“Trying to put a timeline together. Coming at this from a tactical view....
1908 the Scofield Reference Bible came out financed by the House of Rothschild. This is propaganda manipulating Christian into serving God's "Chosen" people.
1913 Federal Reserve started
1914 WW1
1917 The Balfour Declaration was a public letter issued by British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, supporting the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. It was addressed to Lord Rothschild
1939 WW2
1945 The United Nations (UN) officially begins
1947 The UN approved a plan to partition the British Mandate into a Jewish and an Arab state, though the Arab population rejected it.
1948 The State of Israel was proclaimed.
1948 to now. Act out as many End Time prophecies from the Bible on the world stage using all the "tools" and "Assets" they acquired to fool Christians into that we are living in the end times to further enforce the indoctrination from the Scofield Reference Bible that we are at the Rapture and need to be saved but first Christians have to be Zionists because that brings the AntiChrist and you cant have Jesus without the AntiChrist first.”
I used a Scofield reference Bible way back in the day and I never once saw anything in it that supports the premise that Christians have to be Zionists. I may have missed something though, and I eventually got rid of all of the Bibles I had that had references, footnotes, maps or anything else and bought a King James Bible with zero extras besides text and verse numbers.
Also, if this is the end times, who is to say that God won't use the very thing you describe to fulfill the prophesies? These things, from end times prophesies to draining the US swamp have no real precedent in history and who is to say God won't use what they intend for evil to bring about the fulfillment of his plans? It would be a very God thing to do.
Except the King James version has been around for 300 years and says the same thing about the Temple.
However, I have argued that the body is a Temple to the holy spirit and an individual taking the mark of the beast is allowing Satan into the Temple of God making himself god through transhumanism.
If that is the case, the 3rd temple does not need to be rebuilt for that prophecy to come true, for those who choose the Mark of the Beast their own bodies become the abomination of desolation. (Matthew 24:15-16 & Daniel 9:27)
EXACTLY !! We are are in Satan's little season when he is free to deceive the nations one last time that's why EVERY rabbit hole you go down, you find EVERYTHING is a LIE. Jesus is the ONLY TRUTH.
This has nothing to do with the dispensation of the ages doctrine.
Secondly, if you read a bit before verse 34 in Matt. 24 it says which generation will not pass until these things be fulfilled and that generation was the one to see Israel restored to a nation. Which means it is our generation that will likely see it take place. There are many still alive that were alive in 1954.
It is also echoed In Revelations with a lot gorier detail, and those prophecies have not yet been fulfilled. Not in 70 AD and not now.
You are the ONLY one I have ever heard talk about Matthew 24:34! This one verse and the first three verses of Revelation completely destroy the dangerous and false teachings of Scofield...but it seems that the Church body has been so lulled to sleep by this Rapture business that they don't really read their Bibles anymore! Thanks fren!
What is your evidence that people were "marked" 666? All I know of is that people's names were calculated to 666 by that time (primarily Nero and Titus). Is it possible you're conflating another detail?
Can't find it. The information is gone which doesn't surprise me.
Any how I had run the info by a reformed pastor friend of mine way back when and he hinted at the Romans would have been privy to that prophecy at that time.
Can't find it. The information is gone which doesn't surprise me.
Any how I had run the info by a reformed pastor friend of mine way back when and he hinted at the Romans would have been privy to that prophecy at that time.
I'm not a pre-tribulation rapturist at all, we're going to walk through the fire, whether we like it or not.
Some people claim the false alien invasion will sucker in the pre-tribbers to a false rapture where they will be abducted and served for lunch at the restaurant at the end of the universe - Special of the Day- Terran Stake loins (tip of the hat to Douglas Adams)~s
Thanks for the summary and for keeping it moderate.
In the 80s, before discovering anything of global cabal, I realized that if God was laying out the details then his enemies would try to manipulate that to their advantage and yet it would not succeed. The only way he can do this is to speak in slightly mysterious language that will be unlocked properly when the time comes. Following the Holy Spirit will reveal the correct unlock.
That means there must be a plan to fake things so that if there's a rapture it can be attributed to someone other than God. So the devil set up a UFO narrative whereby UFOs are presumed to have the ability to siphon off the "dregs" of humanity and bring the rest into a "better world". Of course I later rejected the pretrib rapture, but the enemy doesn't know for sure if there will be one so this narrative is prepared for whenever the rapture happens.
So it's natural that there be preparations for the literal fulfillment of various prophecies, including the land return and the third temple. It's also natural that everyone attempts to have a hand in it, both satanic and godly forces. The problem is that if the satanic attempt to force fulfillment of God's plan they just fall into his hands, proving him right; and if they fight him they still fail to prevent the progress toward that fulfillment.
So it's understandable that part of the narrative means that many Christians end up going beyond the ordinary process of wishing well to every self-governing nation and making themselves patriots on behalf of a national Israel they don't have rights in. The playing-up of Israel is prophesied, whether or not it happens by counterfeit means and manipulative tactics.
What's the upshot? Take heed that nobody deceives you. Question everything, including what I say. Test all.
Looking at your focus, this is what I gather:
Rothschilds' interest: continuing a bankster power base for self-perpetuation and protection of their own, which involves a "cash cow" of Jewish victimization being perpetuated.
