Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
They were for the Jews and Israelites. Jews are still existent as a distinct and separate group, their gene pool having not been so completely diluted as were the Israelites. The Israelites are untraceable today. They were largely assimilated not only intertribally, but also by the surrounding world. Outside of fantasy, there is no racially pure, or near racially pure group of Israelites in existence today. By the 1400s, Britain was already a melting pot of indigenous people and the products of numerous conquests and invasions. There were no identifiable separate tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim.
The point Paul was making to the Galatians was that by accepting Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, they are grafted in to Israel and were part of the seed of Abraham. This was important as the "Good News" Paul railed against was Gentiles were told by "Judaizers" they could become part of Israel by undergoing ritual conversion, aka "circumcision".
Galatians 3:16 New International Version (NIV) 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,”[a] meaning one person, who is Christ.
Not to make anyone nuts, but this take on the word "Seed" and "Seeds" is considered a bit dishonest in critical thinking circles. The plural is not "seeds" when it comes to descendants or ancestors. "Seed" in context to Abraham meant descendants, plural. Paul is manipulating the OT story of Abraham. Seed in that context obviously is plural. DECENDANTS. Paul needs his Christ to be predicted by Abraham, which he is not in reality.
So to say "scripture does not say "to seeds", meaning it is singular is dishonest. We don't say "Oh look at the Sheeps" Sheep is the plural. We know there are more than one. If we want to single out a particular sheep, we say "that sheep" Just an example.
In the context, which was not important to Paul his view needed support no matter, the promise was to Abrahams descendants and not to any Christ (Messiah) two thousand years into his future.
It is one of scriptures used by Biblical scholars to show that whatever kind of Pharisee Paul said he was, he did not reason like one in his writings. He pretended to but fell far short of the realities of Pharisaical training in such matters.
The author of the Gospel of Matthew did the same thing in cobbling together a birth story for Jesus out of Old Testament scriptures that never meant what he made them to mean. Paul has done, in this case, the same.
"So to say "scripture does not say "to seeds", meaning it is singular is dishonest. We don't say "Oh look at the Sheeps" Sheep is the plural. We know there are more than one. If we want to single out a particular sheep, we say "that sheep" Just an example."
I was going to say that's probably the dumbest thing that I've ever seen you write but I caught myself. As opposite of what Paul said about Seed, there are many.
You do realize that Gal. 3:16, at least what we have is in Greek and not English, so trying to make a point comparing Greek plurals with how English plurals are spelled is foolishness indeed.
Usually when I hear anything about seeds, it reminds me of Sky Saxon and the Seeds, and their garage-rock classic “Pushin’ Too Hard”. Their follow up “Mr. Farmer” didn’t do so well on the charts, and then they pretty much faded. So, I’d have to go way out on a limb and speculate that calling themselves “The Seeds” didn’t qualify them for the birthright blessings.
"I was going to say that's probably the dumbest thing that I've ever seen you write but I caught myself. As opposite of what Paul said about Seed, there are many."
For a good read on how the Apostle Paul tweeked OT scriptures, making them mean what they did not in original context, to make his NT Gospel see Lillian Freudmann's Antisemitism and the New Testament.
"This is the first book since the canonization of the New Testament which studies its anti-Jewish contents on a thorough, systematic, verse-by-verse basis. The author identifies every misquotation and mistranslation from the Hebrew Bible and rebuts every antisemitic assertion in the Christian Scriptures.
The book examines the historical background in which the Gospels and Epistles were written and how contemporary conditions affected their contents. The final chapter deals with the impact of the New Testament on Jews and Christians for the past two millennia and the possibilities of revising this trend through alternate interpretations.
Contents: When and How it all Started; The Tanakh According to the Gospel; On Reinventing Paul; The Letters that Started a Religion; The Law According to Paul; The View of the Jew in the Gospels and Acts; Where Do We Go From Here?; Bibliography; Indexes."
No one will actually read it of course but at least you know I don't make stuff up because I just hate God and don't want to obey his laws etc. :)
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed [sperma - NN SINGULAR], and heirs according to the promise.
Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed [spermati – DN SINGULAR] were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gen 13:15 for all the land which thou seest, I will give it to thee and to thy seed [spermati – DN SINGULAR] for ever. Gen 13:16 And I will make thy seed [sperma - AN SINGULAR] like the dust of the earth; if any one is able to number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be numbered. (LXX).
“Is this argument a bit of rabbinical casuistry, ingenious perhaps but unconvincing? Does not Paul know that even in Hebrew the word seed is a collective noun, so that no plural is needed to indicate more than one? See Gen 15:5; 16:10; 22:17; 46:6; 2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chron 20:7; Mal 2:15; etc. And to the Greek word for seed, namely sperma, does not the apostle not realize that this words also is a collective noun (Matt 22:24; Rom 4:18; Acts 7:6; 2 Cor 11:22), so that spermata (seeds) would have been unnecessary in any case. Shall we say then that in arguing against rabbinical adversaries Paul was using rabbinical methods that belonged to the exegesis of the happily bygone day and age? How can Paul say that the singular seed indicate one person, namely Christ, when in Gal 3:29 he himself uses that very word in the singular as a collective noun which refers to all believers. Besides, did he not know that the seed promised to Abraham would be “as the stars in multitude” (Gen 15:5; 22:17)?” (William Hendriksen, Galatians, NTC, pp.134-35).
They were for the Jews and Israelites. Jews are still existent as a distinct and separate group, their gene pool having not been so completely diluted as were the Israelites. The Israelites are untraceable today. They were largely assimilated not only intertribally, but also by the surrounding world. Outside of fantasy, there is no racially pure, or near racially pure group of Israelites in existence today. By the 1400s, Britain was already a melting pot of indigenous people and the products of numerous conquests and invasions. There were no identifiable separate tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim.
