TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 26: 45, Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul, 1 and 2 Corinthians

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information or DONATE HERE!

  • Christogenea Saturdays
ChrSat20210206-100Proofs-26.mp3 — Downloaded 4304 times


TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 26

In our last presentation we began discussing particular passages in the epistles of Paul where certain terms are mistranslated or misunderstood, which also adversely affect the interpretation of the Scriptures throughout the New Testament. There are many more of these in Paul’s epistles than there are in all of the other New Testament writings, and certainly because of the nature and purpose of the epistles themselves. Once again, while there are many more mistranslations in Paul than what we shall present here, we will only focus on those which concern nation, race and the scope and purpose of the Gospel.

45 continued) Specific NT Verse misteachings, mistranslations or corruptions in the epistles of Paul

First Epistle to the Corinthians

Here I think we should further discuss the word saint, as this word is as poorly understood as Gentile or Jew. Paul addressed his epistle to the Romans “7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.” There, in the King James Version, we see the words “to be” are added in italics, and that means they are not in the original text. The translators made a lie when they added those words, because Paul never used saint in such a context, that someone could somehow become a saint.

For example, his epistle to the Philippians is addressed in part “to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons”, and while we won’t discuss the true meanings of the words bishop and deacon here, we see that those who have positions of authority in the assembly are among the other saints, people whom Paul had already considered saints as they were living. In that context, the King James translators could not add the words “to be”.

Then Paul ended that same epistle by saying, in part, “21 Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren which are with me greet you. 22 All the saints salute you, chiefly they that are of Caesar's household.” Paul was a prisoner in Rome, he had already seen at least one trial there, which he mentions in the epistle, and he had evidently won converts to Christianity even in the household of Caesar, whom he referred to as saints. Where he said “salute every saint” he was asking his readers to greet all of the Christians in Philippi on his behalf. These are all average everyday Christians whom Paul considered to be saints, and not the artificial saints designated as such by the popes of the Roman Catholic Church. They cannot make saints for the express reason that they are supposedly celibate. The true saints are those of the children of Israel who have sanctified themselves in Christ and separated themselves from the sins of the world.

The word for saint in all of these contexts is ἅγιος, which Liddell & Scott define primarily as “devoted to the gods”, although in the Bible we would say God, but then they go on to follow the Church definitions of the word, sacred or holy, without explaining that primary definition any further. In truth, what is sacred or holy is something which has been devoted to a god. The Hebrew word for holy, qadosh (Strong's Hebrew # 6918), means sacred or set apart. This word appears as saint in the King James Version in Psalm 106:16 and Daniel 8:13. More often, the cognate word qodesh (Strong's Hebrew # 6944) appears as saints. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon primarily defines qodesh as apartness, holiness, sacredness, or separateness. The Greek equivalent is ἅγιος or hagios, as these words were translated throughout the Septuagint, and ἅγιος more fully means set apart for the purposes of a god, according to Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon.

The ancient Greeks set something apart, or dedicated something to a god by placing it upon an altar in the temple of that God. Once that was done, the object, or even the person, became the property of the god of the temple, and fell under the authority of the priests. When Abraham placed Isaac on the altar at the command of Yahweh, Abraham was surrendering his authority over his son, and dedicating him to Yahweh whereby Isaac became the only man ever dedicated to God by the explicit will of God. Paul explains in Romans chapter 9 that the seed of the promise is that seed which was born of the promises made to Abraham, Sarah and Rebecca, who gave birth to both Jacob and Esau. But Paul went on to further explain that Yahweh God hated Esau, and that the Israelites are vessels of mercy, while the Edomites are vessels of destruction.

So all of the children of Israel were dedicated to God in the loins of Isaac, and when they separate themselves from the world and turn to Christ they are accepting that fact. That is what it means to be holy, sanctified or a saint in the New Testament. This we read in the promise of a new covenant in Ezekiel chapter 37: “27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 28 And the heathen [or properly, Nations] shall know that I Yahweh do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.” That word for sanctify is the Hebrew word qadash (Strong's Hebrew # 6918), another cognate of qadosh and qodesh which means to consecrate, sanctify, prepare, dedicate, be holy, be sanctified, be separate, etc.

