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Gal. 5:19–21.

By your misinterpretations of Scripture and your heresies, you show works of the flesh.

My brother: It seems you don't understand what a heresy is, and therefore you cannot tell between a "thelogical mistake" from a heresy.
A theological mistake is not work of the flesh.
A heresy is an error that leads to a sinful life. That's how false teachers are depicted in the epistles.

The Holy Spirit OF TRUTH does not teach heresies and lies, so where does your heresies and lies come from? Not from Scripture and that's for sure.

I base my posts in what I understand from Scripture. We can have a debate based on Scripture if you are interested.

You're the one confused. A believer is a born-again man or woman who is the seed of Abraham. They MUST be born-again. An unbeliever is one who is not born-again. Everything else follows this truth.

No, that's not biblical doctrine, nor logical doctrine, nor moral.
You are confused, my brother, and I can debate with you if you are interested.
In order to know if someone is born again, you have to look at what that person does now, compared to what that person did before, and not at the doctrine he or she confesses. Her doctrine could be orthodox in almost all aspects, and yet her works would tell us she is not born again. Her doctrine could be mistaken in many aspects, and yet her works would tell us she is born again.

So, how does that apply to you? You post lies and heresies.... You have it backward. It's not "works" or "fruit" that determines our doctrine, but our doctrine that shows our work or our fruit for only the Holy Spirit can grow fruit in the tree of life in every believer.

When Jesus says that we should judge the tree by the fruit, He is specifically talking about false teachers. So please pay attention to the passage.
He is not asking us to challenge their doctrines with complex arguments. Jesus is asking us to look at the results, the works, the consequences of their teaching on their lives.

If you go through the epistles, you will see that the apostles were 5% interested in presenting counterarguments to heresies, and 95% interested in exhibiting the heretics as bad people, as immoral people. Why? Ask yourself that.

Heresies keep us distant from God not because they are cognitive errors, but because they are lies that lead to an immoral life: the works of the flesh. I can give you some examples if you are interested.

God will hold every one of His sons and daughters accountable to what and how they understand what He has said in His Word.

This is not exactly what Jesus set as criteria for salvation or damnation in the Final Judgement.
You can find the criteria in Matthew 25:31-46
Salvation is not about how smart we are in understanding what is written in the Bible. That would be salvation based on personal intellectual merits. People may have different views on what the Bible say, and still be with the sheep on the right side of Jesus, as per Matthew 25:31-46.

You believe you know a lot the Bible, but you are missing the essential. I'm telling this to you with all respect.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Timothy 3:16–17.

The Hebrew Scripture - for that is what Saul is referring to - is profitable first and foremost for doctrine.

For doctrine, as long as such doctrine is translated into a new life of good works.
Please read the passage again to understand what is the final purpose of Scripture:
"All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

So, if Oskar Schindler saved many lives putting his at risk, the purpose of Scripture had been met in him... even if he rarely read it.

11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 1 Cor. 13:11.

The childish things are the lies I spoke based upon what I understood and thought as a child because from out of the mouth flow the issues of life (and death.)

When I say you must go back to the time in which you were a child, I don't mean intellectual or emotional immaturity, but kindness of heart. This is why Jesus is asking us to be as children.

As a child you learned from your parents what love meant. You learned what evil and good meant.
For example, you learned that burning the skin of Non-Hebrew gentile with a cigarette would be an EVIL thing to do.
Now, that you are an adult, how could you say that a god who burns a Non-Hebrew with fire would be just and merciful?

You learned that, if a non-Hebrew person did something wrong to you, and came to you repented, you could forgive him
Now, as an adult, how could you say that you can forgive him, but God will not?

This is why I think you need to go back to the time you were a child.
The notions of good and evil that you had as a child were true. Those you have now are not true, and are harming you.

It's more important to say the same thing as God than to have fruit, for in the believer who has their doctrine correct the fruit will naturally follow.

That's not true.
It is not our doctrine, but the grace of God, the operation of the Holy Spirit, which makes us bear the fruit.
So, if Oskar Schindler produced good fruit, this is UNQUESTIONABLE EVIDENCE that the grace of God worked in him, whatever his doctrinal mistakes. To deny that consciously would be to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

 

[jeremiah1five]

My brother: It seems you don't understand what a heresy is, and therefore you cannot tell between a "thelogical mistake" from a heresy.

