"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:i8ttmug619v833acfff9gqi6f1129c1q9a at 4ax.com...
> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
> >No, if he was a jew, he could NOT have been a member of the Tribe of
> >Benjamin, because only Israelites were members of the Tribe of Benjamin.
>> Tribal membership was determined by descent.
>
Golly, gee, whillickers. Miracles never cease.
Are you finally acknowledging that "races" do exist after all?
> >He DID have one great-grandparent out of 8 who was an Israelite,
>> Actually it has been argued that it was Mordacai himself that was of
> the tribe of Benjamin. But all of the descendants of even ONE member
> of the Tribe of Benjamin, whether you think they are Israelites or
> not, are descendants of Benjamin, and thence of Abraham.
>
Do you believe that argument?
Can you produce the Holy Scripture that claims that Mordecai was an
Israelite rather than a jew?
Do you finally realize that just having one great-grandparent who was an
Israelite is not what it takes to be an Israelite.
There's only one way for a descendant of a Benjamite great-grandparent to be
an Israelite, and that's for all 8 great-grandparents to be Israelites.
> >But this
> >does not make him an Israelite, particularly when the Holy Bible very
> >specifically states that he was a JEW.
>> But stating that he was a Jew does NOT equate to stating he was NOT an
> Israelite. You are attempting to assume your conclusion, arguing that
> Jews were not Israelites solely because they were called Jews, and
> therefore were not Israelites. That is nincompoop logic. Just as
> stating that someone is a "man" does not imply that he is not a "human
> being" (not being a human being only applies to YOU, and that is by
> your choice).
>
To this very day, jews and Israelites are two entirely separate and distinct
races. Most of the 15 million jews in the world claim to be descendants of
Ashkenaz, and if this is true, then they cannot be Israelites, by definition
http://christianparty.net/noahgenealogy.htm
Most of the 2 billion Christians in the world are descendants of the
Israelites. White English and Americans are descendants of the Tribes of
Manessah and Ephraim. The Danes are descendants of the Tribe of Dan.
Germans are descendants of the Tribe of David.
Israelites and jews are OBVIOUSLY different races now, just as they've
always been.
> >Nobody ever, ever, ever claimed that "Israelites are racially pure and
would
> >never think of miscegenation". They not only "thought" of it, they DID
it,
> >many times.
> >
> >But they also always "put away" the children of Israelites who married
> >non-Israelites--along with their foreign wives.
>> Not always. The Lost tribes did not. ONLY the ones who returned to
> Jerusalem and rebuilt the wall and worshipped again in the temple
> under Ezra and Nehemiah, and in Nehemiah 4 and Nehemiah 20 they are
> called JEWS as well as men of Judah as well as people of Israel, by
> both Nehemiah and by the enemies of Nehemiah.
>
The only people who lived in Judaea who were called "jews" were jews. You
cannot find one single scrap of Holy Scripture which ever calls an Israelite
of any Tribe living in Judaea a "jew".
Why? Because they were Israelites.
> >The jews didn't.
>> But they did. Read the ending of Nehemiah again. It was JEWS that
> followed Nehemiah, who put away foreign wives, etc.
>
NO. It refers only to Israelites, not jews:
Nehemiah 9:1 Now in the twenty and fourth day of this month the children of
Israel were assembled with fasting, and with sackcloth, and earth upon them.
Nehemiah 9:2 And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all
foreigners, and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their
fathers.
Nehemiah 9:3 And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the
law of Jehovah their God a fourth part of the day; and another fourth part
they confessed, and worshipped Jehovah their God.
"Children of Israel" means Israelites, not jews.
There are references in Nehemiah to jews. But the word "jew" appears
NOWHERE in Nehemiah 9 which describes putting away the foreign wives of
Israelites and their children.
Why? These are TWO DIFFERENT RACES.
> >Already did. He was an Israelite, of the Tribe of Benjamin, and NO jew
was
> >ever a member of the Tribe of Benjamin.
>> Proof by nincompoop assertion.
>> >What more proof do you need?
>> Umm. Something that makes sense, and which matches the Bible will do
> for a starter.
>> >How about Mordecai? We don't need to know the name of the Israelite who
> >married a jew to know that the great-grandson of an Israelite who was a
JEW
> >had mixed-race ancestors. This is true by definition.