Fed's interest: other banksters (Morgan, Schiff, Rockefeller, etc., represented at Jekyll Island) controlling access to free money at level deemed unnoticeable by the collateralized population they are stealing it from; partnered with the old money of the Rothschilds.
Roosevelt-Morgenthau interest: restructuring new-deal America to become socialist in our own idiom, establishing the Democratic Party as the progressive half of a duopoly, to continue the subjugation of the American state citizen (which the Civil War was orchestrated to start the process of) as a dependent rather than a healthy interdependent.
Interestingly, all these (plus Lincoln's team) flow through a guy Edward House, known as Wilson's soul, whose father helped instigate the Civil War with Rothschild money, and who anticipated all the Wilson and Roosevelt reforms in his 1912 socialist novel. House also manipulated Europe and Russia in the same way, and his team settled for the League of Nations but when it was realized WWI didn't finish the job then WWII was orchestrated to do so (LN=UN). Roosevelt even consulted the aging House for ideas.
So we then say a satanic cabal (folks of many nations) connected up (1) an old-dispensational pro-Semitic theology, (2) a fourth American central bank, (3) an excuse for world war to support European and global restructure, (4) British gradually ceding control of the Levant to Jews who have an interest in literal fulfillment of the Tanakh, (5) another excuse for world war to support American and global restructure that wasn't previously finished, (6) a more permanent establishment of "the many" who can rage together (Psalm 2) and parcel Jerusalem, (7) an abrogation by the British of interest in controlling the Levant, (8) an opportunistic declaration of a state with full American support due to some of the prior setup, (9) an inexorable process toward literal fulfillments.
In Christianity, dispensationalism has been reformed (e.g. Walvoord) such that it's finally passable to believe in an imminent rapture: but those who believe that won't actually care about politics. Idealism is fine too, where one recognizes that one has all of Jesus that one needs but there is still a greater future fulfillment; they don't care about politics either. It's those Christians, possibly a majority in America, who think that they need to get involved in the process of fulfilling prophecy that can cause trouble, because it's easier to be wrong than right about your part in prophecy.
Breaking down further, in terms of being kind to Israelis, that's fine if it isn't imbalanced with respect to other nations: if someone has a spiritual humanitarian call to support Israelis, that won't conflict or become political. In terms of working to advance Israel politically, that's not a theological position and is one that can be debated politically: it shouldn't be made to rest on Scriptures, which are not about advancing politics other than the kingdom of heaven. There are also many working to advance others politically, including "Christian America" conceived of as a nationalist subset of America: they face the same principle, being debatable but not taught in Scripture.
So, absolutely be aware of all psyops, and I hope I've listed enough different ones to show that our enemy is manifold. The solution is one in Christ Jesus. Whatever he says goes. If Jesus wants the whole literal fulfillment in our lives, it'll happen, and there's some appearance that he wants there to be a political antichrist just so that there can be a final permanent rejection of the whole antichrist narrative. If he doesn't bring those things about in one's lifetime, that's also his pleasure, as it's been all this time. And never argue about eschatology.
If you just stick with the "red letters" or better said the words of Jesus, he states how he feels and thinks about the local religious leaders (and government leaders as well) at the time and they haven't changed much it would appear...and the country of "Isreal?" has nothing to do with being a tribal descendant of Abraham but modern day Zionist's would demand you reconsider such a thought process.
"Dear Sir
In some of the delightful conversations with you, in the evenings of 1798. 99. which served as an Anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then labouring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic: and I then promised you that, one day or other, I would give you my views of it. they are the result of a life of enquiry & reflection, and very different from that Anti-Christian system, imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. to the corruptions of Christianity, I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence, & believing he never claimed any other"
you're welcome^ definitely think it's worthwhile/ helpful in understanding Q; JFK was a big TJ fan!🐸
"I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."
President Kennedy, Remarks honoring Nobel Prize winners of the Western Hemisphere, April 29, 1962
Not all "jews" are Hebrews and the state of Isreal? is a construct of Rothchild's and the post WWII globalist's idea of "fair". Even in the end the Lord will only need 144,000 real Hebrews the rest might be part of the horror of blood that will be chest high after a large battle it was written. Time will tell but I support Hebrews but I got no love for the state of Isreal?.
John 8
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Like my remarks to OP, these relate to tropes that don't pan out. Please try not to look botlike.
The word "Jew" appears in Hebrew and Greek and means a member of Judah by birth or naturalization. Edom was always different. Herod had some Edomite blood and some Jewish, but he was an exception. There is no evidence that Judas or the Pharisees were Edomite (there was one fictitious cite claimed from the old Jewish Encyclopedia about Edom that, I previously showed, doesn't appear in the printed text). Jesus and Paul were Jews without any question raised by the texts.
I also have no evidence that Canaanites have a notable nose that Hebrews (Habiru) didn't have.
If you're interested in more, I'd love to talk, because I seek out evidences that might controvert what I've learned; but people fail to provide evidences in the direction you're going.
Here's a deep dive on the subject of Israelites, Jews, Edomites and deception.
I assume you have the Spirit of God in you and he will convey the truth.
Yes, we invoke the Spirit of God to convey all truth to us. Thanks?
