HARZKP814 Before I respond, I need you to fully understand something.
What you’re doing follows a pattern. I call it the Lucifer phases of deception. They’re simple see below.
PHASE 4: REDEFINING CORE TERMS
You said “these are Hebrews, not modern Jews” Show me where Romans 11 makes that distinction. It doesn’t.
You inserted a new definition into the text. Then you argued from that definition as if it came from Scripture. That’s not reading the Bible. You're rewriting it.
LUCIFER’S DECEPTION PHASE 2: STRAWMAN CONSTRUCTION
I said “do not boast against the branches” You turned it into “so nobody can criticize Jews ever” That’s not what I said.
You replaced my statement with a weaker version so you could attack it. That is not an argument sir, that is substitution.
LUCIFER’S DECEPTION PHASE 6: BOUNDARY OVERRIDE
This is where your argument actually breaks. You are merging two things Scripture keeps separate. Ethnic identity Spiritual condition
You are saying if they don’t believe, they stop being Jews entirely. Then explain this. IN Romans 11:1 “I too am an Israelite…” Paul believes Yeshua is the Messiah and still says “I AM an Israelite” PRESENT TENSE.
So answer this. Did Paul stop being an Israelite when he believed?
Yes or no.
LUCIFERS DECEPTION PHASE 1: FORCED CATEGORIZATION
You split everything into two boxes. “real Hebrews back then” “fake Jews now” Again, show that split in the text. Not your interpretation. The text. You can’t and you know it. Because it’s not there.
Last but not least.
You are not pulling meaning from Scripture. You are inserting meaning into it. You changed definitions. You replaced what was said. You merged categories. That is the pattern. That is how deception works. Now you’ve seen it. Good day.
Hey ummm handshake HARZKP814?
“ALMOST AS IF TRUTH STAYS THE SAME. HUH.” Right.
Truth stays the same. Which is exactly why dragging accusations from completely different centuries and pretending they all describe the same people is not truth. It is you stitching together whatever you can find and calling it a worldview. 🤣
“BEFORE 70 AD. SO YOU’RE JUST REINFORCING MY POINT.”
Yeah, amazing point. Paul dealt with Jewish communities before 70 AD… and somehow they all vanished and got replaced by impostors right after. History just hit a reset button because your theory needed it to. Brilliant. 🤣
“HOW SO?”
Because those same Jewish communities did not disappear. They continued. That is how history works. Populations do not get swapped out like game skins. 🤣
“A BAAL STATUE WAS BURNT AND THEY SCREECHK VETCHED OVER IT!”
Ah yes. The gold standard of historical analysis. One random internet clip equals proof of secret Baal worship. Forget thousands of years of documented theology. 🤣
You saw a video. Case closed. 🤣
“SINCE WHEN HAS CHABAD OR AIPAC EVER SPOKEN OUT AGAINST THOSE?”
Yes, when I think of ancient Near Eastern idolatry, my first thought is modern political lobbying groups. Totally the same category. Not a completely gormless comparison at all. 🤣🤣🤣
“OKAY, WHAT DO THEY SAY? HINT: NOT TALKING ABOUT THE OLD TESTAMENT.”
Right, because Judaism definitely abandoned the Hebrew Scriptures and secretly teaches Baal worship now. You just cannot find it anywhere except in memes and comment sections. 🤣
“NO, THAT IS A STRAWMAN. IT IS JEWS WHO STRUGGLE WITH NUANCE…”
You just spent paragraphs blaming an entire group across centuries and now you are lecturing about nuance. That is rich. 🤣🤣🤣
“SO WHY WOULD THEY BLAME JUCE AND NOT SOMEONE ELSE?”
Because minorities have historically been easy scapegoats. This is not complicated. It has happened to multiple groups across history. But apparently that concept only works when it fits your narrative. RIGHT?
“OH BUT MEDIEVAL ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MUSLIMS AND MODERN POLITICS ARE RELATABLE.”
You keep doing the exact same OLD RUSTY thing and acting like it proves something. Medieval accusation. Modern grievance. Blend. Repeat. 🤣
“THAT’S LIKE SAYING ISLAMIC JIHAD ISN’T RELATED TO MUSLIMS.”
No, it is like saying you cannot blame every Muslim across all centuries for everything done by anyone claiming that label. Same principle. Not hard bruv.