>> But so to were all the people of Ezra and Nehemiah who lived in
> Babylon and took up the ways of the stranger, married and had kids by
> foreigners, and had to be returned to the Lord.
>> >How about Esau? Do you believe Esau was an Israelite? [we'll skip this
for
> >a second to make the point].
>> No.
>> >Esau married Canaanite women and God hated him for it, so Esau and his
> >family were banished to Edom, never to associate with, inter-marry with,
or
> >socialize with Israelites (other than to war with them).
>> Except that they did associate, intermarry and socialize with them in
> the time of the captivity.
>
But the Israelite law never changed. No children born to such marriages
(and there's no evidence that this occurred any more frequently then than it
does now) were ever considered to be Israelites.
You seem to always presume that all races are just one single racial soup,
but there's no evidence that miscegenation was any worse then than it is
today (though it is bad enough today).
> >> 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.
> >
> >Gee, should we believe you, or the Holy Bible?
>> Since I agree with the Holy Bible that he was a Benjaminite and thus a
> descendant of Abraham, my choice is "yes".
>
Mordecai was not a Benjamite. Only his great-grandfather was. You cannot
find a shred of Holy Scripture which proves otherwise.
> >The Holy Bible tells us precisely that the children of an Israelite who
> >marries a jew are NOT ever considered Israelites
>> No it doesn't. It commands that they not intermarry etc. But you
> have acknowledged that they did so, and only intermittently put away
> the foreigners. Well, sorry, but there were entire generations in
> there between the intermingling and the putting away, and mongrels
> stay mongrels. All of the people of Israel were mongrels by the time
> of Nehemiah, and the only saving grace was for them to put away the
> foreigners and rededicate themselves to the Lord.
Read it again. ALL of the mongrels of the foreign wives and the foreign
wives were put away, en masse, just as we're getting ready to do yet again.
It's really not that difficult to preserve the White Race, you know?
> Some of the Jews,
> the Benjaminites and the Levites did so, and they were the ones who
> inherited the mantel of "the chosen people".
>
Wrong. The Covenant With God was with the descendants of Abraham through
Jacob, and nobody else. Not a single jew in the world is an Israelite,
because they're the mongrel children of the enemies of the Israelites
(Ashkenazis, Edomites, Moabites, Canaanites, Jebusites, Cushites, etc.).
> >[or at best, only after ten
> >generations], but here you are claiming that a JEW was a Benjamite.
>> No. I am not. The Bible is; I am just agreeing. Meanwhile,
> regardless of the laws of Israel, even if it were Mordecai's great
> grandfather who was of the tribe of Benjamin, the great grandson of a
> descendant of Benjamin remain a descendant of Benjamin, no matter how
> many others he is ALSO a descendant of.
>
You're absolutely wrong:
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
Mordecai was not permitted into the "congregation fo the LORD", because he
was a jew whose only known Israelite ancestor was Kish the Benjamite.
That makes Mordecai a bastard, not an Israelite.
> >> 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
> >
> >I see. You believe this Israelite law applied only sometimes, and that
it
> >didn't apply at other times?
>> You admitted that it did. Why else would the Israelites who returned
> to Jerusalem who had violated the law, be allowed to *reestablish* the
> congregation of the Lord.
You keep "forgetting" that they put away all the foreign wives and their
bastard children. Why do you keep "forgetting" this?
> The Israelites had STOPPED practicing the
> law for a few generations, and thus if the law were upheld, then for
> 10 generations there could be no Israelites. Yet the Jews rebuilt
> Jerusalem, and are called Israelites. NOT 10 generations later, but
> merely upon separating themselves from the strangers.
>
Why do you continue to ignore the Israelite law. By Israelite law, jews can
never be Israelites.
> >Would you mind too terribly much explaining why Israelite law was
suspended
> >for the JEW Mordecai?
>> It was suspended for ALL of the people who returned from the
> captivity, because otherwise, there would have been no chosen people
> at all.
These "chosen people" you're referring to are the descendants of Abraham
through Jacob, ONLY. No law had to be suspended to keep the Covenant With
God--the law had to be UPHELD.
John Knight
