The Death of CGI’s Bronson James
Late last week, the Church of God International announced the death of longtime Pastor, Bronson James. In their In Memory of Bronson T. James, they noted that “Bronson, 76, was a long-time servant of God's people. He was one of the pioneers of the Church of God International ministry. He pastored churches, served for decades on the CGI's Ministerial Council and Board of Directors, and was instrumental in the creation and production of the Armor of God television program. He was hired by the CGI in 1988 to manage the Letter Answering Department, and he continued working at the home office, taking on various other responsibilities, until he moved to Detroit, MI, in circa 2002.”
After leaving the Worldwide Church of God, I had the opportunity to meet Pastor James and listen to him speak and sing in 1986. I was immediately impressed with both his sincerity, warmth, independent spirit, and oratorical abilities. Over the years that followed, I became aware of the fact that Bronson was adamantly opposed to the preaching of Anglo-Israelism, and that he had made his opposition to that doctrine very plain to both my father and Bill Watson. Moreover, as one of the few African American ministers in the church at that time, his open opposition to the teaching of Anglo-Israelism was a source of some difficulty and embarrassment for many of the White Anglo-Saxon ministers within CGI. To his credit, Bronson continued to extend the hand of fellowship to his deceived brethren in the ministry, but he steadfastly refused to preach it to his own congregation or endorse it when others chose to preach it to their congregations.
In September of last year, I wrote privately to Bronson expressing my own strong distaste for the teaching of Anglo-Israelism. I said: “I am of the opinion that this belief has been completely discredited by science, history, linguistics, and Scripture. Moreover, I believe that the underlying premise of the teaching has proven to be racist, and that its disqualification necessarily renders any prophetic interpretation which depends on it to be invalid.” And, although we both understood that correspondence to be confidential at the time, I don’t feel the same need to protect that communication that I felt while he was still living. Indeed, I think that it is more important to make very clear that Pastor James did NOT support the teaching of this pernicious doctrine!
It didn’t take Bronson very long to respond to me. He wrote: “Thanks for reaching out to me! To keep my response short and to the point: I'm in agreement with your correct perspective on the issues you presented. I have confronted Bill on his point of view going back 20 years or more. British/Israelism is totally un-Biblical. I don't teach it or allow it taught in the Detroit congregation. I try to respond to a growing number of Believers in the Body of Christ who see the error of that teaching. I eventually see a split materializing in this matter. But those who hold fast to the Truth of the Bible will not be drawn into this untruth. Thank you for expressing your difference even with your own father on this matter. Be strong in the Truth you know!”
Pastor Bronson James was a voice of sanity and reason within CGI, and he will be sorely missed. Nevertheless, I believe it does a disservice to the man and his memory to gloss over or dismiss his determined opposition to the messaging associated with the teaching of Anglo-Israelism. The TRUTH is that Pastor Bronson James believed that British-Israelism was “totally unbiblical” and should NOT be taught from the pulpit!
--Lonnie Hendrix
41 comments:
British Israelism is racist to the core. I am glad James refused to teach it. It is irrelevant to anyone's walk with God. This demonic lie has created some of the vilest leaders and members in the church. It's disgusting to see men like Bob Thiel, Weston, and some in UCG still claim it is necessary.
I've heard there are people in CGI including some ministers who doubt or oppose the BI doctrine. I wonder if that could be the case in some of the other groups too?
"It's disgusting to see men like Bob Thiel, Weston, and some in UCG still claim it is necessary."
It's useful for directed scaremongering. Any prophecies regarding destructive punishment directed at Israel are twisted to be aimed at the "Lost Tribes", primarily at "the USA and its Anglo-allies".
British Israelism is racist to the core.
Who cares? What's wrong with having a racial identity. Everyone has one. Get off your high horse.
As a conservative, I spent years reading left wing hard and left wing light newspapers in order to understand why billions believe in these ideologies. So I strongly disagree with the author's statement that British-Israelism should NOT be taught by their church. If they want to teach it as untrue, fine, but to refuse to acknowledge it as a teaching by others is tyranny.
Btw, British-Israelism was an official doctrine of the Anglican church during Queen Victoria's reign. Will they hide this from their members?