“WHY DO I NOT SEE ANY OF THE USUAL PRO-JEW GUYS POINT OUT ANYTHING NEGATIVE JEWS DO?”
Because criticizing specific actions is different from inventing a centuries-spanning conspiracy blob and calling it truth. 🤣🤣🤣
“I TOUCHED ON THIS ONE TOO.” You “touched on it” by ignoring what it says. BIGLY!!
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
That is a warning to Gentiles. Not a ban on criticism. Not a license for your rant. A warning about arrogance. Which you walked straight into. 🤣🤣🤣
“WHO IS DOING BOASTING… WHAT ABOUT NETANYAHU…”
There it is. From Scripture straight to modern politics in one jump. Every time. Moronic.
“THE WEST AND WHITES HAVE DUMPED INFINITY HELP…”
And now we are fully off the rails. Theology, geopolitics, culture war, everything is someone else’s fault. Right on schedule. 🤣
“SO CALLING CENTURIES OF DISCONNECTED ACCUSATIONS ‘FACTS’…”
Exactly. You ALMOST got it. That is literally what you are doing. Taking unrelated events across centuries and pretending they are one continuous proof. Also Moronic.
“LIKE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST COMMUNISTS…”
No. Because communism is a defined political ideology. You are talking about an entire people across thousands of years and pretending it is one unified actor.
Your whole method is simple. Childlike. Grab something medieval. Grab something modern. Add a conspiracy. Call it truth. 🤣
That is not analysis bruv. That is just another gormless rant dressed up like one. 🤣
Dear Handshake HARZKP814
You quoted me all over the place but you still did not deal with the actual text.
You claim Romans 11 is only about “Hebrews” and not applicable now.
That is false.
Paul the Apostle wrote Romans after Yeshua, to Gentile believers, warning them in real time.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
That is not Old Testament. That is not “ancient Hebrews only.” That is a direct warning to Gentiles in the Messianic age.
So your claim collapses immediately. Then you twist it into “so nobody can criticize Jews ever.”
No. That is you building a strawman because you cannot deal with what the text actually says.
The warning is about arrogance and replacement, not banning criticism. And here is the part you keep avoiding. Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “For I too am an Israelite…” Paul believed Yeshua is the Messiah and still identifies as Israelite. IMAGINE THAT.
So your whole framework of “Hebrews back then vs fake Jews now” does not come from the text. It comes from you forcing the text to fit your narrative. Which means you're a liar.
You quoted everything. You just did not understand what you quoted. Bbfn
SwampRangers, I appreciate the kind words and the upvotes. Just to clarify one small thing so nobody gets the wrong idea in the thread. I’m not Jewish and I’m not Messianic. I’m a gentile who follows Yeshua and the Scriptures. Labels get messy so I usually just stick with that. Peace.
SwampRangers, just to clarify one thing before I step away. I am not Jewish and I am not part of the Messianic movement. I simply follow Yeshua and the Scriptures. That is all I meant earlier.
I am not interested in getting into discussions about creeds or church history. I am going to bow out of this thread now. I wish you well. Peace.
SwampRangers, thank you for the welcome and for the suggestion. But I want to be clear about something.
I want nothing to do with Christianity as an institution or label. I follow Yeshua and the Scriptures, but that is not the same thing.
Since you invited me to this forum, I think it is best that I simply decline and step away from this direction of the discussion. I appreciate the civility and wish you well. Peace.
Also you throwing the word “dispensationalist” around like it is some kind of insult is pretty funny.
The apostle Paul literally describes different stewardships in God’s plan.
Ephesians 3:2 (Amplified Bible) “Assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace which was entrusted to me for your benefit.”
The Greek word there is οἰκονομία (oikonomia) meaning administration or stewardship. That is exactly where the concept of dispensations comes from.
So if recognizing that God works through different administrations in history makes someone a dispensationalist, then congratulations. You just accused Paul of being one too.
TALLESTSKIL You wrote a novel but the whole argument collapses the moment the actual words in the New Testament are read.
First. The word “Jew” was not invented a few centuries ago like you claimed. The New Testament itself uses the Greek word Ἰουδαῖος (Ioudaios). That word existed in the first century and refers to the Jewish people or Judeans. So the idea that translators invented the word recently to create confusion is simply false.