So Paul addressed his first epistle to the Corinthians in part: “to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints,” and once again the words “to be” were added by the translators, and it should not have been added because the people that Paul was addressing were already saints while they were living as Christians. So we read in the second epistle to the Corinthians where he addressed it “unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia”, and his intended readers are already saints, but once again, in that context, the King James translators could not add the words “to be”. However where they did add the words, the impression is given that a Christian may become a saint, contrary to the truth that every Christian keeping the commandments of Christ is already a saint. Rather, using verbs of the present tense, Paul is addressing his epistles to those who were “called saints”, to Christians in the present tense.

1 Corinthians 9:16-18: “16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! 17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. 18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.” In order to make this passage complete, the King James translators added three words to verse 17, which are “of the gospel”. Whenever there are so many words added to the text, it is evident that the translators may be adding their own ideas to the text, and doing that they very frequently pervert the intended meaning.

This verse in the Christogenea New Testament reads: “16 Therefore if I announce the good message, it is not a subject of boasting to me; in necessity it is laid upon me, since woe to me it is if I would not announce the good message! 17 For if I do this readily, I have a reward; but if voluntarily I had been entrusted with the management of a family, 18 what then is my reward?” The Greek word οἰκονομία is primarily “the management of a household or family” (Liddell & Scott), and the most literal meaning here is naturally the most sensible, as we can understand Paul’s message without adding any of our own words. We will cite the following passages for support:

Amos 3:2: “You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” Yahweh only having known the children of Israel, only the children of Israel could possibly be reconciled in Christ.

Isaiah 52:6-7: “Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I. How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! ” This is an announcement to the children of Israel that Christ is their King.

Matthew 10:6: “But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

Matthew 15:24: “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

Acts 26:6-7: “And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come….”

Acts 28:20: “For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.” In Acts chapter 26 Paul described Israel as twelve tribes, and in Romans chapter 9 as his “kinsmen according to the flesh”, not according to some belief.

James 1:1: “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.”

Revelation 21:12, describing the City of God: “And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:”

But most significantly, from Hebrews 8: “7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house [οἶκος] of Israel and with the house [οἶκος] of Judah: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house [οἶκος] of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: 11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.”

All of these passages, and many more, serve to show that the message of the Gospel of Christ was intended for a particular house, or family, which is the ancient family of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel.

As the King James Version has “dispensation” at 1 Corinthians 9:17, and then adds words to try to have it make sense, there are several other words which Paul may have chosen to more clearly convey such a meaning. Liddell & Scott list “husbandry” and “thrift” as alternate meanings of οἰκονομία, and among others Thayer adds “stewardship”, none of which fit the context here, although at times they do where Paul used the word elsewhere. A house is an οἶκος, and a steward, the man who manages a house, is an οἰκονόμος, which is a steward, but only if by steward we understand the defninition of the term, that it describes someone who manages a house, which represents the abode and affairs of a family. So the word describes the office of the wicked steward in Luke chapter 16.

But Paul used it again in reference to his ministry in Colossians 1:25 where the King James Version has only dispensation, and we will read a longer passage from the Christogenea New Testament: “24 Now, I rejoice in these sufferings on your behalf, and I substitute for those deficiencies of the afflictions of the Anointed with my flesh on behalf of the body itself, which is the assembly; 25 of which I have become a servant in accordance with the administration of the household [οἰκονομία] of Yahweh which is given to me for you, to fulfill the word of Yahweh, 26 the mystery which has been concealed from the ages and from the races, but now has been made visible to His saints, 27 to whom Yahweh did wish to make known what the riches of the honor of this mystery are among the Nations, which is the expectation of honor anointed in you, 28 whom we declare, admonishing every man and teaching every man in all wisdom in order that we may present every man perfect among the Anointed.”

This interpretation of οἰκονομία is not without precedent. In the Septuagint it appears twice in relation to a man who had the stewardship over the house of Judah, in Isaiah chapter 22 where from verse 19 the Word of Yahweh first speaks to Somnas, or Shebna in the King James Version, who was a wicked steward, and it says: “19 And thou shalt be removed from thy stewardship [οἰκονομία], and from thy place. 20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Chelcias: 21 and I will put on him thy robe, and I will grant him thy crown with power, and I will give thy stewardship [οἰκονομία] into his hands: and he shall be as a father to them that dwell in Jerusalem, and to them that dwell in Juda.” Likewise, on account of his own stewardship, Paul was considered a father in that same respect, even though he would have rejected “father” as a title. But the King James Version of the New Testament never translates οἰκονομία in its primary sense, even though it is very clear in the Old Testament prophets and from the scope and purpose of the Gospel that it should be understood in that simple and literal manner. The Christian Identity message is much clearer in Scripture when the full meaning of words such as οἰκονομία are properly understood.

