Random Questions Thread

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by shag

She’s running against Trump?



A Sincere thank you for taking the time to school me on this stuff

I also appreciate Elder Esaias' kind and patient teaching.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And we haven't even gotten into the "seed of the serpent" yet...

Is it similar to this:

1. Cain's lineage: (Serpent Seed)
2. Ham's wife: Associated with Cain's lineage, corrupting Noah's family
3. Canaanites: Descendants of Cain, cursed by Noah
4. Esau and Edomites: Linked to Cain's lineage, enemies of God's people
5. Herodian dynasty: Edomite descendants, influencing Jewish leadership
6. Synagogue of Satan: Herodian-Edomite Jews opposing Jesus
7. Jewish aristocracy: Connected to Herodian-Edomite lineage
8. European royalty: Descendants of Edomites, ruling through Zionism
9. Zionism and Modern Israel: Seen as serpent seed strongholds

[shag]

Hebrews 8 New Covenant between God and the house of Israel and Judah.


Heb. 8:6
But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7..For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.
8..For he finds fault with them when he says:[c]
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
..when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
..and with the house of Judah,
9..
not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
........on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
..and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
10..
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
..after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
..and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
..and they shall be my people.
11..
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
..and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
..from the least of them to the greatest.
12..
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
..and I will remember their sins no more.”
13..In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.



So…I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but the fact that we are 2000 years into the New Covenant, and the physical nation of Israel (98% atkeast in 2024) (and…those that claim to be Gods chosen) has rejected the the testator of the new covenant, Jesus. They are not in an old covenant and not in a new covenant with God, so therefore the writer of Hebrews HAS to be speaking of those that ARE in new covenant with Him, even when he says, Israel or House of Judah, he means by way of the SEED of Christ, because Jesus was of the lineage of Judah. The promises come to His offspring, the True Israel.

It makes no since that Israel caught between 2 covenants for 2k years is not in covenant, meanwhile the body of Christ is in covenant, but we aren’t Israel or Judah so he couldn’t be talking about us…we’re just sideliners…

I mean how in the world are people seeing this(dispensationalist)?
How are they making since if this? Are they thinking this is still some often the distance future thing, when they stop rejecting Jesus as the Messiah?
(Sincere question)


To me, Rom 9’s true Israel & the Olive Tree engrafting is the only logical explanation.
We have become and united w Gods true Israel…those w a circumcised heart.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by shag

Hebrews 8 New Covenant between God and the house of Israel and Judah.


Heb. 8:6
But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7..For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.
8..For he finds fault with them when he says:[c]
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
..when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
..and with the house of Judah,
9..
not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
........on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
..and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
10..
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
..after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
..and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
..and they shall be my people.
11..
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
..and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
..from the least of them to the greatest.
12..
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
..and I will remember their sins no more.”
13..In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.



So…I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, but the fact that we are 2000 years into the New Covenant, and the physical nation of Israel (98% atkeast in 2024) (and…those that claim to be Gods chosen) has rejected the the testator of the new covenant, Jesus. They are not in an old covenant and not in a new covenant with God, so therefore the writer of Hebrews HAS to be speaking of those that ARE in new covenant with Him, even when he says, Israel or House of Judah, he means by way of the SEED of Christ, because Jesus was of the lineage of Judah. The promises come to His offspring, the True Israel.

It makes no since that Israel caught between 2 covenants for 2k years is not in covenant, meanwhile the body of Christ is in covenant, but we aren’t Israel or Judah so he couldn’t be talking about us…we’re just sideliners…

I mean how in the world are people seeing this(dispensationalist)?
How are they making since if this? Are they thinking this is still some often the distance future thing, when they stop rejecting Jesus as the Messiah?
(Sincere question)


To me, Rom 9’s true Israel & the Olive Tree engrafting is the only logical explanation.
We have become and united w Gods true Israel…those w a circumcised heart.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Is it similar to this:

1. Cain's lineage: (Serpent Seed)
2. Ham's wife: Associated with Cain's lineage, corrupting Noah's family
3. Canaanites: Descendants of Cain, cursed by Noah
4. Esau and Edomites: Linked to Cain's lineage, enemies of God's people
5. Herodian dynasty: Edomite descendants, influencing Jewish leadership
6. Synagogue of Satan: Herodian-Edomite Jews opposing Jesus
7. Jewish aristocracy: Connected to Herodian-Edomite lineage
8. European royalty: Descendants of Edomites, ruling through Zionism
9. Zionism and Modern Israel: Seen as serpent seed strongholds

Well, I was actually just kind of making a joke.

But since you brought it up...

