Theology is important because the words we ingest change how we think, including how we think about who we are.
I was at a National Museum yesterday. It was a nice building; modern, Dutch designed, and the theme was, of course, the history and culture of that (un-named) country. The museum created a narrative within which ones interpretation and understanding are influenced. (This is what the whole body of the Scripture is supposed to do).
The museum also had a wing dedicated to life in the sea millions of years ago. So you had some old bones and fossils. But more interesting was the multimedia display of oceans ostensibly hundreds of millions of years old. Giant beast roaming the seas ate megalodans (big sharks) like chocolate kisses. It was fabulous — the lights were low, they had shimmering waves appearing on the ceiling (as if you were underwater) and lifelike projection on the walls of dinosaur-sharks. It was as if you were immersed in that ancient sea and you understood our present through that imagined past.
After leaving the museum one may forget exactly how many millions of years ago this was supposed to of happened, but that wasn’t really important. And I don’t recall the name of the giant sea beasts that ate sharks for breakfast, but that wasn’t the point.
The point was frame how one understood oneself in relation to this this particular country and point in time. If you can frame a conversation — a narrative — the outcome of that conversation is almost foregone.
This is what a narrative is. It includesspecifics but the grand schema that what’s really important. And I fear most of the Church has lost the Grand Schema of the scriptures as they create tiny idols of specifics around a verse or two.
Good movies create meta-narratives — when we watch Star Wars we imagine as if we are part of that universe. When women watch a romantic film, they imagine they are the beautiful being wooed by the rich and handsome. When men watch James Bond, we are taken, for a moment, from our humdrum existence and get to enjoy the excitement and danger of his life. And all those ideas stay with us as we walk out of the theater — the invade our mind in little ways to frame our expectations and understandings.
Humans are not terrible complicated creatures. We believe the strangest things with virtually no evidence other than a convincing narrative, like an ancient sea world in the museum. This isn’t all bad — humans are intellectually limited and we don’t live very long. So we can’t know much of anything if we rely upon our own fives senses. Therefore we acquire grand narratives from our story tellers.
National Geographic is one of the key story tellers of our civilization. It is all very slick, with lots of pictures and easy to read articles. We know we evolved over billions of years because that’s what we have been reading in National Geographic for our whole lives. And to question that body of writing (scripture is another word for writing) is to be a know-nothing, a dunce in our culture.
Nobody was there millions of years ago. It’s a concocted story built upon assumptions that are built upon other assumptions. Not that it isn’t convincing; of course it is convincing. But that doesn’t mean it’s true, either. We trust our storytellers. Some would call it blind faith.
And so back to the Scriptures — the Hebrew and Greek writings. Humans have been privileged to read and know the narrative of the Creator — as he expresses it in the Bible.
So before you throw out the Bible as so much “religion,” understand that the narrative of National Geographic isn’t any less faith-based than the Bible — it’s just of a different religion, a religion that claims that it isn’t really a religion, just science and fact. Of course, that’s what the Ancient Egyptians believed too when the tore birds apart and looked at their intestines for clues about truth and reality. And it’s what I say about the Bible narrative — it is Truth and fact as revealed by the Creator. I make the same claim as the writers/readers of National Geographic — they defend their writings and I defend His narrative.
Perhaps in my favor I’m self conscious enough to accept a Grand Narrative as beyond what I am able to judge by my own five senses. I’m not sure the readers of National Geographic have realized that, yet.
The Greek Writings Do Not Replace the Hebrew Writings
Here are some core concepts that Christian need to wrap their head around.
First, the Bible does not divide itself into New and Old portions. That is to say, the writings, the Holy Scripture itself, never refers to one set of writings as new and another as old. There is no where in Scripture that claims that one set of writings (Scripture) was replaced by another set of writings. This is folly. I have the great fortune of never having studied “theological studies,” rather I have studied the Scripture directly. And I will tell you that on Page 1345 of my New American Standard Bible it says in giant font “The New Testament.” It is a a separate page between the endow Malachi and Matthew. But there is no scripture reference for it. In other words, it isn’t part of the Bible. It was simply inserted as a way to divide one portion of writings (the Hebrew) from another (the Greek). The Hebrew were written before Christ was born and the Greek after Jesus rose from the dead.
But there isn’t actually any scripture anywhere that calls one section old and another new. And so the Scripture that does refer to the New Testament replacing the Old Testament has absolutely nothing to do with one section of scripture replacing another. This is a heresy that has been built into Christianity for a thousands years — but it is not right. It’s a subtle deception.
