Abraham and Issac: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 2

[Marilyn C]

The idea of a Jewish husband marrying a "gentile" wife and being grafted in is best understood in the life of Joseph.  As his wife was an Egyptian -- and her two sons -- Ephraim and Manasseh were given their portion of the promised land!

Hi George,

 

Good point & I agree. We also read of Ruth, Rahab, & other gentile women being wives of the men of Israel. And as you said they come into the nation of Israel & into Israel`s inheritance.

 

And we know that God is not lying when He told Israel -"I will betroth you to me for ever." (Hosea 2: 19) & that He is their husband, " For your Maker is your husband." (Isa. 54: 5) And we know that God is not a polygamist - marrying more than one wife.

 

Marilyn.

[JustPassingThru]

Following along with the typology of the story, ...John the Baptist gave us the answer to Isaac's question, ...Behold the Lamb of God. John 1:29  

[1to3]

On 6/15/2015 at 11:28 PM, Ezra said:

braham, Isaac, and Jacob were Hebrews.  The Israelites descended from Jacob (Israel).  So there were no "Israelites" in this context. How did you miss that?

Was not the original text that was translated to "Jew" is Judahite ?but the term was shortened by translators to emphasize a racial component that does not exist in the bible?

Is it not so that the bible doesn't speak about race when it comes to belief ?

Is not  Judah is the tribe -- the lineage of Christ -- that we're "Born again" into when we confess in Jesus Christ ?

when you look at the context of certain passages, the bible clearly doesn't speak about race, therefore "jew" is improper because it sounds like a race when in truth it's trying to refer to the tribe of "Judah", which is the tribe that Christ belongs to, which does not constitute race,  as back then, race didn't really matter, rather, the tribe that you belonged to is what mattered, and Christ belonged to Judah.

Judah was God’s chosen tribe to bring about the messiah, we become God’s chosen through belief in Christ, therefor we become Judahites.

it's impossible for faith to live inside of the blood without God forcing love.

 so when I look at the position in going with "Judahite" instead of Jew , is it not correct?

For a long time I was using "Jew" in the spiritual sense, but the way that I was using it, as Paul describes, "One is a Jew by circumcision of the heart" -- by belief, I see that my position is compatible to mean "tribe", for our genes do not change with belief, but our hearts do.

If everyone associated the word Jew with Judahite, nobody would confuse Judahites for a race, and thereforr other deceptions will begin to unravel, namely the concept of a physical jew. 

Also, do you notice something interesting when Paul talks about "Jews"? He doesn't say "Israelite", here you can see another aspect of the original context of the scripture. He doesn't say one is an "Israelite" who is circumcised in the heart. Therefor, exposing the original intent of the scripture, one is a Judahite who confesses in Christ.

Just as God promised of salvation through the tribe of Judah and SPECIFICALLY Judah, therefor Christ is the King of the Judahites. This is where  "Salvation is of the Jews" really meant -- in proper context -- that salvation comes OUT of the tribe of Judah. Salvation does not come out of anyone but Christ, so a blanket plural statement statement "Jews" used in modern translations cannot make any sense without calling Christ a liar. Therefor I'd say the explanation of Judahite makes more sense than the blanket 'catch-all' of "Jews" but the translators made is so that it sounds like Salvation comes out of a race, this is what confuses Christians when it comes to those that claim they are Jews (which Revelation warns about), Christians think that being a Jew references a race even as Christ and Paul both dispute it, being a Judahite means belief in Christ, to become a member of his tribe – his family -- this is why translators destroyed the original meaning, they don’t want people to see that it’s by faith alone that one becomes a Judahite.

For instance, the tribe of Levi, they are Levites, not Judahites, and Salvation did not come out of Levi, nor was such a promise ever made, yet we're supposed to believe that "Salvation is of the Jews", if that was so, then Salvation comes out of the tribe of Levi also because they are "Jews" as well, you see what I mean? Here is where you find a logic-conflict that exposes the original intent of the scripture, when you look at the context of that verse, it makes no sense for "Salvation is out of Judah" to mean "Jews", Salvation comes out of Christ alone, who came OUT of Judah, it is not plural but singular. Just as God's promise to Eve, of salvation through her is not plural but singular, just as Paul’s break down of God's promise to Abraham of "one seed" is not plural but singular:

"The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many, but “and to your seed,” meaning One, who is Christ." Galatians 3:16

Therefor, "Salvation is of the Jews" cannot mean a plural, but singular "out of Judah". Meaning Christ, here you can see precisely what she means. Because in taking Christ's blood, we are born again into his family, which is where salvation lives -- in his tribe -- Judah, Therefor this is why Paul uses "Judahite" and not Israelite. The Levites did not bring about Salvation, nor did the Tribe of Dan, Joseph, etc. It was Judah, therefor to be saved, we are Judahites.

 

[InChristAlways]

On 10/23/2018 at 10:22 PM, JustPassingThru said:

Following along with the typology of the story, ...John the Baptist gave us the answer to Isaac's question, ...Behold the Lamb of God. John 1:29  

Good post.