I have heard the various theories:

1. The seed of the serpent is entirely spiritual. Anyone who "follows the ways of the serpent", that is, opposes God, takes upon themselves the identity of the seed or offspring or progeny of the serpent. So being "seed of the serpent" is entirely metaphorical.

2. Cain was fathered by a union between the serpent and Eve, and his descendants or seed continued through the Flood and exist today somewhere. This is usually amalgamated to the next one,

3. Cain's serpent-human hybrid descendants somehow became Canaanites (not sure how that is explained though). So the Canaanites were the descendants of the serpent. And,

4. Since Esau married a Canaanite woman, his descendants (Edomites) are the current seed of the serpent.

I think all of these theories have problems that I have not been able to resolve. 2-4 just don't make any sense, and don't seem to have any Biblical backing. How Cainites became Canaanites escapes me, and even though Esau did marry a Canaanite woman his descendants are identified in Scripture as "your brother" and were allowed into the congregation of the Lord after the 3rd generation. Eventually they became the people against whom the Lord had indignation forever, but you would think it would have been that way from the beginning if they were literal reptilian-human hybrids descended from the serpent in the Garden.

#1 seems much more plausible, yet there is still a problem. The seed of the serpent is compared to and contrasted with the seed of the woman. The seed of the woman (Adam's descendants in general, and Christ in particular) is a literal physical seed. Which implies the seed of the serpent would also be a literal physical seed. There is no mention of hybridization, so there is no concern on my part as "did the seed of the serpent marry or have relations with any of Adam's descendants?" Rather, there is the question of who are the actual literal seed of the serpent and are they still around.

I find it interesting that the Bible seems pretty silent after the initial Genesis account about any serpent offspring. There may be vague hints here or there, but nothing conclusive or solid, that I can find.

But the fact remains, there was a serpent, a "nachash" (not a common snake, but some kind of intelligent reptilian-like creature). Indo-European and Asian cultures all have references to the mythical "nagas" or serpentine reptilian beings, which were (and are) believed to be shape-shifting humanoid-like fiery or shining reptilian creatures, highly intelligent, often deceptive, and worshipped as a type of divine beings or race of demigods, allegedly responsible for teaching mankind various skills and knowledge (including hidden secret mystical wisdom). The correspondence between the term "nagas" and Hebrew "nachash" is unmistakable, as is the reptilian or serpent-like character, and the meaning of "shining" and "fiery" being applied to them, as well as the idea of these things teaching man "wisdom" (or claiming to).

The nachash (naga) in the Garden was intelligent, cunning, could speak, could deceive, and was at enmity with the offspring of the woman. I have a theory or hypothesis of my own that this serpent and his fellows may have been partly responsible for the Flood, in leading mankind into corruption and iniquity and error, and the pre-Flood civilisation may have worshipped the naga(s) as a god/gods. If so, a cult may have developed around them. They may have been destroyed by the Flood, but the cult may have survived. Noah and his family would have been aware of this possibly dominant religion of their day, and Canaan or Ham or one of their children may have revived that serpent-cult. Which then may have continued on down through the ages until perhaps even today.

Of course, if the Flood was a local flood and not a "planetary" flood (which I believe it was a local Flood) then the serpent cult could have survived the Flood era quite easily by having been exported outside the environs of the Flood civilisation. Therefore, cultures that were not destroyed by the Flood would have continued the cult on their own. In fact, if the Flood was local, then it is possible the nagas themselves could have survived, and might even still be around.

If so, the seed of the nachash would be a literal reptilian race, and humans would be "adopted" as metaphorical or spiritual "seed of the serpent" by following the serpent cult. This might shed some light on the use of dragon symbolism in the Bible to represent rulers like Pharaoh, and especially in the Revelation to represent the Roman adversarial power. Perhaps the Roman adversarial power was controlled by those who were members of the ancient serpent cult. Perhaps this is why one of the medieval orders of nobility and knighthood was the Order of the Dragon, whose most famous member was Vlad "the Impaler",a noble of Wallachia who defended Europe against the Ottoman Turk invasions and who became immortalised in modern times by being the basis of Bram Stoker's "Dracula". Perhaps the members of the Order considered themselves knights of the serpent cult, while pretending to be defenders of (catholic) Christendom.

Perhaps the "illuminati elites" of our day are members of that same serpent cult. Who knows, maybe there's even a real naga somewhere giving orders...

Let me find my special sunglasses to see if They truly Live...