The Christian can figure this out for themselves — what person in the Bible, which writer, taught that one section of scriptures replace another? The answers, of course, is no one. Jesus Christ never once quoted a Greek Scripture — only the Hebrew.
Second, the Hebrew writings are written in Hebrew — not in Jewish. Jews may speak Hebrew or German or Yiddish or Aramaic, but there is no such thing as a language called “Jewish.” The Jews have learned Hebrew — and that’s all well and good — but even Jesus’s first language was Aramaic. The Hebrew language long preceded the Jews just as the nation of the Hebrews long preceded the existence of the Jews.
Eber was the father of the Hebrews. From whence, over time, descended Abram and Isaac and Jacob. The Jews descended from Judah, one of Jacob’s twelve sons.
From a Semitic (of Shem) to a Japethite Language
(Hebrew to Greek)
Third, after the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, Hebrew was abandoned as the language of the new scriptures. The fully inspired Gospels and Epistles and the Revelation where written in a European language — the language of the Greeks.
This is a critical meta-narrative — this is an over arching structure that cannot be ignored. God Almighty chose, after the Resurrection of His Son, to use a European tongue to express the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
This change is too big to overlook, but iis largely ignored, probably because must of use (those reading this article) don’t read Hebrew or Greek — it’s all just an English translation. So it’s not apparent without thinking about it. This writer thinks about those things.
If God inspired the Scriptures, then surely He inspired what language it would be written in.
After all, the languages themselves belong to God — they originated from Him. Men were given new tongues at Babel — they didn’t sit down and invent a bunch of tongues. Chinese as a far from Greek as can be. And I’m no linguist, but I’m told that scholars have a very difficult time discerning (other than making things up) how we came to such fundamentally different languages. (Sure, it’s easy to trace Romance languanges back toe Latin — Rome for Romance, much like tracing Fido back to another dog. But Fido a horse is not. And that’s the problem when looking at the largest language groupings).
As historically significant as the fact of the Resurrection is, so to is the significance of the abandonment of Hebrew for Greek. Something fundamentally different took place — God changed directions. He abandoned the language of a son of Shem and Eber and Abram and embraced the language of a son of Japeth — the Greeks.
This fact is as significant as anything in the Bible. Greek was the the delivery device of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the entire world, but primarily to the Europeans. This is not by chance.
Europeans were especially targeted for the Gospel of Jesus Christ, more so than any other peoples. If not, then how does one explain the shift from Hebrew to a European language?
Tongues are important. God created the languages and supernaturally gifted the folks at the Tower of Babel with new tongues. God repeat this soon after the Resurrection of Jesus Christ when the Holy Spirit descended upon the believers and they began speaking in all different kinds of human languages.
God owns the languages. He decided who spoke what and that was a key part of his control of human history. The impulse toward Babel — a united human defiance of God — was thwarted by the introduction of a multitude of languages which aligned by bloodline. (Thus, the Children of Eber spoke Eber-ew).
EUROPEANS AS CHRISTBEARERS
So the Europeans — as declared by the choice of a European language to carry out the written Gospel of Jesus Christ — become the chosen Christ bearers to the world. It is a huge blessing and a huge burden. Damned we are to reject His Grace. As were the Jews.
As Greek was not just a random language choice for the Holy Scriptures, so the choice of a man whose name was Judas was not a random event. The very traitor of Jesus Christ was named Judas (the Greek variant of Judah, whence Jews) — this is not an accident. Judas is the Greek form for the name Judah — he who was the father of the Jews, the tribes of Judah. Judah is a representation of the rejection by the Jews of the Saviour, Jesus Christ.
But he is by not means the only proof that the Jews rejected their rightful King.
My late mother, once told me very clearly that “all the Jews from all time ) would be saved. Because they are God’s chosen people.”
I responded, You mean Judas will be saved? I recall that Jesus said it would have been if he had never been born.
Well, Dear Mom’s eyes started twitching back and forth and she just re-stated her case. It was as if she had a acquired a new piece of Truth that she had to share and she stood by it even in the face of my response. And there is really nothing to say to that. People will believe what they will believe — someone created a narrative for her and she bought into it. This is important because people ought — and this is the purpose of the written Scripture that we can hold in our hands — directly ingest the written Word of God so as to frame our respective of life and our place in it.
Jews Reject Jesus. Jesus Responds.