So with that consideration, likewise, in Ephesians 3:2 in the King James Version we read: “2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward…” However we will read the same verse with the surrounding text from the Christogenea New Testament: “1 For this cause I, Paul, captive of Christ Yahshua on behalf of you of the Nations 2 if indeed you have heard of the management of the family [οἰκονομία] of the favor of Yahweh which has been given to me in regard to you, 3 seeing that by a revelation the mystery was made known to me (just as I had briefly written before, 4 besides which reading you are able to perceive my understanding in the mystery of the Anointed,) 5 which in other generations had not been made known to the sons of men, as it is now revealed in His holy ambassadors and prophets by the Spirit, 6 those Nations which are joint heirs and a joint body and partners of the promise in Christ Yahshua, through the good message 7 of which I have become a servant in accordance with the gift of the favor of Yahweh which has been given to me, in accordance with the operation of His power.”

The mystery to which Paul refers, which endured for many centuries, was the fate of the twelve tribes of Israel, the identity of the nations which had descended from Abraham in relation to the fulfillment of the promises to Abraham, and how those tribes would be reconciled to God as He had promised them in the words of the prophets throughout the Old Testament. Israel was told that they would be blind in their captivity, but that they would be called out of that blindness, as it was the purpose of Christ in part to open the eyes of the blind, which was also prophesied in Isaiah.

So while we have already discussed three passages from 1 Corinthians chapter 10 in other contexts in this presentation, we should breiefly discuss them here in this context, because they also establish our assertions concerning the words ἅγιος and οἰκονομία:

1 Corinthians 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

1 Corinthians 10:7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. 8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.

1 Corinthians 10:18 Behold Israel after the flesh [according to the flesh, Romans 9:3]: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles [Nations] sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

1 Corinthians 16:22: Here the King James Version, leaving certain words untranslated, reads “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.” The Christogenea New Testament has “If anyone does not love the Prince, he must be accursed, a rebel to be destroyed.” The veracity of this translation can be demonstrated using a tool as simple as Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. The denominational churches and standard lexicons do not even parse the word maranatha consistently, yet most of them insist it means “Oh Lord come”, while they cannot explain why it should have such a meaning. We would assert that the Greek word ἀνάθεμα means accursed, which is the generally accepted meaning, and that μαράναθα is a Hebrew phrase made up of two words, mara (see Strong’s Hebrew #’s 4751 and 4785), which is a rebel, and natha (see Strong’s Hebrew #’s 5421 and 5422), which in the passive voice means to be destroyed. Now this may seem subjective, however it surely does elucidate not only Paul’s great love for Yahshua Christ, but also Paul’s understanding of the nature of the enemies of Yahshua. The King James Version, leaving these words untranslated, hides the truth and neglects its obligation to relate the true meaning of the word. Our interpretation takes the meaning of maranatha from the plainly literal meanings of two common Hebrew words.

Second Epistle to the Corinthians

In 2 Corinthians 6:14 we read in the King James Version “ 14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? ” This translation, which we would assert is wrong, causes a serious conflict. Earlier, in 1 Corinthians chapter 7, Paul was discussing the dilemma of men and women who became Christians but whose spouses did not accept the Gospel and he wrote “ 10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband… 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.” So is Paul contradicting himself, in epistles which were demonstrably written only a few months apart from one another? Certainly not.

In 2 Corinthians 6:14, the King James translators rendered an adjective as a noun, which was apparently necessary for them to do because they did not render the verb as fully or properly as they could have, while also ignoring the meaning of the verb where a different form of the same word was used in the Septuagint. Admittedly, the opening sentence of this verse is very difficult to translate in few words, although it only contains four Greek words. The Greek, μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροζυγοῦντες ἀπίστοις, is in the Christogenea New Testament “Do not become yoked together with untrustworthy aliens”. The King James Version has here “Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers”, and the denominational churches and their translators generally interpret this to be a “religious” admonition: which would have Paul conflict with his own statements such as those in 1 Corinthians chapter 7, which we have just cited, where he advised men and women already married to unbelievers to continue in marriage, and so they make him out to be a liar. This is not a religious statement, and we hope to make that evident upon an examination of the terms ἑτεροζυγέω and ἄπιστος.

