The very term "jew", by itself, that jews use themselves to describe themselves, is a declaration that they are deniers of Christ.
It's not. Neither did Jesus use it in the narrow geographic sense you do. It's pretty simple really, but you pervert it. Why?
What was Jesus's point, then?
At least you ask a reasonable question. The answer is in the entire second and third chapters of the book of Revelation, not in perverting His words "not Jews" into "he really meant jews."
All of the "jews" back during Jesus's day that converted to Christianity no longer called themselves "jews"
You reveal the source of your error, and this is easy for you to find simply by reading the Bible. They in fact were still Jews. Jews today won't accept Christ if they think they'll stop being Jews, which they won't. This is so incredibly simple, but you'll never get it if you can't just read what it says.
Go reread all of Paul's letters to the early Christian churches, and the book of Acts.
Yet you skip Paul referring to himself as a Jew. That's pretty jewy behavior of you.
We're saved through Jesus, and only through Jesus.
Simple. So are Jews. Just like anybody else.
defend the vile filth in the Talmud
I never did that. Why do you have to lie?
and you explicitly defend Israel,
No you didn't. All you can do is lie. Seek professional help.
It's not. Neither did Jesus use it in the narrow geographic sense you do. It's pretty simple really, but you pervert it. Why?
I'm not the one perverting it. Modern jews are perverting it, by trying to tie themselves into the ancient Israelites, who were, in fact, pre-Christians. Modern jews, merely by identifying as such, are all Christ deniers.
At least you ask a reasonable question. The answer is in the entire second and third chapters of the book of Revelation, not in perverting His words "not Jews" into "he really meant jews."
I've read Revelations, and just reread books 2 and 3. Nowhere in books 2 and 3 does it answer this question. The only times jews are directly mentioned in books 2 and 3, is in 2:9 and 3:9, which proves the point I made, not yours. Again, make your point, and be specific. Stop falling back to "but books 2 and 3 prove my point", and then don't specify.
You reveal the source of your error, and this is easy for you to find simply by reading the Bible. They in fact were still Jews.
Perhaps they still thought of themselves as jews genealogically, but as newly converted Christians, they would've understood that lineage no longer held any power or meaning, and would've completely abandoned its use. The New Testament is rife, in almost every single book, talking about how jewish lineage means nothing to God, and that the new covenant is through Jesus.
Yet you skip Paul referring to himself as a Jew. That's pretty jewy behavior of you.
Addressed above, and doesn't prove your point. Paul got so pissed off at his fellow jews he essentially told them "curse you, I'm going to go preach and evangelize the non-jews", which is what the book of Acts points out. Also, LOL at your attempt at trying to invert and claim your opponent is what you're doing (which is classic jewish behavior).
Simple. So are Jews. Just like anybody else.
Way to go, to deflect and miss the point entirely. You're picking and choosing what to reply to, because you know you can't refute what I said. Thus, you try to derail into meaningless conversations and side arguments that have no bearing upon the larger issue.
I never did that. Why do you have to lie?
Yes, you did. The quote is directly above, you two faced forked tongued liar.
Since you've invested so heavily into the talmud, you owe it to yourself to learn that it's about how to be a Jew while there's no Temple. Some 40% of the law of Moses can't be kept without it. jews don't consider it holy like you do, they recognize it's just rabbis arguing and mostly about arcane bits of law that Moses didn't make clear. I'll tell you it's horrible literature that does a terrible job of what it sets out to do, but you don't understand what that is based on what you've said here.
You tried to downplay the complete inversions of scripture in the Talmud, the horrific things it condones and advocates, by painting it as "it's about how to be a jew while there's no temple". You are trying to play off as being smart, while also ignoring the greater horrors contained within the Talmud, suggesting it's innocuous, and not wholly evil. Again, you're a subversive and a liar.
No you didn't. All you can do is lie. Seek professional help.