It is impossible for me to read the Gospel according to St. Matthew and not come away convinced that not only had the Jews rejected their Messiah, but that their Messiah had rejected them. This was a juncture in history of Salvation. The change is reflected not only in the switch from Hebrew to a European tongue, but the opening of His Bloodline to the Nations — the Gentiles.
Judaism — the religion — is founded on the rejection of Jesus Christ. Of that their is no dispute. For to accept Jesus Christ as the Resurrected Lord and Savior, to Accept His Blood atonement, to confess the Name of Jesus as Lord and the Son of God — is to be a Christian and is anathema to Jewish religion.
Now, it can be that a man of Jewish blood — like Saint Paul and the Apostles, become Christians. Yes, Paul brags about his own bloodline — calling himself a Hebrew of the Hebrews (instead of a Jew), but he confessed Jesus Christ. That changes everything. He was a traitor to his Jewish religion — no reading of Acts can exclude this fact.
Jude0-Christian = Anti-Christ-Christian
There is no such thing as a “Judeo-Christian” world view. The Jewish religion is fundamentally anti-Christ. That is saying that there an “Anti-Christ-Christian” world view. To be a Jew, in the religious or world view sense, is the very definition of being anti-Christ. (Islam, by the way, shares that sentiment. As does modern atheism and virtually all of the Eastern religions who accept Jesus as just another guy along the way).
In Matthew 8, a non-Jew showed to up ask Jesus to heal his servant. Jesus did, and marveled that this Gentile had more faith than the Jews. Jesus took that moment to say that “the sons of the kingdom (the Jews) will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place will be weeping an gnashing of teeth.”
Not that he came to punish the Jews, but rather to reach out to them first. He instructs his disciples to avoid the Gentiles, and go to the “Lost Sheep of Israel.” And yet in this same instruction he warns that whoever did not accept his disciples — those bearing witness of Him and preaching His good news — it would be “more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrahs in that day of judgement that for that city.” What city? Those Jewish cities who rejected Jesus Christ, because he just told the disciples only to go to the Jewish cities.
God walked the earth, saw Sodom and Gomorrah, and burnt them alive. And now he says those (Jewish) cities who reject him are worse than Sodom.
In Matthew 10 Jesus prophesies that the Jews would call himself (Jesus) the Devil: “If they have called the head of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign the members of his household!” He tells his disciples not to fear them (the Jews) and rather to “fear Him who is able to destroy both should and body in hell.”
This is the message to the Jews: “Therefore everyone who confesses me before men I will also confess him before My father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before Men I will deny before my Father who is in heaven.” This is all on one chapter, where Jesus sends the disciples just to the Jews.
In Chapter 11, Jesus denounces the Jewish cities that a rejected him. He says the evil Gentile cities would fair better than them at the Judgement Day: “It will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the judgment day that for you!” Twice in two chapters he compares the Jews to Sodom.
Moving ahead to Chapter 12, that which Jesus prophesied in Chapter 10 (that he would be called Beelzebub) actually happens:
The Pharisees (the Jewish leaders) sad “This man casts out demons only by Beelzebub the rule of the demons.” Wow — how is that for prophetic precision!
What does Jesus do? He immediated teaches about the unforgivable sin. He sets it up to declaring that He was casting out demons by the Spirit of God (Matthew 12:27). Then he declares that those not with Him are against Him. And then he says that any blasphemy against Him can be forgiven, but not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit — which is just exactly what the Jews had done when the said Christ casts out demons by Satan (Beelzebub) and Christ Himself said He cast out demons by the Spirit of God.
It can’t be clearer — those Pharisees — those Jewish leaders — blasphemied against, not Jesus, but the Spirit of God, for which “it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”
The unforgivable sin isn’t fornication or doubt or greed — it was what the Jews did — to ascribe to Satan that which the Holy Spirit was doing.
Jesus then goes on to call them a brood of vipers (offspring of a Snake, which goes right back to the Fall in the Garden of Eden) and that they, by their own words, would be condemned.
The Jews came and test him again, asking for signs. Jesus said that the men fo Nineveh would stand up and judge that “generation” because someone greater than Jonah was present, and the the Queen of the South would condemn that “generation” at the judgement.
And then he says something very interesting, all in the context of this conversation with the Jewish leadership. Jesus said when an unclean spirit leaves and then returns, it makes the host even worse — that the last state will be worse than the first — “that is the way it will also be with this evil generation.” He is speaking about the Jews.
Matthew 21 should be read as a whole, not as a series of unrelated parables that we modern Christians then try to apply ad hoc.