Armstrong's personal brand of it is also something of a recruiting tool. The hook deployed in chapter 1 is literally "Surely our wonderful awesome stupendous America and Britain are mentioned in the Bible! They must be!" Quite literally licking the patriotic reader's ass before leading them through the rather messy mess that was the "proof".
As a centrist, I read and view a wide variety of materials from all parts of the political spectrum. Experience has taught me that the truth lies in between. If I closed off certain sources, I would be depriving myself of up to 50% the truth.
The problem with British Israelism for members and exmembers of Armstrongism is that it was a profound implement of our spiritual rape. OK, so it may have been a doctrine of the Anglican church during the Victorian era. That would have remained little more than an antiquated factoid if Herbert W. Armstrong had not revived and exploited it in order to control us. The act of knowing it was once a doctrine of the Anglican church is totally benign. Reviving it, blowing it up and magnifying it to manipulate and modify the behavior of people who are looking for spiritual guidance, coercing them to take part in a con to avoid unimaginable consequences is the real tyranny. How would BI even come up in normal conversation, in classrooms, or in news stories? If you made it into a question for one of Jay Leno's old "man on the streets" Jaywalking episodes, how many of the people queried do you think would have ever even heard of British Israelism?
You can't compare allowing it to die a natural death, or just plain not mentioning with real tyrannical censorship, like banning the teaching of critical race theory. As a species, we really need to advance by doing away with the things that hurt and enslave people. Religious leaders and politicians are the ones who want to enslave us, to preserve the tools they use to accomplish this, and to render us into little more than their codependents. I agree with the original poster. Our spiritual rapists should cease and desist from perpetuating one of the impliments of our rape!
Those that don't believe in BI are in fact discrediting most of the Bible, for the Bible was written for the House of Israel and the House of Judah. I have nothing against those that believe differently than I, for I think that this is between Yahweh and them.
Anonymous Monday, January 9, 2023 at 6:56:00 PM PST,
You are free to say and believe whatever you want to say and believe. You can say that the earth is flat and that the moonwalk was a hoax, but the rest of us are NOT obligated to endorse your statements or provide a platform for their expression! As the lyrics to an old Billy Joel tune go, "you can speak your mind, but not on my time." That is NOT tyranny or censorship!
Moreover, just because a large number of people (even a majority) believe something, doesn't mean that it is right! A majority of the people of the United States used to believe that African slavery was right - they were wrong. Also, on this point, what are your sources for asserting that Anglo-Israelism was EVER the official doctrine of the Anglican Church. I don't recall ever seeing it in ANY version of the Book of Common Prayer that I've had the opportunity to peruse. If I'm wrong, please provide the evidence (I'm genuinely interested in seeing it).
Finally, what does any of this have to do with conservative or liberal ideology? Are you equating Anglo-Israelism with conservatism because Glenn Beck embraced it once upon a time? Indeed, if we had to place the teaching on that worn out political spectrum, I would classify it as being a radical departure from the traditional and historical teachings/understandings of the Christian Church (and I believe that would qualify it as liberal in the classical sense of that term).
BI is more than what Armstrongists might acknowledge. There is the essential statement contained in Armstrongist documents and then there is the expansion of that theory from the pulpits and in the pews.
For example, a direct consequence of BI is the belief, from some pulpits and in some pews, that the white settlers who came to North America should have exterminated Native Americans. One must consider the ramifications. To my knowledge this belief is nowhere documented in WCG booklet theology. But it was nevertheless a firmly held view among some Armstrongists. If someone supports this advocacy of genocide, and many did, what becomes the spiritual state and condition of their hearts? This is a wide-ranging topic, and I will take it no further here.
Another example of elaboration or expansion of the BI doctrine is the belief that it is not only about this life, but it extends into the afterlife. You will not find documentation for this idea in WCG archives. It is possible that it was left undocumented on purpose. It does have a history and involves one evangelist in particular, but I will not go into that. What the WCG evangelist taught was that Israelites would forever rule over Gentiles. He based this on Deuteronomy 32:8 as it is mistranslated in the KJV. The phrase "the sons of Israel" should read "the sons of God." So, the evangelist based his theory on a misinterpretation of a mistranslation, but it nicely expanded BI beyond its traditional boundaries and into eternity. To my knowledge, the old, superseded WCG was the only church around to make race, neither grace nor works, a factor in how salvation would happen.