[shag]

8..For he finds fault with them when he says:[c]
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
..when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
..and with the house of Judah,
9..
not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
........on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
..and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
10..
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
..after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
..and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
..and they shall be my people.
11..
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
..and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
..from the least of them to the greatest.
12..
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
..and I will remember their sins no more.”
13..In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


So after reading a couple of commentaries, it’s my understanding that from at least a dispensationlist view, they believe that this passage, even after 2000 years is not fulfilled or at least not altogether fulfilled. And then it requires the rapturing of everyone out, and then God Will establish the new covenant with Israel, (namely Judah, and Benjamin I suppose).



Is that accurate or am I amiss on that?




If that is in fact the case, I guess my first thought of primary argument would be, the new and better covenant has already been established, that would mean it’s not waiting to be established or fully established, when the other party gets around to it.


We are either in the new covenant or not, we can’t be in the New Testament and yet not fully in the new covenant. Makes no sense to me. I’ve never liked that “already but not yet saying”.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shag

8..For he finds fault with them when he says:[c]
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
..when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
..and with the house of Judah,
9..
not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
........on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
..and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
10..
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
..after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
..and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
..and they shall be my people.
11..
And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
..and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
..from the least of them to the greatest.
12..
For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
..and I will remember their sins no more.”
13..In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


So after reading a couple of commentaries, it’s my understanding that from at least a dispensationlist view, they believe that this passage, even after 2000 years is not fulfilled or at least not altogether fulfilled. And then it requires the rapturing of everyone out, and then God Will establish the new covenant with Israel, (namely Judah, and Benjamin I suppose).



Is that accurate or am I amiss on that?




If that is in fact the case, I guess my first thought of primary argument would be, the new and better covenant has already been established, that would mean it’s not waiting to be established or fully established, when the other party gets around to it.


We are either in the new covenant or not, we can’t be in the New Testament and yet not fully in the new covenant. Makes no sense to me. I’ve never liked that “already but not yet saying”.

I've heard dispensationalists say the new covenant is for the Jews only and has not gone into effect yet, we as Christians are not in the new covenant, we are in something else (not sure what).

[Amanah]

For the sake of clarity, here are definitions and explanations for each term:

*Judah*
Refers to:
- One of Jacob's 12 sons (Genesis 29:35)
- The tribe of Judah, dominant in the southern kingdom of Israel (1 Kings 12:21-24)
- The region of Judah, also known as Judea (Luke 1:5)

*Judean*
Refers to:
- A member or inhabitant of the tribe of Judah or the region of Judea
- Used interchangeably with "Jew" in some contexts (e.g., Luke 23:3)

*Jew*
Originally referred to a member of the tribe of Judah, but later encompassed:
- Descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
- Followers of Judaism
- People from Judea or Israel (Romans 1:16, 2:28-29)

*Judaism*
The monotheistic faith of the Jewish people, encompassing:
- Torah (Law) and Talmudic traditions
- Rituals, practices, and customs
- History and cultural identity

*Judaizers*
A group in early Christianity (Acts 15:1-35, Galatians 2:3-14) that:
- Insisted Gentile converts adhere to Jewish customs (circumcision, dietary laws)
- Emphasized works-based salvation
- Opposed Paul's teachings on faith and grace

*Synagogue of Satan*
A phrase from Revelation 2:9 and 3:9, referring to:
- Those claiming Jewish identity but rejecting Jesus
- Groups opposing Christianity, pretending to be Jewish
- Symbolic representation of spiritual deception and opposition

Contextual note: In Revelation, Jesus distinguishes between true Jews (those faithful to God) and the "Synagogue of Satan" (those opposing Him).

Important distinction:
- Criticisms of Judaism or Judaizers in the New Testament are theological, not ethnic or racist.

The terminology relates to Revelation as follows:

*Judah*: Revelation 5:5; 7:5 - Jesus is lion of Judah, emphasizing His messianic role.

*Judean/Jew*: Revelation 2:9; 3:9 - Jesus distinguishes between true Jews (faithful) and those claiming Jewish identity but rejecting Him (Synagogue of Satan).

*Judaism*: Revelation critiques Jewish leaders and traditions that reject Jesus (2:9; 3:9), emphasizing the transition from old covenant to new.

*Judaizers*: Revelation indirectly addresses Judaizer-like tendencies:
* 2:14-15: Balaam's error (Numbers 25) - compromising with pagan practices.
* 2:20-23: Jezebel's teaching (1 Kings 16:31) - promoting idolatry and immorality.

*Synagogue of Satan*:
* Revelation 2:9: Those claiming Jewish identity but rejecting Jesus.
* Revelation 3:9: Those saying they are Jews but lie, worshiping Satan instead.

