WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.0K

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

Israel had been charged with the responsibility of being a nation of priests, serving God and acting as servants to all men

Ok, since we're back off the topic of language, I think it's fair that I ask if the part I quoted is a core belief of Christianity? As in this was the Christian God's intent before the events described in the New Testament?

[–] 0 pt

Simply put, in my view, looking at Exodus 19 and 20, God offered direct communion with Israel. He used specific language of a “nation of priests,” which was also alluded to in Hebrews of the New Testament with mentions of Priests on the order of Melchizedek.

Israel repeatedly told God to shove it, while continuing to enjoy the miracles and blessings, but ignoring the responsibilities placed upon them.

Eventually, at the stoning of Stephen, the full story is laid out succinctly, and Stephen says as his last, in Acts 7, “behold, I see the Son standing at the right hand of the Father,” the language was clear to the jews about to kill him, and the stopped their ears, and moved to kill Stephen. The symbolic language meant that Christ was standing, prepared to pass judgment, on the jews. The jews recognized this and wished to silence Stephen.

This was the end of their story as the “set apart” special ethnic people of God, at least for the time being.

There are some who think that, following the rise of the (((antichrist))), a remnant of 144,000 of Israel descent will reclaim their spiritual heritage and resist their evil jew brothers. That one I’m still not sure about.

[–] 0 pt

While I don't think we see eye to eye, I think we've both had room to make our points and I appreciate that. A rare thing here, or online in general. Hope you have a good weekend.