Jesus comes to Jerusalem and declares to them that their King is arriving: “Behold your King is coming to you.” The crowds fickle greet him as king — the same crowd that would later condemn Him before Pilate. Jesus enters the temple and violently casts out the vendors, and then heals some people. The Jewish leaders accuse him of accepting praise as the “Son of David” and Jesus says, in essence, not only at they praising me, but God Himself.
The next morning he sees a tree with no fruit and says “No longer shall there every be any fruit from you.” This is in the context of this nation of Jews.
He immediately gets challenged again by the Jewish leaders: “Listen to the parable of the landowner,” he tells them. He send his slaves to gather it’s fruit and they were beaten and killed. Finally the landowners says “I will send my Son and they will listen to Him.” And those who ran the garden murdered him so they could keep it for themselves. What would be done to the murders? Even the crowd new: “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers who will pay in the proceeds in the proper season.”
Jesus then talks about Himself as the chief cornerstone: “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will betaken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruit of it. And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.”
Immediately the chief priests and Pharisees understood that Jesus was talking about them.
This is a rejection of the Jewish nation. They had murdered God prophets, and them murdered His Son, Jesus Christ. The Jewish leaders understood clearly that Jesus was talking out them, so they “sought to seize Him.”
Jesus said he would take they vineyard form that Nation (the Jews) and give it to another Nation who would bring forth the fruit to the Landowner (to God). And He told the Jewish that whomever that Rock lands one would be ground to powder — to dust. Not much coming back from that.
Jesus Christ is the stumbling block for the whole world. Either you fall in this rock in repentance or that Rock will fall on you and you will be ground to powders. You cannot parse this away.
Jesus is exclusive. If you build a house on His Words, you will stand. If you (or the Jews, or anyone) reject His words, your house will fall. The House of the Jews fell hard. That a modern “State of Israel” exists in total rejection of Jesus Christ is not anything to welcome; anti-Christ is anti-Christ no matter where it comes from. And if you call yourself a friend of the Jews, then you owe them the truth — they cannot be saved by remaining true to their Jewish religion.
Offering the Jews kinder words than Jesus did doesn’t do them any favors.
Forward to Matthew 23 and you get see how deeply Jesus Christ rejects the Jews, specially, Jewish leadership — the Pharisees — those who define what Judaism is. Of course he had mercy and compassion on the lost sheep of Israel — that is who he came for and died for. But the Jewish people rejected him, especially the leaders of that nation.
Jesus attack was scathing — “woe to you . . . hypocrites.” Seven times he says to the Jews “woe to you,” for they make their (Jewish) converts “twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.”
“You serpents,” says Jesus, “you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell.”
In Chapter 25 Jesus expands upon hell — that hell is for entire nations/bloodlines and not just individuals. v 41: He will also say to this on His left, “Depart from me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels.” Who goes there? Those who rejected Him and his messengers. “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
And right after this in Chapter 26 the chief priests and elders of the people plotted to seize him in secret and kill him. For Judas — him who is named after the tribe of Judah — he says “woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.”
And that’s pretty much it for the Jews.
Upon Christ’s Resurrection He commands the Christians — almost all of whom at that time were of Jewish blood but had rejected the Jewish religion (for the be a religious Jew is to reject Christ) he said “Go and make disciples of all the nations/bloodlines.”
I wonder what my Mom would say now, if she read this.
Jesus Not Jewish
One final word on the Bloodline of Jesus Christ: it is said by many Christians that Jesus is Jewish. Consider the following:
Jesus is the “son of David,” but not by blood. David was man after God’s own heart — he was a lusty and violent man who was passionate about his Creator. Jesus’s mother — Mary — was a direct blood descendant of King David.
But in the Bible, descent comes not from the female — it comes only from the male. Even Mary’s ancestry was recorded through her male ancestors only.
That is why the Saviour could come from Eve’s offspring, not fallen Adams — even though Eve first sinned. Jesus is not only the Son of God, but through Mary, the Son of Adam or Man.
But since ancestry is traced ONLY through the male, the Father of Jesus Christ is God Almighty by the Holy Spirit.
Adam passed his fallen nature to his children. That fallen nature comes through the male.
It is impossible that Jesus Christ descended from fallen man — if so he could not have been the Redeemer of Mankind. Christ’s Blood alone was untainted by Adam’s sin. Thus he could not have descended from Abel or Noah or Jacob or David, all of whom descended from Adam — fallen man.