Semantics. It's the same thing. Heresy is a 'theological mistake" and all theological mistakes are heresy because it deals with doctrine while "schism" has to do with division through lack of love.
You want the doctrine on "heresy?" Well, the word is defined by Strong as "choice." When it comes to God's Word there is NO "CHOICE." One either receives or rejects His Word - there is no medium. Now let me give you an example of "heresy."

Let's say Peter is preaching to a crowd - small or large - and he says, "For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount (2 Pe 1:17–18), and someone stands up and says, "That's not what God said. I heard it. I heard His voice and the voice said from heaven, 'this is one of my sons and we are all pleased with him,' and it didn't happen on a mount but by the seashore!"

What this person has done is presented a "choice" to the minds of his hearers. Does the crowd believe Peter or the testimony of this stranger (or even someone well known and respected)?

That's the meaning of "heresy." It means "choice" and it becomes heresy when someone presents an alternative version of something to one authorized to speak the Word of God such as Peter who was there and Peter took the voice from God speaking directly to him (because he omits what God said, "Hear Him.")

When God speaks there is no "choice" between God's Word and the word of someone else. We are commanded to believe God over anyone and everyone. And there is a lot of "choice" here at Berean. Many posting this and that and giving their own interpretation and commentary on what God said, but many here do not receive what God said and post their own interpretations as to what God said. Such as the heresy that God promised His Spirit to be poured out upon non-Hebrew Gentiles, or the "Adam is federal head of the human race" which is just Gentile garbage, and I know because I used to believe that crap. So, when I read someone posting Gentile theology with a Gentile bias over the Chosen people of God, I just shake my head as I recognize, "that was the garbage I used to post and believe."

A theological mistake is not work of the flesh.
A heresy is an error that leads to a sinful life. That's how false teachers are depicted in the epistles.

A "theological mistake" reveals a disconnect between God's Word and the person who supposedly read it (or heard it.) A heresy is the putting forth a "choice" to the mind of its hearer and it manifests as an alternate version of what the truth of the Word of God.

I base my posts in what I understand from Scripture. We can have a debate based on Scripture if you are interested.

Yes, we all do that. But it comes down to this: one of us is wrong and it's not me. I understand Redemption History is a history of the Hebrew people and no other. God chose Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and Jacob's descendants to whom He gave His Law to. He didn't give His Word of His Law to non-Hebrew Gentiles for God never made covenant with non-Hebrew Gentiles. The whole of the bible is a history of God and the Hebrew people. Yes, it may discuss non-Hebrews but from Genesis to Revelation is a revelation of God to the Hebrew people and no other, at least not in the context of having a salvation covenant and taking this people through human history to be the only people for nearly six thousand years who is still in existence and has much more blessings coming to them.
You want to read the bible as though God is speaking or wrote to non-Hebrew Gentiles and that is the furthest thing from the truth. Only Abraham and his seed have salvation coming to them of God and no one else because God saves through covenant and non-Hebrews do not have a covenant with God they can speak of. So, they steal what God gave to the Hebrew people. They steal their covenants, steal their terminology and even their blessings. It's a shame when I read through posts and see the garbage posted by others that I used to believe in. I recognize everything. All of it. And what others here do is regurgitate the theology of Gentiles that I used to believe in and I just shake my head.

No, that's not biblical doctrine, nor logical doctrine, nor moral.
You are confused, my brother, and I can debate with you if you are interested.
In order to know if someone is born again, you have to look at what that person does now, compared to what that person did before, and not at the doctrine he or she confesses. Her doctrine could be orthodox in almost all aspects, and yet her works would tell us she is not born again. Her doctrine could be mistaken in many aspects, and yet her works would tell us she is born again.

There are several ways in which to discern a true believer from one who does not know the Lord. Through doctrine, and behavior, and countenance, and fruits, there are many ways to tell a true believer from a false believer and the one that is most telling is the things they say about God. You see, the Holy Spirit's ministry is to teach God's people God's Word. A true believer who has studied under the anointing will get his or her doctrine right 90% of the time and have 5-10% error in their belief system. A false believer/brethren will have 5-10% correct but 90% incorrect. So, I don't put too much on "fruits" because many people can mimic the fruits of the Holy Spirit but it's what comes out of their hearts and passes through their tongues or their keyboard that justifies them or condemns them just as Jesus taught. Anyone can be "patient" or "caring" or "merciful" or "longsuffering" or be "lovely" but it's what comes from their mouths that shows me their hearts and whether they have been saved or not. But as for you I am discerning whether you are saved or not at this point in time. I am discerning how much heresy you've incorporated into your mind that is not biblical and presents itself as false, Constantinian Gentile theology from commentaries and theological works from people like "Hodge" or "Vos" or Calvin" or "Arminius" or "Pelagius," or the Puritans, etc. I've read them all and then some. The depth of my knowledge of God's Word is directly tied to the depth of my suffering in life and I know a great deal. More than you. I can say more than you because I have read and studied and am most familiar with those things you post and the things you've interpreted that used to fill my mind. So, if I've left all of that Gentile garbage behind but you're still regurgitating that garbage. I've gone on to deeper things of God and you're still wading in the children pool where the water goes only to the knees and that's where you're at with what I read of your statements. Very elementary and all of it is Gentile textbook responses.

