This is what Swamp Jew considers himself. It's a Judaized sect created in the late 20th Century.
Read through both of these articles. I am not making anything up here. Swamp Jew is a Judaizer. It's literally a religious syncretism group that syncretizes both Judaism and Christianity (which have been mutually opposed, since Jesus Christ).
I get gaslighted whenever I point this out. It's factual. It's inarguable. But yet, Swamp Jew, and many of his supporters in this forum will still do so, and gaslight me, like I am some sort of hateful, lying idiot that is just making everything up.
The fact that I call myself a Hebrew roots Christian does not mean I agree with characterizations of some "Hebrew Roots Movement" defined from outside; I've admitted the movement contains contradictory views. There is no proof I teach syncretism, dual covenant, legalism, Judaizing, or any such teaching simply because I believe the term "Hebrew roots Christianity" is an accurate representation of Romans 11.
In the link above, the commenter was given opportunity to defend charges of gaslighting, and ran away from the opportunity, instead deciding to use a nickname repeatedly that the mods regard as ad hominem, and to commit other factual and logical errors.
Since you now seem to have unblocked me, it merely suffices to repeat, 8 times, that my argument began by rejecting dual covenant, "Dual covenant theology wrongly teaches the Old Covenant is salvific"; and then to repeat that you contradict Jesus to say "The law was ... abolished", and your supersessionism is tantamount to teaching a past dual covenant because you imply the Old Testament had some valid "life" and "place" that was "replaced" and "superseded" by the New when you believe "the Old Law died" as if words of God could die forever.
And for people wondering, here is why I keep calling u/SwampRangers aka Swamp Jew a Judaizer.
First, a Judaizer is someone who calls himself a Christian but still believes the Mosaic Law and Old Covenant continues and is still binding.
Here is the Wikipedia article on Judaizers, where it shows this is the case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers
Funnily enough, if you scroll to the bottom, one of the groups that is listed as a modern Judaizer group is the Hebrew Roots Movement.
Here is the Wikipedia article for that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Roots
This is what Swamp Jew considers himself. It's a Judaized sect created in the late 20th Century.
Read through both of these articles. I am not making anything up here. Swamp Jew is a Judaizer. It's literally a religious syncretism group that syncretizes both Judaism and Christianity (which have been mutually opposed, since Jesus Christ).
I get gaslighted whenever I point this out. It's factual. It's inarguable. But yet, Swamp Jew, and many of his supporters in this forum will still do so, and gaslight me, like I am some sort of hateful, lying idiot that is just making everything up.
The commenter above spammed this to nine communities after blocking me, so my response will be identical in each case.
There is no proof I ever said the Old Covenant is or was binding, so I am not a Judaizer by the definition quoted.
The fact that I call myself a Hebrew roots Christian does not mean I agree with characterizations of some "Hebrew Roots Movement" defined from outside; I've admitted the movement contains contradictory views. There is no proof I teach syncretism, dual covenant, legalism, Judaizing, or any such teaching simply because I believe the term "Hebrew roots Christianity" is an accurate representation of Romans 11.
In the link above, the commenter was given opportunity to defend charges of gaslighting, and ran away from the opportunity, instead deciding to use a nickname repeatedly that the mods regard as ad hominem, and to commit other factual and logical errors.
I'm happy as always to answer questions.
Read this if you want to see Swamp Jew defend Dual Covenant theology:
https://communities.win/c/Christianity/p/17txVyUe1f/the-old-covenant-is-fulfilled-su/c
Since you now seem to have unblocked me, it merely suffices to repeat, 8 times, that my argument began by rejecting dual covenant, "Dual covenant theology wrongly teaches the Old Covenant is salvific"; and then to repeat that you contradict Jesus to say "The law was ... abolished", and your supersessionism is tantamount to teaching a past dual covenant because you imply the Old Testament had some valid "life" and "place" that was "replaced" and "superseded" by the New when you believe "the Old Law died" as if words of God could die forever.