This is why Christ was born of a Virgin woman, conceived of by the Holy Spirit — the Direct Descendant — without intermediary — of God Almighty. Jesus the only begotten Son of God. He has no earthly father — His Father is God Almighty.
And when we are born again of the Blood of Jesus Christ it is that Blood — of God Almighty — that cleanses us and makes us One Blood with God. All outside of Jesus Christ are vipers — descendants of the Serpent who deceived Eve.
So in this very real sense, Jesus Christ has zero Jewish blood in him — lineage in the Hebrew scriptures is only through the Father, and the Father of Jesus Christ is God Almighty — directly and without intermediary, through the Holy Spirit. Countenancing otherwise is an insult — blasphemy — to the Spirit of Grace.
None of this is to say that a person of Jewish blood (as opposed to religion) cannot be saved. James, the half-brother (by Mary) of Jesus was saved. As was Mary and the disciples and the early church. When the Gospel was to be preached, they were to start in Jerusalem and Judea (reflecting God’s unending mercy) and then to the uttermost parts of the earthy.
But the Jews made a decision, and so did Jesus Christ.
The Jews, as a bloodline/nation and religion) rejected Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ rejected the Jews and said he would give the vineyard to another nation/bloodline who to give the Father the appropriate fruit. When he cursed the fig tree, it was forever. When the Rock falls on those his enemies, they are ground into powder.
When Paul, who is the Apostle to the non-Jews — who went to the Europeans — pleads for his own people in Romans 10, he claims not be be a Jew but rather an “Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin” and in Phillipians 3 he is of the nation of Israel, a Hebrew of Hebrews, of the tribe of Benjamin. Again, never claiming to be a Jew.
That said, Paul is openly boastful of his own racial heritage. So why not Europeans? If both Jesus Christ and Paul can prefer a certain race, or reject it, they why not Europeans?
It is clear that the Gospel was to be breached to all the nations/bloodlines of the world. It was clear from Acts chapter 2 that the Gospel did, in fact reach every nation and that the Holy Spirit gave tongues from every part of the world. So the Gospel is to the whole World.
In Acts 17 it is clear yet again that God made the nations/bloodlines and gave them times to be on the earth, and gave them boundaries. Why? To see which nations would serve Him.
And, although the Gospel of Jesus Christ went out into all the World, it was the Europeans who uniquely made Christ their King. This was, in fact, prophesied by the changing of the Scriptures from Hebrew to Greek, a European tongue — it was purposed by God. The flag of Greece today still bears a Christian cross, as do the nations of Northern Europe. This means everything. We Europeans have been the Christ-bearers to the rest of the world, that nation to whom God entrusted the vineyard after pulling it from the Jews.
Now, this is not for the Europeans to brag about. For if God uprooted the Jews to graft in the Europeans, they stand only by grace, and they too can fall and be ripped out.
I would give my life and blood to renew the Gospel of Jesus Christ amongst my European brethren. I yearn that they may honor again the Cross emblazoned on their flags.
The spiritual well of the Europeans has been poisoned and darkened by evil meaning men who have diluted the pure truth of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures to something quite different thant what was intended.
I write that entire bloodlines would serve Jesus Christ and bend their knee to Him as King, whether European or any other peoples.
No peoples rejecting Jesus Christ are God’s people, be they atheists or servants of another god. No Christian does a Jew a favor by saying “you are God’s people.” That is anti-Christ, for to be a religious Jew is to be anti-Christ, as the atheist and Muslim.
Christians who support an anti-Christ institution are deceived. I will know that the Jews have repented when they tear down their flag —with a six pointed star — and erect a banner emblazoned with the Cross of Jesus Christ. Until then, they remain our enemies for the sake of the Gospel.
Christians who dance around an idol of one or two verses and yet ignore the Narrative are self-deceiving, seeking praise from men rather than honor from God. Preaching the Cross is a hard saying — only by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord, and only through His Blood the forgiveness of sins, is treason against a united and “tolerant” Babel-onian world. We are not all one. That was never God’s plan. Either you fall on the Rock or the Rock will grind you to dust.
No one comes into the house except through the one doorway which is Jesus Christ. It is only the Blood of the Lamb that saves — nothing but the Blood of Jesus. To reject this is to reject Jesus Christ; to reject the Son is to reject the Father.
If European man is to survive it can only be by returning to the King — who is not a Jew, but rather the Son of Almighty God. His Blood — the Blood of the Creator — will wash away your sins and open your eyes to his greatness and glory and the honor intended to those who would stand for Him and Him alone.
New Years Day, 2020