Genesis 22:9 uses "slaughter", the same word used in Revelation 5:6 concerning Jesus as the Passover Lamb.  Just thought that was interesting.  Unlike Isaac, who was saved from death, Jesus suffered death on the cross but was raised from the dead and ascended to the right hand of God in Acts.

Genesis 22:
9 And they come in unto the place of which 'Elohim hath spoken to him, and there Abraham buildeth the altar, and arrangeth the wood<06086>, and he bindeth Yitschaq his son, and placeth him upon the altar above the wood<06086>. 10 And Abraham putteth forth his hand, and taketh the knife--to slaughter his son.
13 And Abraham is lifting his eyes and behold a ram behind being held in thicket, in horns of him and Abraham is going and and he is taking the ram and he is offering up him as ascent offering instead of his son.

6086 `ets from 6095; a tree (from its firmness); hence, wood (plural sticks):--+ carpenter, gallows, helve, + pine, plank, staff, stalk, stick, stock, timber, tree, wood.
H6086 עֵץ (`ets), occurs 328 times in 288 verses

===============================================

Act 1:9 Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.

G286>amnós, am-nos'; apparently a primary word; a lamb:—lamb.

Acts 8:32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:
“He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; And as a lamb<286> before its shearer is silent, So He opened not His mouth.

Acts 13:29 and when they did finish all the things written about Him, having taken down from the wood/xulou<3586>, they laid Him in a tomb;

Revelation 1:18 and the living One! And I became dead, and behold,  I am living into the Ages of the Ages. And I am having the Keys of the Hades and of the Death

=============================================

I noticed when I was doing a Greek study on Revelation, that the word G721 is used instead of G286.

721. arnion ar-nee'-on diminutive from 704; a lambkin:--lamb.

Revelation 5:6 And I saw and behold! in midst of the throne and of the four living-ones and in midst of the elders a lambkin/arnion <721> standing, as having been slaughtered

=================================

 

[Jedi4Yahweh]

On 6/16/2015 at 2:12 PM, Willa said:

I see this story of Abe and Isaac to be more a testing of Abe's faith. Without faith, believing God, there would have been no actions. His actions demonstrated his belief. They revealed his heart to himself, since God already knew his heart. But the whole scenerio was a prophecy, as you have aptly put. It was a foreshadowing of the coming Messiah. It was yet another way in which Jesus fulfilled the Torah, the Law.

Amen!  Faith with out works is not real faith. (Jam 2.17)  Abraham substantiated the evidence of his faith by the things he did in obeying God.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. - Heb 11:1 KJV

Faith has evidence if there is no evidence there is no faith. 

But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as [in] a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker [is] God. ... By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten [son], - Heb 11:6-10, 17 KJV

Edited September 25, 2020 by Jedi4Yahweh

[Jedi4Yahweh]

On 1/7/2019 at 3:24 PM, 1to3 said:

Was not the original text that was translated to "Jew" is Judahite ?but the term was shortened by translators to emphasize a racial component that does not exist in the bible?

Is it not so that the bible doesn't speak about race when it comes to belief ?

Is not  Judah is the tribe -- the lineage of Christ -- that we're "Born again" into when we confess in Jesus Christ ?

when you look at the context of certain passages, the bible clearly doesn't speak about race, therefore "jew" is improper because it sounds like a race when in truth it's trying to refer to the tribe of "Judah", which is the tribe that Christ belongs to, which does not constitute race,  as back then, race didn't really matter, rather, the tribe that you belonged to is what mattered, and Christ belonged to Judah.

Judah was God’s chosen tribe to bring about the messiah, we become God’s chosen through belief in Christ, therefor we become Judahites.

it's impossible for faith to live inside of the blood without God forcing love.

 so when I look at the position in going with "Judahite" instead of Jew , is it not correct?

For a long time I was using "Jew" in the spiritual sense, but the way that I was using it, as Paul describes, "One is a Jew by circumcision of the heart" -- by belief, I see that my position is compatible to mean "tribe", for our genes do not change with belief, but our hearts do.

If everyone associated the word Jew with Judahite, nobody would confuse Judahites for a race, and thereforr other deceptions will begin to unravel, namely the concept of a physical jew. 

Also, do you notice something interesting when Paul talks about "Jews"? He doesn't say "Israelite", here you can see another aspect of the original context of the scripture. He doesn't say one is an "Israelite" who is circumcised in the heart. Therefor, exposing the original intent of the scripture, one is a Judahite who confesses in Christ.