When Jesus says that we should judge the tree by the fruit, He is specifically talking about false teachers. So please pay attention to the passage.
He is not asking us to challenge their doctrines with complex arguments. Jesus is asking us to look at the results, the works, the consequences of their teaching on their lives.

If you focus on the fruits, you will be deceived because fruits can be deceiving. It's what comes out of a person's heart that reveals the most about their relationship or lack thereof with God. To be a living, walking epistle means to say the SAME THING as God.

If you go through the epistles, you will see that the apostles were 5% interested in presenting counterarguments to heresies, and 95% interested in exhibiting the heretics as bad people, as immoral people. Why? Ask yourself that.

The New Covenant writings are only discussion and arguments and attempts to try to understand the New Covenant era Israel found itself in. It took time to search the Hebrew Scripture in order to make sense and understand the things taking place among the Hebrew people was the New Covenant that overnight was upon them (Israel.) There was Aquila and Priscilla and Apollos, and Saul, and Peter, and James and John - all of them trying to understand what effect Messiah's arrival had on the Abraham and Mosaic Covenants. The same thing when the Spirit arrived. They (the disciples/apostles) didn't know everything and in many places their knowledge was spotted. But ONLY Israel was the recipient of the Spirit of God being poured out upon Israel. And for four decades until the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple salvation was of only the Jews. God did not promise salvation to non-Hebrew Gentiles. The whole 66 'books' of the bible is a history of the Hebrew people and God's covenants with His Chosen and apple of His eye. Israel is God's Bride. Israel is God's Church. God promised nothing worthy of salvation to non-Hebrew Gentiles. Nothing.

Heresies keep us distant from God not because they are cognitive errors, but because they are lies that lead to an immoral life: the works of the flesh. I can give you some examples if you are interested.
This is not exactly what Jesus set as criteria for salvation or damnation in the Final Judgement.
You can find the criteria in Matthew 25:31-46

Salvation is not about how smart we are in understanding what is written in the Bible. That would be salvation based on personal intellectual merits. People may have different views on what the Bible say, and still be with the sheep on the right side of Jesus, as per Matthew 25:31-46.

No, but once saved we are commanded to not only get wisdom but also knowledge with the same urgency, and knowledge of the Word of God.

You believe you know a lot the Bible, but you are missing the essential. I'm telling this to you with all respect.
For doctrine, as long as such doctrine is translated into a new life of good works.
Please read the passage again to understand what is the final purpose of Scripture:
"All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
So, if Oskar Schindler saved many lives putting his at risk, the purpose of Scripture had been met in him... even if he rarely read it.

The Holy Spirit is the purpose in the New Covenant God has with Israel. Good works is nothing. It is the Holy Spirit and a person possessing Him that is the cornerstone for without the Spirit the body is dead.

When I say you must go back to the time in which you were a child, I don't mean intellectual or emotional immaturity, but kindness of heart. This is why Jesus is asking us to be as children.

No, God is asking His people to be men, not children. You are confused.

As a child you learned from your parents what love meant. You learned what evil and good meant.
For example, you learned that burning the skin of Non-Hebrew gentile with a cigarette would be an EVIL thing to do.
Now, that you are an adult, how could you say that a god who burns a Non-Hebrew with fire would be just and merciful?

I take what is written in Scripture and my emotions do not rule my life. There were millions of non-Hebrew Gentiles that were born and went straight to hell for those centuries the children of Israel were sacrificing animals yearly to atone for their sins. Millions. All without salvation being offered or given to the Gentiles. Did Israel weep and cry at what God did to the Egyptians? No, they celebrated, sang songs, and had feasts and with much revelry. And they were not wrong.

You learned that, if a non-Hebrew person did something wrong to you, and came to you repented, you could forgive him
Now, as an adult, how could you say that you can forgive him, but God will not?