The Chosen Tribe of God, the Hebrew family of Jacob (Known as Israel afterwards) were all Caucasian, white people. The “Jews” who say they are Jews but are not, and do lie – are actually the synagogue of Satan – the Edomites (Through Jacob’s brother, Esau – A murderous Barbarian)
So the foundational argument is that Jacob was racially white but his fraternal twin Esau wasn't? They were both Isaac's (Rom. 9:10) so I'd have difficulty starting with the idea that they get to define "white" and "nonwhite".
The graphic called "God's Chosen People -- True Israelites" then repeated a second time is an edited version of something a hundred years old that we've previously debunked here; if you want me to dig out the details I can, but they are mostly obvious on the surface. Now we come to the sections:
"The Word Jew Was Not In Original Bibles": I already told you the answer, it's disappointing that he leads with perhaps the worst argument. Of course "Jew", an English word dating to the 13th century (m-w.com), doesn't appear in the original languages, but it's etymologically the same as Yahudah and Ioudaios (any spellings), and the etymological chain has always meant the same thing. In the KJV 1611 it was spelled "Iewe", which is part of the chain. The argument is that "Iou" is valid but "Jew" is invalid, which is linguistically hogwash. If there were actually evidence that Judean and Jew were two different things (which the intro presumes), then there might be an argument at some point, but you don't lead with a loser like this.
Now, it gets to the main point soon enough, saying that Esther and Josephus show that others including Edomites intermarried into Judah. Well, of course! And did you notice that among the first 600,000 Israelites in the exodus, there were many Egyptians who had converted, known as the mixed multitude? Do they cease to be Judah by allowing intermarriage? Not if the citizenship rules of Judah are continued, which they were. All nations rely on birth and naturalization together. There's no evidence that the converts were "to become" (all) the scribes and Pharisees, or that they included Annas and Caiaphas or the Sanhedrin (Annas was installed by Rome in opposition to the Herodians when Herod Archelaus was famously deposed in 6 AD). For instance, Gamaliel, the undisputed leader of the Sanhedrin, had a Judahite lineage back to David, and a maternal lineage among Benjamin. The idea that the Edomites expelled from Jerusalem the Christians (by which is meant all the true descendants of Judah) and reserved the name "Jew" for themselves alone is belied by the entire book of Acts which records that they were called the same name everywhere, Ioudaios, the same word used for Jesus and his followers. Contrary to this idea, many Christians remained in Jerusalem at this time (around the apostles, Acts 8:1, and basically the rest of Acts).
"The Word Jew Is a Deception": If it were, it's modern because there is no distinction in original texts between the two types of Ioudaios that the article imagines. The article falls over itself trying to keep this distinction alive without reference to the originals. A central idea is that "the land of Judah and the land of Idumea were merged into the land then called Judaea in the first century BC": No, "Judaea" is the Roman name as of 6 AD, but before that it was the precious Hasmoneans (John Hyrcanus) who, as Judahites, independently conquered and governed the Idumeans in about 125 BC. If Idumeans didn't accept Judean religion but retained Idumean religion, they didn't get credit as citizens of Judah.
About the most credit I can give this section is to say the nature of the integration of Idumeans into Judean religion is less than fully attested, allowing some inference. But the whole genetic argument assumes that true Judahites were widespread in Judea as well as Edomites, and yet that all the true Judahites were removed in some extrahistorical event while only the true Edomites remained. That's not how history works. The question and division was over practice and theology and never genetics. You might argue that Jesus himself instigated the main division by warning his followers to "head for the hills", which they literally did in 68 AD, putting forward one of the biggest exoduses of Christians from non-Christian Judaeans.
The Jewish quotes are old tropes. The first is about "Jew" being inexact for "Israelite" because there are other Israelite tribes than Jews, not because Jews are not Israelites. The second is rather irrelevant because Judah was always recognized as Hebrew and Israelite even if those names were not widely used. The third is wholly fabricated, the text actually says the historical "The Edomites ... were then incorporated with the Jewish nation, and their country was called by the Greeks and Romans 'Idumea' .... Till its conquest by the Romans .... From this time the Idumeans ceased to be a separate people." The fourth quote from a "Gerald Soman" of a 1935 "World Jewish Federation" (the reality was called the World Jewish Congress) is nonexistent outside its own echoes; I've tracked such quotes before to their fictional rabblerouser origins, so I'm not inclined to do this one today, thanks.
Since the article then jumps to Khazaria, which is another history of the same character without adding anything to the argument, let's stop there for now. What I've learned is that I have had insufficient appreciation for the integration of Idumeans into Jewish society, but that factor doesn't change the fact that there is no separation in this historical period on Esau-Jacob lines and it appears wholly invented and templated onto the history. (I also have sources that indicate that Idumeans continued on the east side of the Jordan, which may not be a continuous thread to the present day but deserves to be noted here too.) If the whole theory is based on the idea that those not racially Judahite get to judge those who say they are racially Judahite (and who have retained continuously, by accord of all societies, the right to judge that name), it's just more racism. Let Elijah show us who the true fathers are.
Is the Spirit of God conveying to you something different about the texts and history?
"Esau's biblical appearance and temperament
A "hairy" or "rough" man: The name Esau is believed to be derived from the Hebrew word for "hairy" or "rough," reflecting his appearance at birth.