Second. Your claim that believing in the Messiah erases Jewish identity is destroyed by the apostle Paul the himself.
Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
Notice the tense. Paul does not say “I used to be an Israelite.” He says I am. The Greek word is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs), meaning a member of Israel. Paul believed Yeshua is the Messiah and still identified as an Israelite. That alone destroys the definition you are trying to force.
Third. Your claim that Galilee was only the tribe of Benjamin is simply made up. By the first century Galilee had multiple Israelite populations and the New Testament repeatedly refers to its inhabitants as Jews.
And since you seem bothered by the name I use, let’s address that directly. The name given to the Messiah was יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshua).
Look in Matthew 1:21 (Amplified Bible) “She will give birth to a Son, and you shall name Him YESHUA [The LORD is salvation], for He will save His people from their sins.”
The Greek New Testament records the name as Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous) because the text was written in Greek. The English form “Jesus” came later through Greek and Latin. Using Yeshua is simply using the Hebrew name He was actually given. GOD gave Him that name sir.
And where did Yeshua grow up? John 1:45–46 (Amplified Bible) “Philip found Nathanael and told him, ‘We have found the One Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote, Yeshua from Nazareth, the son of Joseph.’ Nathanael said to him, ‘Can anything good come out of Nazareth?’”
Nazareth is in Galilee. So the Messiah Himself grew up in the very region you are trying to separate from Jews.
You also quoted several passages condemning unbelief among some Jews in the first century. No one denies that happened. Scripture says plainly that some rejected the Messiah.
But the same apostle also says this.
Romans 11:28–29 (Amplified Bible) “From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake; but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are still beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”
The Greek word for irrevocable is ἀμεταμέλητα (ametamelēta). It means not taken back. So the picture Paul gives is simple. Some branches were broken off because of unbelief. Gentiles were grafted in. The root is still Israel. God has not rejected His people. Period.
You told me to read the Bible.
That is exactly why your “Hebrews vs Jews” theory falls apart the moment the text is actually read.
QUOTE: "Self-evidently. You refuse to reply to what others actually write, you can’t defend your claims, and you post heresies that only jews have ever said. We’re completely done. You’ve exposed what you are."
QUOTE OF MY REPLY: "TALLESTSKIL You’re contradicting yourself and Paul at the same time. lol
You say a Jew who accepts the Messiah stops being a Jew and becomes something else. But the apostle Paul the Apostle literally identifies himself as both after believing in Yeshua. How do you square that?
Look in Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
Look at The Greek word he uses is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs). That means a member of Israel. Paul did not say “I used to be an Israelite.” He says I am. Big difference dude.
And your claim that “the ancient Hebrews all became Christians centuries ago and now only Jews are left” is something the Scriptures never say. LOL.
Paul says the opposite in the same chapter.
Look AGAIN in Romans 11:28–29 (Amplified Bible) “From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake; but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are still beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”
The Greek word for irrevocable is ἀμεταμέλητα (ametamelēta), meaning not withdrawn, not taken back. Look it up!!
So no, Israel did not disappear and get replaced. Paul explicitly says God has not rejected His people. I see a duh coming on.
And you brushed off the warning about boasting against the natural branches, but that warning was written to Gentiles exactly for this kind of arrogance. Go back and read it.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
The Greek word for root is ῥίζα (rhiza), the source or foundation.
So the picture Paul gives is clear. Gentiles are grafted in. Israel is the root. God has not rejected His people. And Gentiles are warned not to boast against the natural branches.
You told me to read the Bible. I did. That is why your claim does not line up with what Paul actually wrote. Do better homework." <----- SO WHATS THIS SIR?
As for who I am I am a born again Child of the Living God sir. Yeshua is the King of Kings and God come in the flesh. Tread carefully.
You are throwing a pile of accusations from completely different centuries and calling it “facts.” That is not how history works.
You claim Jews after 70 AD are impostors and not connected to the ancient Hebrews. Yet the apostle Paul the Apostle was already dealing with Jewish communities before 70 AD in places like Rome, Corinth, and Ephesus. The same people you are trying to separate are the very communities the New Testament is talking about.
And the idea that Jews secretly worship Baal or Molech today is pure assertion. Judaism has condemned those idols for thousands of years. That accusation only works if you ignore what Jewish texts and practices actually say.