Because there is nothing in the Hebrew Scripture that evidence God saving non-Hebrews. There are three Hebrew covenants and all three are between God and the Hebrew people. There are no Gentiles in any of these three covenants. And there are no more covenants to follow. I have asked repeatedly here for someone to show me a Scripture that reveals God making or having a salvation covenant between Him and Gentiles in the Hebrew Scripture and NO ONE has posted such a Scripture or verses that say such a thing because there is no such a thing in the Hebrew Scripture. God doesn't love non-Hebrews.

This is why I think you need to go back to the time you were a child.
The notions of good and evil that you had as a child were true. Those you have now are not true, and are harming you.


That's not true.
It is not our doctrine, but the grace of God, the operation of the Holy Spirit, which makes us bear the fruit.
So, if Oskar Schindler produced good fruit, this is UNQUESTIONABLE EVIDENCE that the grace of God worked in him, whatever his doctrinal mistakes. To deny that consciously would be to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Fruit is the result of having the Word of God rightly divided in our souls and in our minds. It makes no sense - and God does not do this - to have fruit and more fruit and one is a moron, an idiot.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Because there is nothing in the Hebrew Scripture that evidence God saving non-Hebrews.

Were the inhabitants of Nineveh Hebrews? How did God save them and why?
Was Cyrus from Persia, that man who God called "My Annointed" a Hebrew? Did God annointed Cyrus in order to send him to hell few years later?

But more importantly, how can you rely in Hebrew Scripture, and more specifically in the covenants between God and Israel, to learn about the relationship of God with non-Hebrews?
To learn about Hungary, you don't read a book about the History of Mexico.

Hebrew Scripture is just one pearl in the long necklace of God's Revelation.
The Holy Quran, for example, presents God calling all mankind to repentance, just as Saul did in the Areopagus.

Why don't you study Zoroastrianism to learn how God revealed his Will to ancient Iranians?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

God promised nothing worthy of salvation to non-Hebrew Gentiles. Nothing.

God doesn't love non-Hebrews.

If you are really convinced of that, why haven't you thrown away the Hebrew Scripture? Why haven't you thrown away your god?
Are you convinced of the morality of such Hebrew Scriptures and such god?

How do you expect any one to convert and accept such Scriptures or such a god?
These are serious questions, my brother.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Were the inhabitants of Nineveh Hebrews? How did God save them and why?

Their repentance wasn't genuine. God destroyed that land so deep that in order to visit that nation you have to dig.

Was Cyrus from Persia, that man who God called "My Annointed" a Hebrew? Did God annointed Cyrus in order to send him to hell few years later?

You misunderstand. True repentance is controlled by God and is a grace granted by God. And since it is a grace, God is obligated through covenant to give all His grace to one people: the children of Israel.

But more importantly, how can you rely in Hebrew Scripture, and more specifically in the covenants between God and Israel, to learn about the relationship of God with non-Hebrews?

The Hebrews trust their oracles and that's sufficient for me. All the New Covenant writings are just recording and discussion among all the writers trying to understand the New Covenant era Israel as a people found themselves in. The Hebrew Scripture is a gift of God for they are His revelation of Himself on a personal level to only one people: the children of Israel. The three parts of God's revelation of Himself to the children of Israel are His Law, His Psalms, and His prophets, ending with the Prophet of prophets, Jesus Christ.

To learn about Hungary, you don't read a book about the History of Mexico.

Nor do you get "nations" or "Gentiles" from two Hebrew parents and yet that is what Gentiles believe in their false teaching that a miracle occurs when a "Gentile" becomes born-again. They are miraculously changed biologically to become Abraham's seed in their heretical interpretation of Galatians 3:28-29.
Incredible stupidity.

Hebrew Scripture is just one pearl in the long necklace of God's Revelation.
The Holy Quran, for example, presents God calling all mankind to repentance, just as Saul did in the Areopagus.

It is not "holy" for God is not its Author.

Why don't you study Zoroastrianism to learn how God revealed his Will to ancient Iranians?

More false Gentile theology.

 

[jeremiah1five]

If you are really convinced of that, why haven't you thrown away the Hebrew Scripture? Why haven't you thrown away your god?
Are you convinced of the morality of such Hebrew Scriptures and such god?

How do you expect any one to convert and accept such Scriptures or such a god?
These are serious questions, my brother.