Reddish complexion: Genesis 25:25 notes that Esau came out "red, all over like a hairy garment". This reddish coloring also inspired his other name, Edom, which means "red".
Outdoor hunter: His rugged physique aligned with his personality, as he grew up to be a "man of the field" and a skilled hunter. This contrasted with Jacob, who was described as a "mild" or "plain" man who preferred to stay in the tents.
Central to a deception: Esau's hairiness was a key element in the story of Jacob stealing the firstborn's blessing. Jacob used goat skins to make his skin feel hairy like Esau's, fooling their blind father, Isaac."
I'm aware; that still doesn't make races. Plus, the above amounts to saying whites are descended from a white guy whose fortune was founded on pretending not to be white (we call that blackface).
It seems to me that the whole theory is modern shards left over from some exploded 19th-century tentative texts where people couldn't debunk things in real time. There is nothing to fear from real history. Jewish leadership counts all ethnic groups within Judaism alike because of continuity of birth/naturalization being the same in all cases, and we as outsiders don't get to tell them they can't self-define. (Unlike Jesus, who as a Jew was able to call out a very small group in Asia Minor that everybody knew was made of Gentiles.) So I keep looking for evidence that the continuity is false or breached, and I don't find it.
Schofield is nearly a duplicate of the KJV. Some minor word differences but nothing that changes the meaning . Schofield aptly points to a pre-trib rapture in his footnotes. That seem to be everyone’s problem.
Here's the problem with that tiny country in the middle east called Israel.
Israel is the name God gave Jacob and his descendants.
At every turn Esau whom God hated, keeps trying to steal the blessings of Jacob including Jacobs valor by posing as Jacob.
And the dispensationals keep harping praises because these frauds are sitting on "the holy land" so now they have made this piece of dirt an idol.
These are the people that are being misidentified as the Israelites. Read the account as are the words of General Patton.
This is what those people did to that hospital set up by the Anglo Israelites that was clean and sanitized in order to treat the Typhus ............
“We drove for about 45 minutes to a Jewish camp … established in what had been a German hospital. The buildings were therefore in a good state of repair when the Jews arrived but were in a bad state of repair when we arrived, because these Jewish DP’s or at least a majority of them, have no sense of human relationships. They decline, where practicable, to use latrines, preferring to relieve themselves on the floor . . .
This happened to be the feast of Yom Kippur, so they were all collected in a large wooden building which they called a synagogue. It behooved General Eisenhower to make a speech to them. We entered the synagogue which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about half way up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General . . .
However, the smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result of remembering it.”
General George S. Patton in his diary, September 17, 1945
“Trying to put a timeline together. Coming at this from a tactical view....
1908 the Scofield Reference Bible came out financed by the House of Rothschild. This is propaganda manipulating Christian into serving God's "Chosen" people.
1913 Federal Reserve started
1914 WW1
1917 The Balfour Declaration was a public letter issued by British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, supporting the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. It was addressed to Lord Rothschild
1939 WW2
1945 The United Nations (UN) officially begins
1947 The UN approved a plan to partition the British Mandate into a Jewish and an Arab state, though the Arab population rejected it.
1948 The State of Israel was proclaimed.
1948 to now. Act out as many End Time prophecies from the Bible on the world stage using all the "tools" and "Assets" they acquired to fool Christians into that we are living in the end times to further enforce the indoctrination from the Scofield Reference Bible that we are at the Rapture and need to be saved but first Christians have to be Zionists because that brings the AntiChrist and you cant have Jesus without the AntiChrist first.”
I used a Scofield reference Bible way back in the day and I never once saw anything in it that supports the premise that Christians have to be Zionists. I may have missed something though, and I eventually got rid of all of the Bibles I had that had references, footnotes, maps or anything else and bought a King James Bible with zero extras besides text and verse numbers.
Also, if this is the end times, who is to say that God won't use the very thing you describe to fulfill the prophesies? These things, from end times prophesies to draining the US swamp have no real precedent in history and who is to say God won't use what they intend for evil to bring about the fulfillment of his plans? It would be a very God thing to do.
Every modern bibles, because of the mistranslation Jew, will turn everyone who reads it into a Zionist ie right into Satan's trap.
https://theserapeum.com/the-true-hebrew-israelites-the-caucasian-race-the-lost-tribes-of-israel/
And they're fooling their own people by making it seem prophecy coming true about the third temple
Except the King James version has been around for 300 years and says the same thing about the Temple.
However, I have argued that the body is a Temple to the holy spirit and an individual taking the mark of the beast is allowing Satan into the Temple of God making himself god through transhumanism.
If that is the case, the 3rd temple does not need to be rebuilt for that prophecy to come true, for those who choose the Mark of the Beast their own bodies become the abomination of desolation. (Matthew 24:15-16 & Daniel 9:27)
And this is the problem with Dispensational Baptist churches.
The 70 weeks of Daniel was fulfilled in 70 AD.
Everything Jesus mentioned in Matt 24 was fulfilled in that generation.
The tribulation happened in the 7 year period in 70 AD
They even marked people during that time 666.