??? This reply doesn't follow from what you quoted. Did you mean "No I didn't"? If that's the case, all that needs to be said, is that your profile is free to peruse for anyone here, who can see how you reply to ANYONE critical of Israel and jews, here and elsewhere. You lie, attack the commenter, deflect, don't address key issues brought up, and use logical fallacies. Oh, and by your debate """prowess""" displayed, you display several other aspects of jewish behavior, like trying to accuse your enemy of what you're guilty of.
Again, you glow brighter than the sun. It's obvious who you are. Try to gaslight someone else. It won't work on me.
You're obviously not familiar with the Bible, at all.
Yes, I am. I'm doing a comprehensive first read through with a lot of research and connecting dots within scripture. I started with the New Testament, finished that last year, and am doing the Septuagint right now. I'm quite familiar with a lot of the Reddit atheist arguments and the judeo-Christian false interpretations and heresies.
Also, what exactly am I getting wrong? Be specific. Make your arguments.
It's nice that you form opinions based on ignorance though.
Everything I've thus far said is based on simple logic, very clear scripture, and historic church doctrine (up until the Rothschilds corrupted it through Darbey, Scofield, and dispensationalism).
Also, I've seen you on TheDonald blatantly shilling for Israel, the Iran war, jews, and making the exact same useless "arguments" like what you just did, against anyone who disagrees. You're really, really bad at this.
Get better and improve. Learn. Challenge your own beliefs. Self reflect. If your beliefs are so correct, and you're so sure of them, then they should be able to withstand scrutiny and earnest reflection. But this kind of comment, without any evidence or logic based arguments, is pure logical fallacy. It's comfort blanket you wrap around yourself to try to convince yourself you've "won" the argument, and you do this extremely frequently. You add nothing to the conversation.
Yes, I am. I'm doing a comprehensive first read through with a lot of research and connecting dots within scripture.
So you're not familiar with the Bible, at all. A couple points:
there is no book of revelations. All of it is one revelation. OF Jesus Christ, Himself. That it happens to have been given first to John is less important, but that is part of the formal title. This same John is known as John the Beloved, because that's how he's referred to in the Gospel of John. (The Disciple whom Jesus Loved. Jesus made everybody feel not merely loved, but loved exclusively. And He still does. Christians notoriously behave poorly because of this, especially when new to the Faith.) John is also known as John the Theologian, because his theology is always excellent. So if you're ever torn or confused in a Gospel, find what John says about it. "When in doubt, go with John." This isn't a final end point, but it can help when needed. He's also known as John the Revelator, for the obvious reason of writing Revelation; that's the only book in the NT there was ever any controversy about including as Canon. I'm glad the early Church decided to preserve it and hand it down to us, but it's not a good source of theology very often. Conversely, there are a HUGE number of OT references in it that the book can't much be understood until you understand those first. Which is ok, everybody misses a lot on the first read through. No shame in that:
"But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you." (1 Peter 5:10)
That is invariably part of the process of becoming rooted and grounded in the Word, which will be the most rewarding thing you ever do.
You've never seen me shill for Israel. I do point out that pretending this is "war for Israel" is braindead stupid, not because Israel doesn't benefit but because at least 10 other Nations do too, and so do we. As does the whole world. In fact if you want to talk about anyone trying to influence DJT to attack Iran you should be talking about the Prince of Saudi Arabia doing that.
Challenge your own beliefs. Self reflect. If your beliefs are so correct, and you're so sure of them, then they should be able to withstand scrutiny and earnest reflection.
I've done that more than you can fathom, for longer than you've been alive.
It's not. Neither did Jesus use it in the narrow geographic sense you do. It's pretty simple really, but you pervert it. Why?
At least you ask a reasonable question. The answer is in the entire second and third chapters of the book of Revelation, not in perverting His words "not Jews" into "he really meant jews."
You reveal the source of your error, and this is easy for you to find simply by reading the Bible. They in fact were still Jews. Jews today won't accept Christ if they think they'll stop being Jews, which they won't. This is so incredibly simple, but you'll never get it if you can't just read what it says.
Yet you skip Paul referring to himself as a Jew. That's pretty jewy behavior of you.
Simple. So are Jews. Just like anybody else.
I never did that. Why do you have to lie?
