Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Billy Graham, A Different Perspective

Another case of your personal bias changing your theology... ie a little isogesis vs exogesis. Hint; the Pharisees were masters at this.

Rejection of the Messiah was the error of the Nation of Israel & Judaism during Christ’s life & following His resurrection. Jesus Himself was the only perfect follower of Judiaism. Their error doesn’t magically define the religion they professed (which, practiced perfectly, gave Christ the righteousness He now imputes to His people) any more than identity politics practiced by one claiming to be Conservative taints Conservatism. Double hint.

An ethnic Jew who becomes a Christian is a Jewish Christian just like an ethnic Jew who is an atheist (as the majority are) is a Jewish Atheist. It’s common sense.

Contorting linguistics to suit a preconceived notion eroded ones credibility and ought to point a person toward the erroneousness of his views.

Luther’s vehemence, when read in context, was rooted in a deep and abiding care for the salvation of the Jewish people not condemnation of them for Jesus’ death as is so often put forth. He believed, as I do, that ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God; no one seeks God we have all gone our own way.

This is another huge problem with the identity politics; it creates an us vs them when all there is is us.

Not true. Only a Jew is capable of saying that Jesus isn't the Christ that was foretold by the prophets. Christ was only speaking of Jews when he said those words.

OHHH,so only a Jew can be following after Satan,gotcha. You must really want to be cursed. You need to get the hate out or it will destroy you.

Put words in my mouth all you like. That's not anything close to what I said. I was referring to a particular scene described in John's Gospel, which had particular circumstances, and referred to people who denied he was the Christ, who were themselves Jews, which only makes sense since only a Jew at that time could have an opinion on whether someone was the Christ foretold by their prophets.

Christ was a jew.He never denied it and was thought of as Rabbi by his followers.His disciples were Jews and saw Christ as the Messiah.They still considered themselves to be Jewish as origin..A friend of mine is a Coptic Priest and is of Jewish decent and still considers himself to be a Jew who is a Christian.Your splitting hairs.You cannot deny your heritage.You can convert to Judaism as a faith ,but that does not make your origins Jewish.JMHO and I am sticking to it.Huntz

Yea,and you know good and well that anyone following Satan would also be of their father Satan. You can get technical to the point of being ridiculous and say that everything Jesus said was to the Jews but the point is that it is available to us because it can also apply to us.

In fact if you want to get real technical,you can't be saved unless you become a Jew,circumcised in the heart,and grafted into the vine.

Seems to me that it is you who is being technical to the point of being ridiculous. I'm merely discussing what Jesus said to some Jews.

Outstanding point; as Paul says in Galatians 2:

“15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified[b] by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ...”

So he said he was a Jewish Christian???

Then in chapter 3



“28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave[g] nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.”

Things that make ya go HMMMMMMMM...

ah, the vine. haven't heard or thought of that concept or thought in a spell. but, here it is, hitting me in the face yet again.

the vine, composed of the root and the twin vines, maybe?

the root is Judaism. and the first bud & vine was Christianity. leaves reaching to the Sun in order to bear fruit.

and then the second bud was Islam. reaching to the sun in order to bear fruit.

i don't want to ask if there's a third bud emerging from the root? well, there might be?

this whole discussion is getting way to deep for this ol country kid. some rabbi's need to move to the front?

Then forgive me if I mistook you. I thought I sensed hostility toward Jews from other posts and was seeking to turn you from that path.

I agree....... Most pathetic Tread ever...

What? Like bald?

Prior to the Jewish rejection and crucifixion of Christ, a Jew merely referred to a Hebrew, generally of the tribe of Judah, attached to the Kingdom of Judea. Since then, however, it also implies the rejection of Christ and the applauding of the crucifixion, since this is what is taught in their central sacred text, the Talmud, which is merely the codification of the teachings of the rabbis since the Jews rejected and sought Christ’s crucifixion. This is why a person of Jewish ancestry who accepts Christ isn’t any longer referred to as a Jew. It’s why John wasn’t referring to Matthew, James, or Peter (for example) when he said “for fear of the Jews,” even though these folks were of Jewish ancestry. They, like most of the disciples, and all of the Apostles, in the Gospels, were of Jewish ancestry, but no longer Jews, since they didn't reject Christ, nor did they applaud the seeking and carrying out of his crucifixion. Those became, since the dawn of Christ's ministry, central elements of being Jewish.

no doubt there's been many self-proclaimed messiahs over the many years from the beginning to this point in time. those folks were really mis-led? but they were well intentioned.

in a line-up, its probable that jesus would be at the head of the pyramid? i mean, given a ton of messiahs, somebody has to emerge and rise to the top, right?

That "sermon" is ridiculous on its face.

Well, yea,

Stormfront "sermons" always are.

Amen. I’m suspicious of any “sermon” that doesn’t involve exegetical working out of Scripture. As soon as a preacher gets away from that he is bound to tickle ears and spout the ideas of men. I have no doubt the irony of that in this case was lost to both the preacher & the OP.

Ps- I happen to believe that the name of Christ is the only One by which men are saved; I just think that the preacher ought to let God’s message through him do the offending rather than going out of his way to put himself over others and thereby be a stumbling block himself.

The Eternal Christ has always been that particular facet of our multi faceted Creator which has been the Agent allowing the creatures to commune with their Creator. When Jesus claimed that no one came to the Father except thru Him, He was just explaining the way things have always been, not introducing a new methodology.

It really is that simple and a clear reading of Scripture will bear that out.

If you consider that the phrase “ name of “ is interchangeable with “ Agency of “, it will clear up a lot of questions, primarily the one; “ What about those people who never heard the gospel....”?

You're right, it's that simple, but when people read the Scripture is when the "catch" begins. That "catch" is the way that we interpret those words. I think most get it right, and understand it clearly, but others do not, and think their view is right, and everyone else's is wrong.

Just look at the way the Bible is interpreted, with people handling snakes, drinking poison, and such, all because it's mentioned. I'm no expert, and don't claim to be one, but the fact is that perhaps no book ever written can be as confusing as the Bible is to some, yet as clear as it is to others. It may all depend on just what one is looking for.