Matthew 24
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
EXACTLY !! We are are in Satan's little season when he is free to deceive the nations one last time that's why EVERY rabbit hole you go down, you find EVERYTHING is a LIE. Jesus is the ONLY TRUTH.
Excellent post!
"Satan's little season"
I couldn't have said it better
Amen brother!
When a Spirit filled Christian leans into the Spirit, looks for little signs,
hints, even when studying scripture, there are "land mines" in some of these translated bibles that aim to throw us off!
This has nothing to do with the dispensation of the ages doctrine.
Secondly, if you read a bit before verse 34 in Matt. 24 it says which generation will not pass until these things be fulfilled and that generation was the one to see Israel restored to a nation. Which means it is our generation that will likely see it take place. There are many still alive that were alive in 1954.
It is also echoed In Revelations with a lot gorier detail, and those prophecies have not yet been fulfilled. Not in 70 AD and not now.
How can Israel be restored as a nation in 1954 when the people are not even Israelites?
They're Edomites.
AND 10 of the 12 tribes are still "lost".
Ah... The Anglo-Israel connection..
The 10 tribes left behind as slaves to the Assyrian empire.
The Israelites, The 10 tribes, notorious for being great fighters, were used by the Assyrians to guard their borders.
Escaped up through the Caucasus mountains into northwestern Europe around 600 BC.
Caucasus is where the 10 tribes got their Anglo Saxon Caucasian name.
They spread out to North West Europe and into Great Britain, Ireland, Germany then onto America.
Yes the Anglo Saxon white Caucasians are the 10th tribe of Israel.
Though we are saved by God's Grace not race. His will and Sovereignty not ours.
You are the ONLY one I have ever heard talk about Matthew 24:34! This one verse and the first three verses of Revelation completely destroy the dangerous and false teachings of Scofield...but it seems that the Church body has been so lulled to sleep by this Rapture business that they don't really read their Bibles anymore! Thanks fren!
Now I have to go back and read the first 3 verses of Revelation!
And you are correct. Baptists (water) should be focused on the Holy Spirit Baptist (immersion), generally don't study the scriptures.
Though I have made many friends from back in my 20's and back then it was social with lots of sports every week with those friends.
I stay in touch with a few who are close friends.
That rapture business was started by John Darby in the early 1800's
Then add the Schofield Bible commentary and you have the creation of the Zionist state.
Keep digging brother and iron sharpens iron.
Thanks brother. We are here to expand on the truth wherever it may be.
What is your evidence that people were "marked" 666? All I know of is that people's names were calculated to 666 by that time (primarily Nero and Titus). Is it possible you're conflating another detail?
I'll see if I can dig up the information.
Can't find it. The information is gone which doesn't surprise me.
Any how I had run the info by a reformed pastor friend of mine way back when and he hinted at the Romans would have been privy to that prophecy at that time.
That I am not sure.
I will keep digging when I have time.
I'll check and get back to you. I'm on my way to the DMV
Can't find it. The information is gone which doesn't surprise me.
Any how I had run the info by a reformed pastor friend of mine way back when and he hinted at the Romans would have been privy to that prophecy at that time.
That I am not sure.
I will keep digging when I have time.
Says the preterist...
I'm not a pre-tribulation rapturist at all, we're going to walk through the fire, whether we like it or not.
Some people claim the false alien invasion will sucker in the pre-tribbers to a false rapture where they will be abducted and served for lunch at the restaurant at the end of the universe - Special of the Day- Terran Stake loins (tip of the hat to Douglas Adams)~s
The 70 weeks of Daniel is most certainly the events of 70 AD and Christ's prophecy in Matthew 24.
Everything else in regards to eschatology is mass confusion.
Taking that journey is like following the Donner family and their "shortcut" to California Gold.
What? A Peterist?
Satan can't touch God's chosen believers because of their immersion of the Holy Spirit.
Thanks for the summary and for keeping it moderate.
In the 80s, before discovering anything of global cabal, I realized that if God was laying out the details then his enemies would try to manipulate that to their advantage and yet it would not succeed. The only way he can do this is to speak in slightly mysterious language that will be unlocked properly when the time comes. Following the Holy Spirit will reveal the correct unlock.
That means there must be a plan to fake things so that if there's a rapture it can be attributed to someone other than God. So the devil set up a UFO narrative whereby UFOs are presumed to have the ability to siphon off the "dregs" of humanity and bring the rest into a "better world". Of course I later rejected the pretrib rapture, but the enemy doesn't know for sure if there will be one so this narrative is prepared for whenever the rapture happens.
So it's natural that there be preparations for the literal fulfillment of various prophecies, including the land return and the third temple. It's also natural that everyone attempts to have a hand in it, both satanic and godly forces. The problem is that if the satanic attempt to force fulfillment of God's plan they just fall into his hands, proving him right; and if they fight him they still fail to prevent the progress toward that fulfillment.
So it's understandable that part of the narrative means that many Christians end up going beyond the ordinary process of wishing well to every self-governing nation and making themselves patriots on behalf of a national Israel they don't have rights in. The playing-up of Israel is prophesied, whether or not it happens by counterfeit means and manipulative tactics.
What's the upshot? Take heed that nobody deceives you. Question everything, including what I say. Test all.