ReplyDeleteBB
Saved as a favorite, I love your web site!
ReplyDeleteDave Pack certainly wasn't birthed right!
ReplyDeleteThe point Paul was making to the Galatians was that by accepting Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, they are grafted in to Israel and were part of the seed of Abraham.
ReplyDeleteThis was important as the "Good News" Paul railed against was Gentiles were told by "Judaizers" they could become part of Israel by undergoing ritual conversion, aka "circumcision".
Galatians 3:16 New International Version (NIV)
ReplyDelete16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,”[a] meaning one person, who is Christ.
Not to make anyone nuts, but this take on the word "Seed" and "Seeds" is considered a bit dishonest in critical thinking circles. The plural is not "seeds" when it comes to descendants or ancestors. "Seed" in context to Abraham meant descendants, plural. Paul is manipulating the OT story of Abraham. Seed in that context obviously is plural. DECENDANTS. Paul needs his Christ to be predicted by Abraham, which he is not in reality.
So to say "scripture does not say "to seeds", meaning it is singular is dishonest. We don't say "Oh look at the Sheeps" Sheep is the plural. We know there are more than one. If we want to single out a particular sheep, we say "that sheep" Just an example.
In the context, which was not important to Paul his view needed support no matter, the promise was to Abrahams descendants and not to any Christ (Messiah) two thousand years into his future.
It is one of scriptures used by Biblical scholars to show that whatever kind of Pharisee Paul said he was, he did not reason like one in his writings. He pretended to but fell far short of the realities of Pharisaical training in such matters.
The author of the Gospel of Matthew did the same thing in cobbling together a birth story for Jesus out of Old Testament scriptures that never meant what he made them to mean. Paul has done, in this case, the same.
"So to say "scripture does not say "to seeds", meaning it is singular is dishonest. We don't say "Oh look at the Sheeps" Sheep is the plural. We know there are more than one. If we want to single out a particular sheep, we say "that sheep" Just an example."
ReplyDeleteI was going to say that's probably the dumbest thing that I've ever seen you write but I caught myself. As opposite of what Paul said about Seed, there are many.
You do realize that Gal. 3:16, at least what we have is in Greek and not English, so trying to make a point comparing Greek plurals with how English plurals are spelled is foolishness indeed.
Usually when I hear anything about seeds, it reminds me of Sky Saxon and the Seeds, and their garage-rock classic “Pushin’ Too Hard”. Their follow up “Mr. Farmer” didn’t do so well on the charts, and then they pretty much faded. So, I’d have to go way out on a limb and speculate that calling themselves “The Seeds” didn’t qualify them for the birthright blessings.
ReplyDeleteBB
"I was going to say that's probably the dumbest thing that I've ever seen you write but I caught myself. As opposite of what Paul said about Seed, there are many."
ReplyDeleteFor a good read on how the Apostle Paul tweeked OT scriptures, making them mean what they did not in original context, to make his NT Gospel see Lillian Freudmann's Antisemitism and the New Testament.
"This is the first book since the canonization of the New Testament which studies its anti-Jewish contents on a thorough, systematic, verse-by-verse basis. The author identifies every misquotation and mistranslation from the Hebrew Bible and rebuts every antisemitic assertion in the Christian Scriptures.
The book examines the historical background in which the Gospels and Epistles were written and how contemporary conditions affected their contents. The final chapter deals with the impact of the New Testament on Jews and Christians for the past two millennia and the possibilities of revising this trend through alternate interpretations.
Contents: When and How it all Started; The Tanakh According to the Gospel; On Reinventing Paul; The Letters that Started a Religion; The Law According to Paul; The View of the Jew in the Gospels and Acts; Where Do We Go From Here?; Bibliography; Indexes."
No one will actually read it of course but at least you know I don't make stuff up because I just hate God and don't want to obey his laws etc. :)
Hmm sorry Dennis, but I prefer Hoss's interpretation.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I direct anyone who have questions over this issue to check out God's Promise to Abraham's Offspring and the Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange for a more thorough Christian explanation.
Hoss explanation is how i see Pauls writing.
ReplyDeleteThanks Hoss
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed [sperma - NN SINGULAR], and heirs according to the promise.
ReplyDeleteGal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed [spermati – DN SINGULAR] were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gen 13:15 for all the land which thou seest, I will give it to thee and to thy seed [spermati – DN SINGULAR] for ever.
Gen 13:16 And I will make thy seed [sperma - AN SINGULAR] like the dust of the earth; if any one is able to number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed be numbered. (LXX).
“Is this argument a bit of rabbinical casuistry, ingenious perhaps but unconvincing? Does not Paul know that even in Hebrew the word seed is a collective noun, so that no plural is needed to indicate more than one? See Gen 15:5; 16:10; 22:17; 46:6; 2 Kings 11:1; 2 Chron 20:7; Mal 2:15; etc. And to the Greek word for seed, namely sperma, does not the apostle not realize that this words also is a collective noun (Matt 22:24; Rom 4:18; Acts 7:6; 2 Cor 11:22), so that spermata (seeds) would have been unnecessary in any case. Shall we say then that in arguing against rabbinical adversaries Paul was using rabbinical methods that belonged to the exegesis of the happily bygone day and age? How can Paul say that the singular seed indicate one person, namely Christ, when in Gal 3:29 he himself uses that very word in the singular as a collective noun which refers to all believers. Besides, did he not know that the seed promised to Abraham would be “as the stars in multitude” (Gen 15:5; 22:17)?” (William Hendriksen, Galatians, NTC, pp.134-35).