The verb ἑτεροζυγέω appears nowhere else in the New Testament, nor in the Septuagint. However the corresponding adjective, ἑτερόζυγος, does appear in the Septuagint, at Leviticus 19:19, where the King James Version itself has “Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind”. The Septuagint Greek is: τὰ κτήνη σου (your cattle) οὐ κατοχεύσεις (do not let “gender”, and the verb implies the act of sexual intercourse) ἑτεροζύγῳ (with a diverse kind, and since the idea of being “yoked” was already implicit, the English translators did not repeat it). Brenton’s English as it was translated from the Greek varies little from the King James Version English, which was translated from Hebrew.

So while the Liddell & Scott definition for the verb ἑτεροζυγέω that appears here in the New Testament follows the King James Version: “to be yoked in unequal partnership” the Liddell & Scott definition for the adjective ἑτερόζυγος as it appears in the Septuagint is “coupled with an animal of diverse kind” which with people can only mean “to be coupled with someone of another race”, and therefore it is evident that both the King James Version and Liddell & Scott are attempting to convince us that the verb form of the word somehow has a totally different meaning than the adjective! Furthermore, this word being a compound word from ἕτερος which is another or different and ζυγός which is a yoke, it means to be yoked to something different, and not merely to be unequally yoked in some religious sense. It does not refer to being coupled with people of other beliefs, but to people of other kinds. The word ἕτερος describing flesh was in the epistle of Jude translated as “strange flesh” in the King James Version, in the context of people of other races.

I have already discussed this simple concept in these presentations. Different forms of the same basic word must share the same basic meaning, whether they be noun, verb or adjective. The words call as a noun, to call as a verb, and calling, caller or called as nouns, verbs or adjectives all share the same basic meaning relating to the same action. So if the adjective ἑτερόζυγος means coupled with an animal of diverse kind then the verb ἑτεροζυγέω means to be coupled with an animal of diverse kind.

For that reason, here in the Christogenea New Testament for the verb ἑτεροζυγέω I have “yoked together with aliens”, preferring the idea that the verb as it was used by Paul surely bears the same meaning that the adjective did in the Greek scriptures of the Septuagint which Paul so often quoted verbatim. This word must also be contrasted with σύζυγος, used in the New Testament only once, by Paul at Philippians 4:3 and which Liddell & Scott define “yoked together, paired, σύζυγος ὁμαυλίαι wedded union, a feminine Substantive, a wife, Euripides; masculine a yoke-fellow, comrade, Iliad, Aristotle.” It is of marriage that Christ used the corresponding verb συζεύγνυμι (4801) at Matthew 19:6 and Mark 10:9. While συ- (see συν, 4862) means “with” or “together”, ἕτερος (2087) means “other” or “other than” or “different”. ζυγός (2218) is “anything which joins two bodies”, according to Liddell & Scott, and is commonly a yoke (Matthew 11:29, 30; Acts 15:10; Galalatians 5:1; 1 Timothy 6:1). If Paul wanted to tell us not to be yoked together with the unfaithful, σύζυγος was the word to use. Rather, he was clearly using ἑτεροζυγέω as ἑτερόζυγος was in the Septuagint, and telling us not to be yoked together with untrustworthy aliens.

But now we must discuss that other word, ἄπιστος, which we have translated as untrustworthy. The word ἄπιστος is an adjective, which Liddell & Scott define “not to be trusted...not trusty, distrusted, faithless...” Yet it is treated in the King James Version as a substantive in this verse, as a noun, and translated merely as unbelievers. The Christogenea New Testament has the word as an adjective, which is what it is. If Paul wanted to use this word as the substantive, a simple article would have cleared up any ambiguity. But there is no article at all, so we have chosen to render the participle verb ἑτεροζυγοῦντες as the substantive, but in truth would read the two words together in that manner as they seem to be interdependent even though the participle is Nominative and the adjective is in the Dative case.