Looking at your focus, this is what I gather:
Rothschilds' interest: continuing a bankster power base for self-perpetuation and protection of their own, which involves a "cash cow" of Jewish victimization being perpetuated.
Fed's interest: other banksters (Morgan, Schiff, Rockefeller, etc., represented at Jekyll Island) controlling access to free money at level deemed unnoticeable by the collateralized population they are stealing it from; partnered with the old money of the Rothschilds.
Roosevelt-Morgenthau interest: restructuring new-deal America to become socialist in our own idiom, establishing the Democratic Party as the progressive half of a duopoly, to continue the subjugation of the American state citizen (which the Civil War was orchestrated to start the process of) as a dependent rather than a healthy interdependent.
Interestingly, all these (plus Lincoln's team) flow through a guy Edward House, known as Wilson's soul, whose father helped instigate the Civil War with Rothschild money, and who anticipated all the Wilson and Roosevelt reforms in his 1912 socialist novel. House also manipulated Europe and Russia in the same way, and his team settled for the League of Nations but when it was realized WWI didn't finish the job then WWII was orchestrated to do so (LN=UN). Roosevelt even consulted the aging House for ideas.
So we then say a satanic cabal (folks of many nations) connected up (1) an old-dispensational pro-Semitic theology, (2) a fourth American central bank, (3) an excuse for world war to support European and global restructure, (4) British gradually ceding control of the Levant to Jews who have an interest in literal fulfillment of the Tanakh, (5) another excuse for world war to support American and global restructure that wasn't previously finished, (6) a more permanent establishment of "the many" who can rage together (Psalm 2) and parcel Jerusalem, (7) an abrogation by the British of interest in controlling the Levant, (8) an opportunistic declaration of a state with full American support due to some of the prior setup, (9) an inexorable process toward literal fulfillments.
In Christianity, dispensationalism has been reformed (e.g. Walvoord) such that it's finally passable to believe in an imminent rapture: but those who believe that won't actually care about politics. Idealism is fine too, where one recognizes that one has all of Jesus that one needs but there is still a greater future fulfillment; they don't care about politics either. It's those Christians, possibly a majority in America, who think that they need to get involved in the process of fulfilling prophecy that can cause trouble, because it's easier to be wrong than right about your part in prophecy.
Breaking down further, in terms of being kind to Israelis, that's fine if it isn't imbalanced with respect to other nations: if someone has a spiritual humanitarian call to support Israelis, that won't conflict or become political. In terms of working to advance Israel politically, that's not a theological position and is one that can be debated politically: it shouldn't be made to rest on Scriptures, which are not about advancing politics other than the kingdom of heaven. There are also many working to advance others politically, including "Christian America" conceived of as a nationalist subset of America: they face the same principle, being debatable but not taught in Scripture.
So, absolutely be aware of all psyops, and I hope I've listed enough different ones to show that our enemy is manifold. The solution is one in Christ Jesus. Whatever he says goes. If Jesus wants the whole literal fulfillment in our lives, it'll happen, and there's some appearance that he wants there to be a political antichrist just so that there can be a final permanent rejection of the whole antichrist narrative. If he doesn't bring those things about in one's lifetime, that's also his pleasure, as it's been all this time. And never argue about eschatology.
If you just stick with the "red letters" or better said the words of Jesus, he states how he feels and thinks about the local religious leaders (and government leaders as well) at the time and they haven't changed much it would appear...and the country of "Isreal?" has nothing to do with being a tribal descendant of Abraham but modern day Zionist's would demand you reconsider such a thought process.
yes^ it's All about Jesus✨
that's why I like to recommend The Jefferson Bible; The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth
https://uuhouston.org/files/The_Jefferson_Bible.pdf
Thomas Jefferson believed the message of Jesus was obfuscated, so he actually cut out Jesus' words/story to make his own study Bible.
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-40-02-0178-0001
To Benjamin Rush Washington April 21. 1803.
"Dear Sir In some of the delightful conversations with you, in the evenings of 1798. 99. which served as an Anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then labouring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic: and I then promised you that, one day or other, I would give you my views of it. they are the result of a life of enquiry & reflection, and very different from that Anti-Christian system, imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. to the corruptions of Christianity, I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence, & believing he never claimed any other"
Thanks. I will check out that Jefferson bible.
you're welcome^ definitely think it's worthwhile/ helpful in understanding Q; JFK was a big TJ fan!🐸
"I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."
Now I'm trying to find the books and chapters!
Like the Gospel of John chapter 4 and 8
Jews today are a continuum from the Jews of the Bible and many trace their lineage all the way back to Levi and Judah.
Not all "jews" are Hebrews and the state of Isreal? is a construct of Rothchild's and the post WWII globalist's idea of "fair". Even in the end the Lord will only need 144,000 real Hebrews the rest might be part of the horror of blood that will be chest high after a large battle it was written. Time will tell but I support Hebrews but I got no love for the state of Isreal?.
A little help for your timeline... https://img.gvid.tv/i/4UYSLHKf.jpg
Invaluable read, should be it's own post
Thank you
🙄
Everything is a deception with these people.
Their identity a lie.
Their country a lie. (Should have named it EDOM.)
Their God a lie.
John 8 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
The Holocaust a lie.
https://radiochristianity.com/holocaust-deprogramming-course/
Still looking for that evidence that the whole people-group became Edomite, it's never appeared.