No you didn't. All you can do is lie. Seek professional help.
I'm not the one perverting it. Modern jews are perverting it, by trying to tie themselves into the ancient Israelites, who were, in fact, pre-Christians. Modern jews, merely by identifying as such, are all Christ deniers.
I've read Revelations, and just reread books 2 and 3. Nowhere in books 2 and 3 does it answer this question. The only times jews are directly mentioned in books 2 and 3, is in 2:9 and 3:9, which proves the point I made, not yours. Again, make your point, and be specific. Stop falling back to "but books 2 and 3 prove my point", and then don't specify.
Perhaps they still thought of themselves as jews genealogically, but as newly converted Christians, they would've understood that lineage no longer held any power or meaning, and would've completely abandoned its use. The New Testament is rife, in almost every single book, talking about how jewish lineage means nothing to God, and that the new covenant is through Jesus.
Addressed above, and doesn't prove your point. Paul got so pissed off at his fellow jews he essentially told them "curse you, I'm going to go preach and evangelize the non-jews", which is what the book of Acts points out. Also, LOL at your attempt at trying to invert and claim your opponent is what you're doing (which is classic jewish behavior).
Way to go, to deflect and miss the point entirely. You're picking and choosing what to reply to, because you know you can't refute what I said. Thus, you try to derail into meaningless conversations and side arguments that have no bearing upon the larger issue.
Yes, you did. The quote is directly above, you two faced forked tongued liar.
You tried to downplay the complete inversions of scripture in the Talmud, the horrific things it condones and advocates, by painting it as "it's about how to be a jew while there's no temple". You are trying to play off as being smart, while also ignoring the greater horrors contained within the Talmud, suggesting it's innocuous, and not wholly evil. Again, you're a subversive and a liar.
??? This reply doesn't follow from what you quoted. Did you mean "No I didn't"? If that's the case, all that needs to be said, is that your profile is free to peruse for anyone here, who can see how you reply to ANYONE critical of Israel and jews, here and elsewhere. You lie, attack the commenter, deflect, don't address key issues brought up, and use logical fallacies. Oh, and by your debate """prowess""" displayed, you display several other aspects of jewish behavior, like trying to accuse your enemy of what you're guilty of.
Again, you glow brighter than the sun. It's obvious who you are. Try to gaslight someone else. It won't work on me.
You're obviously not familiar with the Bible, at all. It's nice that you form opinions based on ignorance though.
Yes, I am. I'm doing a comprehensive first read through with a lot of research and connecting dots within scripture. I started with the New Testament, finished that last year, and am doing the Septuagint right now. I'm quite familiar with a lot of the Reddit atheist arguments and the judeo-Christian false interpretations and heresies.
Also, what exactly am I getting wrong? Be specific. Make your arguments.
Everything I've thus far said is based on simple logic, very clear scripture, and historic church doctrine (up until the Rothschilds corrupted it through Darbey, Scofield, and dispensationalism).
Also, I've seen you on TheDonald blatantly shilling for Israel, the Iran war, jews, and making the exact same useless "arguments" like what you just did, against anyone who disagrees. You're really, really bad at this.
Get better and improve. Learn. Challenge your own beliefs. Self reflect. If your beliefs are so correct, and you're so sure of them, then they should be able to withstand scrutiny and earnest reflection. But this kind of comment, without any evidence or logic based arguments, is pure logical fallacy. It's comfort blanket you wrap around yourself to try to convince yourself you've "won" the argument, and you do this extremely frequently. You add nothing to the conversation.
So you're not familiar with the Bible, at all. A couple points:
"But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you." (1 Peter 5:10)
That is invariably part of the process of becoming rooted and grounded in the Word, which will be the most rewarding thing you ever do.
You've never seen me shill for Israel. I do point out that pretending this is "war for Israel" is braindead stupid, not because Israel doesn't benefit but because at least 10 other Nations do too, and so do we. As does the whole world. In fact if you want to talk about anyone trying to influence DJT to attack Iran you should be talking about the Prince of Saudi Arabia doing that.
I've done that more than you can fathom, for longer than you've been alive.