I have the answers. The problem is that you reject Scripture for your own pet Gentile theories. That happens a lot here at Berean.

Case in point: there is no verse in the Hebrew Scripture recording God making a covenant with non-Hebrews. And yet most everyone here believes that in the born-again conversion from death to life Gentiles believe they miraculously are also changed biologically and become Abraham's seed through their erroneous interpretation of Galatian 3:28-29.

Case in point: Since there is no verse in the Hebrew Scripture of God making covenant with non-Hebrews that such fact doesn't matter because once a "Gentile" becomes born again not only do they miraculously are changed into Abraham's seed, but they also can't tell me which tribe they belong to or with who God made covenant with. Scripture records God making covenant with a man named "Abram" but non-Hebrew Gentiles here cannot give the name of the non-Hebrew Gentile that was recipient of a Gentile covenant for their descendants as Abram was recipient of his covenant with God for his.

Case in point: Non-Hebrew Gentiles take Scripture out of context or ignore it altogether to justify their inclusion in the Hebrew covenants and yet cannot identify non-Hebrews being included where each covenant is recorded being made between God and Abram and Abram's seed.

Case in point: Abram the Hebrew received covenant promises for himself and also for his seed and Moses wrote about it but in claiming to be in covenant with God non-Hebrew Gentiles cannot point to the person who is non-Hebrew that received covenant promises of God nor is there any history of such a relation between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles nor do they have their own Scripture. They have to borrow the Hebrew Scripture and wrongly and erroneously interpret it in order to "prove" they are in covenant with God - going so far as to steal everything God gave to Israel, even stealing identification marks God used for the Hebrew people, terms like "elect" and "Bride" and "Church" and even terms such as "saint." It's inheritance theft on a global scale. Non-Hebrew Gentiles claim to be in covenant with God but don't have their own bible with God interacting with significant non-Hebrew men and women and have non-Hebrew Gentiles to write about it like the relationship God has with the Hebrew people and sends Hebrew prophets like Moses and David and Jeremiah to write about watershed moments in their history of God presenting such commanding instruction of blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience such as what God did for the children of Israel through Moses in passages like Deuteronomy 28 and other places.

As I said, it's non-Hebrew Gentile inheritance theft of another peoples covenant and covenant blessing of God on a global scale.
Won't non-Hebrews be shocked and put in place when the "Times of the Gentiles" ends with the destruction of their non-Hebrew Gentile nations, and through the prophecies of the two Hebrew witnesses of Revelation 11.
God sends these two Hebrew witnesses as prophesied by John for one of several reasons, one of those reasons is their use of the Hebrew Scripture to point out to the Hebrew people that this Carpenter from Nazareth was truly their long-awaited Messiah and that preparations are being made among the Hebrew people and the miraculous turning of the hearts of their children to their respective fathers, and the hearts of their Hebrew fathers turning to their respective Hebrew children. Not only that but through their prophesying to Israel they will kill two birds with one stone in which in their presenting the truth of Messiah to Israel they also destroy all the Constantinian non-Hebrew Gentile theology proving it all lies and misinterpretation which in the course of the non-Hebrews being "schooled" by these two Hebrew witnesses also cause non-Hebrew Gentile hatred against the Hebrew people to grow that God need not truly 'lift a finger' to bring all the non-Hebrew Gentile nations against Israel - even including so-called non-Hebrew "Gentile Christians" against the apple of God's eye as prophesied by Zechariah. Saul was correct. The Law of Moses did point the Hebrew people towards their Messiah and King just as he says:

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Gal. 3:23–24.

In the end only the Hebrew nation of Israel remains standing (Oops, how can "nations" mean "Gentiles" when it is also used to describe the Hebrew "nations/Gentiles" of Israel???
What a paradox!

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I have the answers.

You don't have the answers... Perhaps because you didn´t read the questions. So I will repeat them again:

• If you are really convinced that God only loves certain ethnic group, why haven't you thrown away the Hebrew Scripture? Why haven't you thrown away your god?
• Are you convinced of the morality of such Hebrew Scriptures and such god?
• How do you expect any one to convert and accept such Scriptures or such a god?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Their repentance wasn't genuine.

False, unless you believe that

• Men can deceive God. The text says:"When God saw their actions, that they turned from their evil ways, He changed His mind about the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it." (Jonah 3:10)
• Jesus was wrong. He said: "The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah." (Matthew 12:41)

CONCLUSION:

God loved the non-Hebrew people of Nineveh. God sent Jonah to them to preach repentance. They repented. God accepted their repentance. Your claim that such repentance was not genuine is unsupported. It has been refuted.