Revelation themes:

* True Israel vs. false (2:9; 3:9)
* Faithfulness vs. compromise (2:14-15; 18:4)

*Key passages:*

Revelation 5:5 - Jesus as lion of Judah.
Revelation 7:4-8 - 144,000 sealed from 12 tribes.
Revelation 21:12 - new Jerusalem's gates named after 12 tribes.

Meta search

[Amanah]

Here's an overview of the complex DNA, ethnicity, and genealogy of Israel's current residents:

*DNA:*
Israel's population is genetically diverse, reflecting its history as a crossroads of migrations.
- Studies suggest:
- 40-50% of Israeli Jews have Middle Eastern genetic markers (Y-chromosome haplogroups J1, J2).
- 30-40% have European genetic markers (R1b, R1a).
- 10-20% have African genetic markers (E1b1b, E1b1a).
- 10-20% have Asian genetic markers (Q, H).

*Ethnicity:*
Israel's population comprises various ethnic groups:
1. Jewish Israelis (74%):
- Ashkenazi (Eastern European): 30-40%
- Sephardic (Spanish/Middle Eastern): 20-30%
- Mizrahi (Middle Eastern): 20-30%
- Ethiopian: 2-3%
- Other (Indian, Yemeni, etc.): 5-10%
2. Non-Jewish Israelis (26%):
- Arab Israelis (21%): Muslim, Christian, Druze
- Palestinian Arabs
- Bedouin
- Other (Circassian, Armenian, etc.)

*Current Genetic Studies:*
1. "The Genome of the Jewish People" (2014): analyzed 128 Jewish individuals from 14 communities.
2. "Genomic Insights into the Origins of the Jewish People" (2019): studied 367 Jewish individuals from 13 communities.

*Key Findings:*
1. Genetic diversity within Jewish communities.
2. Shared ancestry between Jewish and non-Jewish Middle Eastern populations.
3. Evidence of ancient migrations and admixture.

*Resources:*
1. Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs: "The Jewish People's Genetic History"
2. National Geographic: "Genographic Project"
3. Scientific American: "The Genetics of the Jewish People"

*Challenges and Limitations:*
1. Complex history of migrations and admixture.
2. Limited genetic data from ancient populations.
3. Interpreting genetic results in historical context.

Meta

[Amanah]

Israel's founding was shaped by the convergence of secular, Zionist, and socialist ideologies.

*Secular Founding:*
1. Early Zionist leaders, such as Theodor Herzl and Chaim Weizmann, were largely secular.
2. Emphasis on creating a modern, democratic state, separate from religious authority.
3. Influenced by Enlightenment values: reason, individualism, and humanism.

*Zionist Ideology:*
1. Emerged in late 19th century as a response to anti-Semitism and Jewish persecution.
2. Aimed to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine, then under Ottoman rule.
3. Herzl's "The Jewish State" (1896) outlined the vision for a Jewish nation-state.

*Socialist and Labor Zionism:*
1. Influenced by Marxist and socialist ideas, emphasizing collective ownership and social justice.
2. Leaders like David Ben-Gurion and Berl Katznelson sought to create a Jewish workers' state.
3. Kibbutzim (collective farms) and moshavim (cooperative settlements) exemplified socialist Zionism.

*Key Figures:*
1. Theodor Herzl (1860-1904): Founded the World Zionist Organization.
2. Chaim Weizmann (1874-1952): First President of Israel, advocated for British support.
3. David Ben-Gurion (1886-1973): Israel's first Prime Minister, led Labor Zionist movement.
4. Berl Katznelson (1887-1944): Key figure in Labor Zionism, emphasized social justice.

*Influential Documents:*
1. Theodor Herzl's "The Jewish State" (1896)
2. The Balfour Declaration (1917): British support for Jewish homeland.
3. The Israeli Declaration of Independence (1948): Establishes Israel as a democratic state.

*Impact on Israeli Society:*
1. Secularism: Israel's education system, culture, and politics reflect secular values.
2. Zionism: Shaped Israel's national identity, foreign policy, and relationship with Diaspora Jews.
3. Socialism: Influenced Israel's economic and social policies, including labor rights and social welfare.

*Challenges and Evolutions:*
1. Balancing secular and religious aspects.
2. Addressing Palestinian-Israeli conflict and questions of self-determination.
3. Shifts in Israeli politics: from socialist to liberal and nationalist orientations.

*Legacy:*
1. Israel's founding ideals continue to shape its identity and values.
2. Inspiration for other national liberation movements.
3. Ongoing debates about the role of secularism, Zionism, and socialism in Israeli society.