"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> "Zayton" <zayton at bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:mi9b9.86932$%v4.4664562 at e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...>> And why didn't you produce just ONE example of Holy Scripture where a member of the Tribe of Benjamin who lived in Judaea was ever referred to as a "jew"?
>> *Esther 2:5
>> "Now there was a Jew in Susa, the capital whose name was Mordecah, the son of Jair, son of Shimei, son of Kish, a Benjaminite,...."
>> Because you cannot?
>> *But John, I just did.
>>No, Zayton, what you DID do was produce the Holy Scripture which refers to a JEW.
>>Mordecai wasn't an Israelite--because he was a JEW.
I repeat your question from above:
>And why didn't you produce just ONE example of Holy Scripture where a
> member of the Tribe of Benjamin who lived in Judaea was ever referred
> to as a "jew"?
He was a member of the Tribe of Benjamin, who lived in Judea, and was
a Jew.
>ONE of Mordecai's four great-grand fathers was an Israelite, of the Tribe of Benjamin.
All of them were by your reasoning, since you've stated that all
Israelites are racially pure and would never think of miscegenation.
Therefore all of them must have been, and therefore Jews were
Israelites.
>But because the Holy Bible referred to Mordecai a JEW and not as an
> Israelite, at least ONE of his other great-grandfathers, if not all
> of the rest, had to have been JEWS.
I'm sure they all were including Kish. Prove that Kish was NOT a Jew.
>It's well documented throughout the Holy Bible that none of the
> children of an Israelite who ever married a JEW was considered to be
> an Israelite:
Find any example in the Holy Bible where an Israelite married a Jew,
and the resulting person was not considered an Israelite.
In any event, he remained a Benjaminite, because he was descended from
the tribe of Benjamin. You've placed great stock in the genealogies
of the Holy Bible. This one says that he was of the bloodlines of
Benjamin.
>A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to
> his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the
> LORD, Deuteronomy 23:2
Not relevant unless you can PROVE by a quote from the Bible that
the word "bastard" would apply in the case of the genealogy quoted in
Esther, even though there was no mention thereof, or of anyone being
cut off from the congregation of the LORD
>Perhaps you could argue that the descendants of such an Israelite could re-enter "the congregation of the LORD" after ten generations, but not even that would prove that they would be considered to be Israelites at that point.
You have to prove that they were ever NOT Israelites. After all,
since WE claim that Jews and Israelites were the same people, the
offspring of a Jew and an Israelite would not be miscegenation, and
therefore there is not reason for them not to be considered
Israelites.
lojbab