Your coin clipping example also collapses the moment you look at the records. Medieval courts prosecuted large numbers of Christians for that crime. Yet entire Jewish communities were blamed collectively because they were convenient scapegoats. That is exactly how stereotypes get created.
Then you jump from medieval accusations to modern politics and try to weld it all together into one narrative. That is not evidence. It is just connecting unrelated grievances across centuries.
The irony is that the New Testament itself warns Gentiles not to go down this road.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
Paul’s point is simple. Gentiles are grafted in. Israel is the root. And Gentiles are warned not to boast against the natural branches.
So calling centuries of disconnected accusations “facts” does not make them historical or biblical. It just shows you are stitching together grievances instead of dealing with what the texts actually say.
I do wish you knew what you were talking about. It would make this conversation much more interesting.
HARZKP813
You are jumping between centuries, stereotypes, and modern politics and pretending it is one continuous argument. It is not.
First, the “Christkiller” accusation. The New Testament itself does not support blaming an entire people. Yeshua was executed by Roman authority under Pontius Pilate. Historically that is how crucifixion worked. Rome carried it out.
Second, the idea that Jews today secretly worship Baal or Molech. That accusation makes no sense when applied to Judaism. Judaism has been strictly monotheistic for thousands of years and explicitly condemns those idols. The Hebrew Scriptures repeatedly condemn Molech worship as abomination.
Third, the coin clipping stereotype. That crime shows up in medieval Europe. Court records from England and other kingdoms show large numbers of Christians prosecuted for it. Yet entire Jewish communities were often blamed collectively even when individuals convicted were not Jewish. That is where the stereotype comes from.
Fourth, the claim about political control or a unified agenda. Jewish populations are politically diverse across countries and communities. The fact that some Jews hold positions of influence does not prove a coordinated agenda any more than influential Catholics, Protestants, or secular people prove those groups run governments.
Fifth, the argument that ancient Hebrews were different from Jews today. Historically that is incorrect. Judaism developed directly from the religion and people of ancient Israel after the Second Temple period. The continuity is widely recognized in historical and archaeological scholarship.
Finally, the entire discussion started because you were mocking the idea that a Jew could believe Yeshua is the Messiah. The apostle Paul the Apostle was exactly that: a Jew who believed Yeshua is the Messiah and still identified as an Israelite.
Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
The Greek word Paul uses is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs), meaning a member of Israel.
So the attempt to divide “Hebrews” from “Jews,” pile on medieval accusations, and then attach modern politics to it does not hold up historically or biblically.
Facts don't care dude. Just relax and deal. Lates.
TALLESTSKIL You’re contradicting yourself and Paul at the same time. lol
You say a Jew who accepts the Messiah stops being a Jew and becomes something else. But the apostle Paul the Apostle literally identifies himself as both after believing in Yeshua. How do you square that?
Look in Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
Look at The Greek word he uses is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs). That means a member of Israel. Paul did not say “I used to be an Israelite.” He says I am. Big difference dude.
And your claim that “the ancient Hebrews all became Christians centuries ago and now only Jews are left” is something the Scriptures never say. LOL.
Paul says the opposite in the same chapter.
Look AGAIN in Romans 11:28–29 (Amplified Bible) “From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake; but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are still beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”
The Greek word for irrevocable is ἀμεταμέλητα (ametamelēta), meaning not withdrawn, not taken back. Look it up!!
So no, Israel did not disappear and get replaced. Paul explicitly says God has not rejected His people. I see a duh coming on.
And you brushed off the warning about boasting against the natural branches, but that warning was written to Gentiles exactly for this kind of arrogance. Go back and read it.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
The Greek word for root is ῥίζα (rhiza), the source or foundation.
So the picture Paul gives is clear. Gentiles are grafted in. Israel is the root. God has not rejected His people. And Gentiles are warned not to boast against the natural branches.
You told me to read the Bible. I did. That is why your claim does not line up with what Paul actually wrote. Do better homework.
HARZKP813 you seem confused.
That list you threw out is just a stack of old stereotypes that fall apart the moment you look at reality.
Jews do not “believe the Talmud over everything.” Most Jews today are secular and many do not even study it.
“Clipping coins” is a medieval myth that got attached to Jews even though the people actually caught doing it in Europe were often Christians.
The “Star of David” is just a cultural symbol that became common centuries after the biblical period.