It falls under Judeans sub race Israelites, or Edomites. There are no Jews in scripture.
King Herod... Edomite
Judas Iscariot... Edomite
The Pharisees in John chapter 8.. Edomites
The reference to the Judeans killing the Lord, the prophets and are contrary to all men aka Pharisee Edomites.
1 Thessalonians chapter 2 verses 14 15
Today You can easily see the markers aka Pinocchio's with the Canaanite nose.
Like my remarks to OP, these relate to tropes that don't pan out. Please try not to look botlike.
The word "Jew" appears in Hebrew and Greek and means a member of Judah by birth or naturalization. Edom was always different. Herod had some Edomite blood and some Jewish, but he was an exception. There is no evidence that Judas or the Pharisees were Edomite (there was one fictitious cite claimed from the old Jewish Encyclopedia about Edom that, I previously showed, doesn't appear in the printed text). Jesus and Paul were Jews without any question raised by the texts.
I also have no evidence that Canaanites have a notable nose that Hebrews (Habiru) didn't have.
If you're interested in more, I'd love to talk, because I seek out evidences that might controvert what I've learned; but people fail to provide evidences in the direction you're going.
Here's a deep dive on the subject of Israelites, Jews, Edomites and deception. I assume you have the Spirit of God in you and he will convey the truth.
https://theserapeum.com/the-true-hebrew-israelites-the-caucasian-race-the-lost-tribes-of-israel/
Yes, we invoke the Spirit of God to convey all truth to us. Thanks?
So the foundational argument is that Jacob was racially white but his fraternal twin Esau wasn't? They were both Isaac's (Rom. 9:10) so I'd have difficulty starting with the idea that they get to define "white" and "nonwhite".
The graphic called "God's Chosen People -- True Israelites" then repeated a second time is an edited version of something a hundred years old that we've previously debunked here; if you want me to dig out the details I can, but they are mostly obvious on the surface. Now we come to the sections:
"The Word Jew Was Not In Original Bibles": I already told you the answer, it's disappointing that he leads with perhaps the worst argument. Of course "Jew", an English word dating to the 13th century (m-w.com), doesn't appear in the original languages, but it's etymologically the same as Yahudah and Ioudaios (any spellings), and the etymological chain has always meant the same thing. In the KJV 1611 it was spelled "Iewe", which is part of the chain. The argument is that "Iou" is valid but "Jew" is invalid, which is linguistically hogwash. If there were actually evidence that Judean and Jew were two different things (which the intro presumes), then there might be an argument at some point, but you don't lead with a loser like this.
Now, it gets to the main point soon enough, saying that Esther and Josephus show that others including Edomites intermarried into Judah. Well, of course! And did you notice that among the first 600,000 Israelites in the exodus, there were many Egyptians who had converted, known as the mixed multitude? Do they cease to be Judah by allowing intermarriage? Not if the citizenship rules of Judah are continued, which they were. All nations rely on birth and naturalization together. There's no evidence that the converts were "to become" (all) the scribes and Pharisees, or that they included Annas and Caiaphas or the Sanhedrin (Annas was installed by Rome in opposition to the Herodians when Herod Archelaus was famously deposed in 6 AD). For instance, Gamaliel, the undisputed leader of the Sanhedrin, had a Judahite lineage back to David, and a maternal lineage among Benjamin. The idea that the Edomites expelled from Jerusalem the Christians (by which is meant all the true descendants of Judah) and reserved the name "Jew" for themselves alone is belied by the entire book of Acts which records that they were called the same name everywhere, Ioudaios, the same word used for Jesus and his followers. Contrary to this idea, many Christians remained in Jerusalem at this time (around the apostles, Acts 8:1, and basically the rest of Acts).
"The Word Jew Is a Deception": If it were, it's modern because there is no distinction in original texts between the two types of Ioudaios that the article imagines. The article falls over itself trying to keep this distinction alive without reference to the originals. A central idea is that "the land of Judah and the land of Idumea were merged into the land then called Judaea in the first century BC": No, "Judaea" is the Roman name as of 6 AD, but before that it was the precious Hasmoneans (John Hyrcanus) who, as Judahites, independently conquered and governed the Idumeans in about 125 BC. If Idumeans didn't accept Judean religion but retained Idumean religion, they didn't get credit as citizens of Judah.
About the most credit I can give this section is to say the nature of the integration of Idumeans into Judean religion is less than fully attested, allowing some inference. But the whole genetic argument assumes that true Judahites were widespread in Judea as well as Edomites, and yet that all the true Judahites were removed in some extrahistorical event while only the true Edomites remained. That's not how history works. The question and division was over practice and theology and never genetics. You might argue that Jesus himself instigated the main division by warning his followers to "head for the hills", which they literally did in 68 AD, putting forward one of the biggest exoduses of Christians from non-Christian Judaeans.