Just as God promised of salvation through the tribe of Judah and SPECIFICALLY Judah, therefor Christ is the King of the Judahites. This is where  "Salvation is of the Jews" really meant -- in proper context -- that salvation comes OUT of the tribe of Judah. Salvation does not come out of anyone but Christ, so a blanket plural statement statement "Jews" used in modern translations cannot make any sense without calling Christ a liar. Therefor I'd say the explanation of Judahite makes more sense than the blanket 'catch-all' of "Jews" but the translators made is so that it sounds like Salvation comes out of a race, this is what confuses Christians when it comes to those that claim they are Jews (which Revelation warns about), Christians think that being a Jew references a race even as Christ and Paul both dispute it, being a Judahite means belief in Christ, to become a member of his tribe – his family -- this is why translators destroyed the original meaning, they don’t want people to see that it’s by faith alone that one becomes a Judahite.

For instance, the tribe of Levi, they are Levites, not Judahites, and Salvation did not come out of Levi, nor was such a promise ever made, yet we're supposed to believe that "Salvation is of the Jews", if that was so, then Salvation comes out of the tribe of Levi also because they are "Jews" as well, you see what I mean? Here is where you find a logic-conflict that exposes the original intent of the scripture, when you look at the context of that verse, it makes no sense for "Salvation is out of Judah" to mean "Jews", Salvation comes out of Christ alone, who came OUT of Judah, it is not plural but singular. Just as God's promise to Eve, of salvation through her is not plural but singular, just as Paul’s break down of God's promise to Abraham of "one seed" is not plural but singular:

"The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many, but “and to your seed,” meaning One, who is Christ." Galatians 3:16

Therefor, "Salvation is of the Jews" cannot mean a plural, but singular "out of Judah". Meaning Christ, here you can see precisely what she means. Because in taking Christ's blood, we are born again into his family, which is where salvation lives -- in his tribe -- Judah, Therefor this is why Paul uses "Judahite" and not Israelite. The Levites did not bring about Salvation, nor did the Tribe of Dan, Joseph, etc. It was Judah, therefor to be saved, we are Judahites.

 

Originally, the word Jew referred to anyone from the Kingdom/House of Judah not just the tribe of Judah, after the split of the nation of Israel.  The Kingdom of Judah (Jews) is the southern kingdom which mostly included the tribe of Benjamin and the tribe of Judah and it also included Levites.  The 10 northern tribes were referred to as the Kingdom/House of Israel or Ephraim and later became known as Samaritans. They were never referred to as Jews unless they joined themselves to the Kingdom of Judah and followed the law of the covenant.  The Israelites (Northern Israel) went into captivity during the Assyrian invasion and only a small number returned after their captivity and later became know as Samaritans because they were a mixed race of Israel and Assyrians living in northern Israel.  Jews would not associate with them because they did not follow the covenant and also for the fact they had been mixed in with the Assyrians and their religious practices and created their own form of religion in Israel.  Jews and Samaritans had deep disdain for each other.  This was even seen in the Gospels how Jews and Samaritans did not like each other, yet Jesus spent much if not most of his ministry in the Samaritan regions (lost sheep of the House of Israel).  Many Jews rejected Jesus because he was from Nazareth which was a Samaritan region.  

Lets make something clear, being a Jew was more about following the covenant the Kingdom of Judah more than about where or whom you were born from.  Meaning if someone  was from the region of Samaria but followed the covenant and teachings of the Jews they were also considered a Jew based on their religion and likewise if you lived in Judea but did not follow the covenant of the Jews you were considered a sinner/gentile.  So a Jew today is anyone who follows the covenant and teachings of that the Jews regardless of where you are born or whom you were born from.

Edited September 25, 2020 by Jedi4Yahweh

[JohnR7]

On 6/12/2015 at 1:34 AM, George said:

You'll notice over and over again the number 3 in connection to the resurrection throughout the Old Covenant.

Jesus was raised on the beginning of the third day.

"Go tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected." (Luke 13:31)

[JohnR7]

On 1/7/2019 at 4:24 PM, 1to3 said:

Was not the original text that was translated to "Jew" is Judahite ?but the term was shortened by translators to emphasize a racial component that does not exist in the bible?

The word "Jew" is derogatory slang. It is a version of Judah which the germans used the term Jewish during the holocaust. It was intended to mock the people who claimed to be a descendant of Judah. Today the "Jewish" people are happy to use this term for them.  One reason they do this is to hide proper names and terms for what is holy from people that are foul and profane and have no right to use holy names, words and terms. 

[Guest]

On 11/21/2020 at 8:34 PM, JohnR7 said:

The word "Jew" is derogatory slang. It is a version of Judah which the germans used the term Jewish during the holocaust. It was intended to mock the people who claimed to be a descendant of Judah. Today the "Jewish" people are happy to use this term for them.  One reason they do this is to hide proper names and terms for what is holy from people that are foul and profane and have no right to use holy names, words and terms. 

This is not correct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_(word)

https://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Jew.html

[JohnR7]

On 11/29/2020 at 5:11 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

This is not correct.

Are you a holocaust survivor or do you know anyone that is? You are treading on thin ice if you want to deny the Holocaust took place and in some places that is against the law. 

According to your referance in Wiki: "The English term Jew originates in the Biblical Hebrew word Yehudi, meaning "from the Kingdom of Judah". This is exactly what I said so you have your confirmation there.