Accusing Jews of worshipping Baal or Molech is nonsense. Judaism is strictly monotheistic and has condemned those idols for thousands of years.
The idea that Jews are pushing modern Western political movements like LGBT activism, mass immigration, or anything else as some unified agenda is just conspiracy thinking. Jews are politically all over the spectrum like any other population.
And the usury stereotype exists because medieval laws often banned Christians from lending money with interest while allowing Jews to do certain financial jobs. That created resentment and myths that stuck around long after the laws disappeared.
So the list you posted is not evidence of anything. It is just recycled accusations that have been floating around for centuries.
HARZKP813 you said...
Did Paul the Apostle believe the Talmud? No. The Talmud did not exist yet. Paul lived in the first century. The Mishnah was compiled around 200 AD and the Talmud centuries after that.
Did Paul abuse chickens? No. That accusation comes from much later polemics and rituals that appeared long after the first century. It has nothing to do with Paul.
Did he clip coins? No. Coin clipping was a medieval crime where people shaved precious metal from coins. Historically it was often Christians who were caught and punished for it. In medieval England many of the people prosecuted for coin clipping were Christians, even though Jews were often scapegoated for the crime. None of that has anything to do with a first-century Jew like Paul.
Did Paul bow to Molech or Baal? No. Paul explicitly condemned idolatry.
Romans 1:22–23 (Amplified Bible) “Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory and majesty and excellence of the immortal God for an image [worthless idols] in the shape of mortal man and birds and four-footed animals and reptiles.”
The Greek word used for idolatry is εἰδωλολατρία (eidōlolatria), meaning the worship of idols.
Did he wear the “Star of David”? No. That symbol did not become widely associated with Jewish identity until the medieval period, more than a thousand years after Paul lived.
Did Paul “cry victim”? No. Paul openly identified himself as Jewish while following Yeshua.
Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
The Greek word he uses is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs), meaning a member of Israel.
Did Paul push mass immigration, LGBT ideology, or modern political movements? No. Those are modern issues. Paul’s letters deal with first-century questions like circumcision, Torah observance, and Gentiles being grafted into Israel.
Did he push miscegenation? No. Paul spoke about unity of Jews and Gentiles in the Messiah, not modern racial categories.
Was he pro-usury? No. Paul taught believers to live honestly and not exploit others.
AND PAUL GIVES A DIRECT WARNING TO GENTILES WHO START RAILING AGAINST JEWS.
AND PAUL GIVES A DIRECT WARNING TO GENTILES WHO START RAILING AGAINST JEWS.
AND PAUL GIVES A DIRECT WARNING TO GENTILES WHO START RAILING AGAINST JEWS.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them… do not boast against the branches… it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
The Greek word sir for root is ῥίζα (rhiza), meaning the source or origin. LOOK IT UP!!
So every accusation you listed either comes from a completely different historical period or has nothing to do with what Paul actually taught. Enjoy your day.
TALLESTSKIL Said
“If they’re Jews, they’re not messianic. If they’re messianic, they’re not Jews.”
Then sir, you need to explain why the apostle Paul the Apostle says the exact opposite.
In Romans 11:1 (Amplified Bible) “I say then, has God rejected and disowned His people? Certainly not! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”
Paul believed in Yeshua and still identified himself as a Jew. The Greek word he uses is Ἰσραηλίτης (Israēlitēs), meaning a member of the people of Israel. So the rule you just invented collapses immediately.
And Paul goes even further in the same chapter when he addresses Gentiles who start thinking they replaced Israel.
Romans 11:17–18 (Amplified Bible) “But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive [shoot], were grafted in among them to share in the rich root of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. If you do boast, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root that supports you.”
The Greek word for root is ῥίζα (rhiza), meaning the source or origin. Very important.
Paul’s point is simple. The Gentile believer is the wild branch grafted in. The root is Israel. The branch does not replace the root and it certainly does not define it.
So the idea that a Jew stops being a Jew the moment he believes Yeshua is the Messiah is the exact opposite of what Paul teaches. And the moment Gentiles start boasting against the natural branches, Paul says you have already forgotten your place. See?
The root supports the Gentile sir, not the other way around. Have a good day.
I just showed you HOW Lucifer has you doing his work for him. Yes you are currently right now being manipulated by a demon. Bummer right?