"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> Why persist in this jewish sleight of hand, Zayton? Why do you
> continue to dispute the Holy Bible? Why do you continue to insist
> that the JEW Mordecai was an Israelite when he could NOT have been an
> Israelite, according to both Israelite and jewish law? Why can't you
> recognize that having one great-grandparent who was an Israelite of
> the Tribe of Benjamin (and up to 7 great-grandparents who were JEWS),
> does not make Mordecai an Israelite--it makes him a JEW?
>> ONE of Mordecai's four great-grand fathers was an Israelite, of
> the Tribe of Benjamin. 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 gave you the citatiion for Mordechi, the Benjaminite Jew; Where the reference for your bizzaire claims. The Bible doesn't say that his great-grandfather was both a Benjaminite and a Jew. It says that he was. Your racist lies are in conflict with the Bible, John.
> This paragraph does not say that. Re-read that paragraph very carefully. From the Holy Bible, we know of only ONE of his great-grandparents who was an Israelite, and that was Kish, a Benjamite:
> Est 2:5 Now in Shushan the palace there was a certain Jew, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite;
>> No, his great-grandfather Kish was not a jew, because he was an
> Israelite. But, no, by Israelite law, if just one of Mordecai's
> great-grandparents was a jew, then Mordecai was NOT an Israelite.
> Since Mordecai WAS a jew, at least one of his 8
> great-grandparents had to have been a jew, so he was NOT an
> Israelite.
>> 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:
The problem with this logic is that Abraham's children, married others
who were not children of Abraham (unless they practiced incest). And
Isaac's children likewise married people who were not children of
Isaac or Abraham. And Jacob's children, who were unquestionably
Israelites, had 8 great grandparents who were not Israelites (2 of
them were Abraham and his wife, who were ancestors of Israelites, but
not Israelites themselves.
The Biblical genealogies NEVER give us more than 1 of the 8 great
grandparents. You thus have NO way of knowing whether the bloodlines
reported in the Bible are pure Israelite (and in fact, since the
bloodlines were not written down, neither did they). You don't know
that Christ was an Israelite, because of all the great-grandparents
that were not recorded in the umpteen generation bloodline. Since he
was born in Nazareth which was primarily inhabited by Galileans who
were NOT Israelites, it would be hard for the families to find mates
that were pure Israelite.
(And all this of course presumes that the Babylonians who carted the
Israelites away into captivity ALLOWED them to mate only with
Israelites, with never a rape or a forced marriage among them. Since
the Babylonians were trying to destroy them as a people, they almost
certainly made it very difficult for them to keep bloodlines straight
- not to mention that they probably would have destroyed most written
records of bloodlines when they destroyed their cities. After all, it
was the PEOPLE that were hauled into captivity, not their stuff.
Your theories strain basic logic so much that I would think your puny
brain would burst. You know: the brain on this web site:
http://www.geocities.com/fathersfiasco/skull.html
lojbab