The Jewish quotes are old tropes. The first is about "Jew" being inexact for "Israelite" because there are other Israelite tribes than Jews, not because Jews are not Israelites. The second is rather irrelevant because Judah was always recognized as Hebrew and Israelite even if those names were not widely used. The third is wholly fabricated, the text actually says the historical "The Edomites ... were then incorporated with the Jewish nation, and their country was called by the Greeks and Romans 'Idumea' .... Till its conquest by the Romans .... From this time the Idumeans ceased to be a separate people." The fourth quote from a "Gerald Soman" of a 1935 "World Jewish Federation" (the reality was called the World Jewish Congress) is nonexistent outside its own echoes; I've tracked such quotes before to their fictional rabblerouser origins, so I'm not inclined to do this one today, thanks.
Since the article then jumps to Khazaria, which is another history of the same character without adding anything to the argument, let's stop there for now. What I've learned is that I have had insufficient appreciation for the integration of Idumeans into Jewish society, but that factor doesn't change the fact that there is no separation in this historical period on Esau-Jacob lines and it appears wholly invented and templated onto the history. (I also have sources that indicate that Idumeans continued on the east side of the Jordan, which may not be a continuous thread to the present day but deserves to be noted here too.) If the whole theory is based on the idea that those not racially Judahite get to judge those who say they are racially Judahite (and who have retained continuously, by accord of all societies, the right to judge that name), it's just more racism. Let Elijah show us who the true fathers are.
Is the Spirit of God conveying to you something different about the texts and history?
Esau wasn't white like his brother.
"Esau's biblical appearance and temperament A "hairy" or "rough" man: The name Esau is believed to be derived from the Hebrew word for "hairy" or "rough," reflecting his appearance at birth. Reddish complexion: Genesis 25:25 notes that Esau came out "red, all over like a hairy garment". This reddish coloring also inspired his other name, Edom, which means "red". Outdoor hunter: His rugged physique aligned with his personality, as he grew up to be a "man of the field" and a skilled hunter. This contrasted with Jacob, who was described as a "mild" or "plain" man who preferred to stay in the tents. Central to a deception: Esau's hairiness was a key element in the story of Jacob stealing the firstborn's blessing. Jacob used goat skins to make his skin feel hairy like Esau's, fooling their blind father, Isaac."
I'm aware; that still doesn't make races. Plus, the above amounts to saying whites are descended from a white guy whose fortune was founded on pretending not to be white (we call that blackface).
It seems to me that the whole theory is modern shards left over from some exploded 19th-century tentative texts where people couldn't debunk things in real time. There is nothing to fear from real history. Jewish leadership counts all ethnic groups within Judaism alike because of continuity of birth/naturalization being the same in all cases, and we as outsiders don't get to tell them they can't self-define. (Unlike Jesus, who as a Jew was able to call out a very small group in Asia Minor that everybody knew was made of Gentiles.) So I keep looking for evidence that the continuity is false or breached, and I don't find it.
The studies we're referring to are outside the realm of scripture.
Rather they are historical.
I am still at the DMV waiting for my number to be called.
https://theserapeum.com/the-true-hebrew-israelites-the-caucasian-race-the-lost-tribes-of-israel/
Schofield is nearly a duplicate of the KJV. Some minor word differences but nothing that changes the meaning . Schofield aptly points to a pre-trib rapture in his footnotes. That seem to be everyone’s problem.
Schofield bible is trash. Part of the counter reformation
Anything created by the Rothschilds is trash imo
Here's the problem with that tiny country in the middle east called Israel.
Israel is the name God gave Jacob and his descendants. At every turn Esau whom God hated, keeps trying to steal the blessings of Jacob including Jacobs valor by posing as Jacob.
And the dispensationals keep harping praises because these frauds are sitting on "the holy land" so now they have made this piece of dirt an idol.
These are the people that are being misidentified as the Israelites. Read the account as are the words of General Patton. This is what those people did to that hospital set up by the Anglo Israelites that was clean and sanitized in order to treat the Typhus ............
“We drove for about 45 minutes to a Jewish camp … established in what had been a German hospital. The buildings were therefore in a good state of repair when the Jews arrived but were in a bad state of repair when we arrived, because these Jewish DP’s or at least a majority of them, have no sense of human relationships. They decline, where practicable, to use latrines, preferring to relieve themselves on the floor . . .
This happened to be the feast of Yom Kippur, so they were all collected in a large wooden building which they called a synagogue. It behooved General Eisenhower to make a speech to them. We entered the synagogue which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about half way up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General . . .
However, the smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result of remembering it.”
General George S. Patton in his diary, September 17, 1945
Amazing gymnastics...That has absolutely nothing to do with the Christ...
So many get ensnared and caught up in all the dogma a bs that they lose sight of Christ's message.
It's sad and unnerving to observe good people going full retard because of false doctrine.
The one thing that irritates me with Paul is his murder of two people as described in the book of Acts,
All because they didn't sell everything they owned even the clothes they were wearing
And give to the poor.
Paul killed them!!
Jesus would not have done that!
Paul as known a Saul of Tarsus was on a blood thirst killing of Christians when Jesus intervened!
Is Paul beloved of the Lord? Yes he is!
And he and John are my two favorite writers in the bible.
You're thinking of Peter (Ananias and Sapphira). Paul was present at the death of Stephen.
I'll double check that. Thanks.
You're right it was Peter. I fill bad blaming Paul.
I don't spend much time in Acts as it's a historical rendering of the early church and the Apostles.
Not doctrinal.
What is the first day of the week? When is the New Year?