So with all of this, we would assert that another way to translate this clause from Greek is: “Do not become yoked together with those of other races who are not to be trusted”, which is also a literal translation, or if one would insist that ἄπιστος is the substantive, “Do not become yoked with the faithless of other races”, which is also literal. Either way represents a message that is consistent with all Scripture, and both ways express the true meanings of the original words.

With this in mind, we may better understand the context of Paul’s statements just a few verses later, in 2 Corinthians 6:17, where the King James Version unjustly adds the word thing to the text. The Christogenea New Testament reads this passage as follows: “Come out from the midst of them and be separated,’ says the Prince [or Lord], and ‘do not be joined to the impure, and I will admit you’.” It is asserted here that the reference to “the impure” directly refers to the subject earlier in the passage which is “them”, and therefore no added words are necessary in order to understand this verse.

This passage is a paraphrase from Isaiah chapter 52 where it says “10 The LORD hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God. 11 Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the LORD.” Once again, the King James Version added that word thing to the text. The Brown, Driver Briggs Hebrew lexicon acknowledges that the form of the Hebrew word, Strong’s # 2931, is a masculine adjective, and that it describes someone unclean, ethically or religiously, citing Isaiah 6:5, Ezekiel 22:5 and Job 14:4, or someone unclean ritually, again speaking of of persons, citing Deuteronomy 12:15, 12:22, 15:22, Leviticus 22:4 and Ecclesiastes 9:2.

So where Paul had written in 2 Corinthians chapter 6 “Come out from the midst of them and be separated,” he was referring to people just as Isaiah was, and it is only a further admonition where it says “and do not be joined to the impure,” or unclean. This in turn was written to clarify what Paul had meant where he wrote just a few verses earlier “Do not become yoked with the faithless of other races”, which we have given as one plausible and literal translation, and we therefore see an interpretation which describes Paul as having offered a narrative that is fully consistent with all of his other statements.

In this same light, there is another adjective which is mistranslated in this epistle, in 2 Corinthians 13:5 where Paul beckoned his readers and the King James Version has: “5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?” The word ἀδόκιμος is an adjective, translated as a noun here in the King James Version where the word is rendered “reprobates”. It should rather have been rendered as an adjective, and it means spurious.

The intermediate Liddell & Scott lexicon defines the word to mean “not standing the test, spurious, properly of coin, metaphorically of persons, rejected as false, disreputable, reprobate, , , etc.” But a coin is spurious when it is not pure, when it is mixed with base metals, and therefore we would cross-reference this verse to Hebrews chapter 12 where Paul wrote “8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.” Only bastards are spurious.

Here, discussing bastards and the impure, or unclean, it might be relevant to go back to Acts chapter 10 and discuss what Yahweh God had cleansed on the cross of Christ. But we should probably do this as a proof of its own further on in this series.

So for now it should suffice to say that in Acts chapter 10 Peter was shown a vision of beasts, and as the vision is completed and in what happened to Peter subsequently, it is revealed that where Peter was commanded to arise and eat certain unclean beasts, the actual signification was that he should not reject certain men. So we read in verse 14: “14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.” But then we see the answer in verse 15: “15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”

Even though Peter was concerned with things both common and unclean, in the answer we see that Yahweh God was only concerned with what is common. This is an important distinction which is missed by denominational churches and translators as it relates to men. What is common, or sometimes the word κοινός was translated as profane, referred to things which were soiled or tainted, but which could be cleansed and ceremonially purified by a priest. But what is unclean, or ἀκάθαρτος, is unclean according to the law and can never be cleansed. For example, swine is unclean according to the law, and no ceremony or cleansing ritual could ever make it clean so that it could be sacrificed on the altar or eaten by men. However cattle which are clean but which were mishandled in some manner could be considered profane, but a priest could purify them in a ritual.

When the children of Israel were put off into captivity and alienated from Yahweh, from that time they were considered common, or profane, and it is they who were cleansed on the cross of Christ. But Christ did not clean any of the other races, which were never clean according to the law. Once this concept is understood in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament, many of the allegories concerning Israel are also better understood. Yahweh God would not cleanse pigs, just as He would not cleanse other races of so-called people.

ChrSat20210206-100Proofs-26.odt — Downloaded 154 times