God destroyed that land so deep that in order to visit that nation you have to dig.

That may be the result of a returned of wickedness of other generation... or part a broader plan for them in the afterlife.
Afterall, God allows earthquakes, wars and diseases to destroy the life of Hebrews and not Hebrews alike, good and bad, believers and unbelievers. Isn't that so?

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It is not "holy" for God is not its Author.

God revealed in the Quran: We sent a messenger to every nation, saying: “Worship God, and shun the powers of evil!” (16:36)

وَلَقَدۡ بَعَثۡنَا فِی كُلِّ أُمَّةࣲ رَّسُولًا أَنِ ٱعۡبُدُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَٱجۡتَنِبُوا۟ ٱلطَّـٰغُوتَۖ فَمِنۡهُم مَّنۡ هَدَى ٱللَّهُ وَمِنۡهُم مَّنۡ حَقَّتۡ عَلَیۡهِ ٱلضَّلَـٰلَةُۚ فَسِیرُوا۟ فِی ٱلۡأَرۡضِ فَٱنظُرُوا۟ كَیۡفَ كَانَ عَـٰقِبَةُ ٱلۡمُكَذِّبِینَ

The term for "nation", ummatin, refers to any tribe, ethnic or linguistic group. Any group of people that sees itself as a community.
This goes in line with the vision of the multitude in Book of Revelation, which came "from all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues"

I know you don't believe that God is the Author of the Quran. Then I ask you "Why do you believe that it is God, and not Satan, the author of your theory of God's love?
What is more compatible with the character of the God you worship: the Quranic claim that God has sent a messenger to every nation, or the claim that He loves only Hebrews?

 

[jeremiah1five]

You don't have the answers... Perhaps because you didn´t read the questions. So I will repeat them again:

• If you are really convinced that God only loves certain ethnic group, why haven't you thrown away the Hebrew Scripture? Why haven't you thrown away your god?

Not necessary. As a true born-again Biblical Christian, I accept the fact from Scripture that God has covenant with Abram the Hebrew and his seed, a people identified as the children of Jacob/Israel, and that only those under the Law given to the children of Israel by God and through Moses are the recipients of the grace of God and as a people under the Law are a people redeemed by God to eternal life. Those not under the Law of God are not atoned and will suffer eternal separation from God when they die.

• Are you convinced of the morality of such Hebrew Scriptures and such god?

I am convinced by God that the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Covenant writings from Matthew to Revelation is the Holy Word of God and that God cannot lie and that what is written in the Scripture is for the believer - like me - for their training and admonition in order to live a saved and redeemed eternal life in the Name of God and in the blood of the Jewish Savior of the Jewish people, Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.

• How do you expect any one to convert and accept such Scriptures or such a god?

I expect those whose names are written in the book of life of the lamb slain from [before] the foundation (creation) of the world shall be saved at their appointed time.
Two things are true from Scripture.

Salvation is OF THE LORD (Jonah 2:9)

and

Salvation is OF THE JEWS.

13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Romans 9:13–23.

The LORD knows them that are His. When God calls His people, they will come. And who are His people?
They are those for whom Christ died to save and redeem back to God.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:4–5.

Those that God placed under His Law are the children of Israel.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Not necessary. As a true born-again Biblical Christian, I accept the fact from Scripture that God has covenant with Abram the Hebrew and his seed, a people identified as the children of Jacob/Israel, and that only those under the Law given to the children of Israel by God and through Moses are the recipients of the grace of God and as a people under the Law are a people redeemed by God to eternal life. Those not under the Law of God are not atoned and will suffer eternal separation from God when they die.

But why don't you consider that to be evil?
I'm sure you would have considered that evil some years ago, am I right? Please share with us, if you are comfortable with it, what happened in your life. As you know, millions of Christians define themselves as born-again and have studied the Scriptures... including brilliant theologians, and do not believe what you believe. So, what led you to take this different direction?

I am convinced by God that the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Covenant writings from Matthew to Revelation is the Holy Word of God and that God cannot lie and that what is written in the Scripture is for the believer - like me - for their training and admonition in order to live a saved and redeemed eternal life in the Name of God and in the blood of the Jewish Savior of the Jewish people, Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.

Thanks for your comment, but my question was about the morality of such beliefs.
Do such beliefs help you to treat better other people, to help them in their needs... do such beliefs make you find more joy in life?