There is quite a "talmud" of novel ideas about BI that were held in a semi-doctrinal state by followers of HWA. I could list a dozen or two from the BI imaginarium. If this kind of creative approach were taken towards the Sabbath, for instance, heads would have rolled. But it affected mostly "Gentiles" and nobody who fancied themselves to be "Israelite" really objected.
Further, someone stated " So I strongly disagree with the author's statement that British-Israelism should NOT be taught by their church."
This was portrayed as a conservative position. No, it is a tyrannical position. Churches should preach what they understand to be the Gospel with a view that there is a history of the Christianity and the church. The mainstream Christian church down on the corner does not have to waste its time on the nonsense of BI just because some fringe group revels in it. I don't know where this commentor is coming from.
Scriptor
I am curious. I wrote an article about the falsehood of BI based on genetics a couple of weeks back and it was published on this blog. No Armstrongists showed up to comment. But now here they are.
A commentor wrote, "Those that don't believe in BI are in fact discrediting most of the Bible, for the Bible was written for the House of Israel and the House of Judah."
Appalling. It reminds me of something said by a buddy who went to AC Pasadena back in the Sixties. He said that the belief then was that non-Israelites, however that was defined, maybe read it as Browns and Blacks, could not attend AC because they did not have the kind of mind necessary to understand and profit from the spiritual education taught there. This quoted statement is illogical, racist and a calumny against God.
Scriptor
Steven Collins book, "The Lost 10 tribes of Israel...Found" is a great book on the subject.
Scriptor,
The folks who make those kinds of statements aren't interested in TRUTH or the evidence to support it. I'm guessing that's why your excellent article didn't elicit commentary from them. There is also a great deal of Scriptural evidence to refute this teaching. Just as they have twisted history and science, they have had to do a whole lot of twisting of Scripture and reading things into those writings that simply are NOT there! The Israelites themselves made the same mistake that these modern Armstrongists make - The Israelites were a tool to further God's plans to save the WHOLE world. It NEVER was all about them! Finally, the Israelites were NEVER lost - they did go through a whole lot of scattering and mingling, but there is NO such thing as ten "lost" tribes!
"Those that don't believe in BI are in fact discrediting most of the Bible, for the Bible was written for the House of Israel and the House of Judah."
The Bible was written for the benefit of all, and God's plan of salvation is extended to all peoples, not just Israel and Judah. God loved the world, sending His only begotten son into it so that all might have the chance to be saved, not just some. The promises of Abraham's seed, culminating in the arrival of Jesus Christ, the Lion of Judah and Lamb of God, was to be a blessing to all the families of the earth, not just some. It is only through Him that all nations or peoples can truly receive the benefit of those blessings. John 3:16; 1Timothy 2:3-7; 1Corinthians 10:11; Genesis 22:18; Galatians 3:16
To promote the idea that the benefit of those blessings are somehow carried and dispersed through imperfect human nations or peoples, who have not only been purveyors of good, but also evil, denies and minimizes the above truth, and at least in part, misses the point of the gospel message. Israel and Judah as a nation repeatedly rejected God, and carried that pattern through to the rejection of Jesus Christ Himself, as both God, and King. John 8:56-59; John 19:14-15
It isn't the human lineage of a people that now determines whether they receive those blessings, but their acceptance or rejection of Jesus Christ, as Lord and Savior, King and Messiah. Galatians 3:26-29; Romans 2:26-29; Matthew 3:9-10
Concerned Sister
Every time we have discussions that touch on race, a bunch of guys always manage to show up in their bib overalls, spitting tobacco juice around. Seems like it wouldn't take much to make them lynch someone.
A cursory view of the past several hundred years confirms BI. In the the late 1800s when there were numerous articles and books on BI, the United States of America hadn't yet burst onto the world scene. It ascendency, together with the Anglo-Saxons possessing all of the worlds sea gates at the end of WW2, should have removed any doubt to BI's validity.
All these anti BI posters are peeing into the wind.
"A cursory view of the past several hundred years confirms BI"
On the contrary. A cursory look at the past several hundred years disconfirms BI. HWA did some Millerite arithmetic and came up with the Seven Times Punishment on Israel. This meant that "Israel" was supposed to begin to ascend around 1800. But it did not happen that way. Instead, France (aka "Reuben") already had the Louisiana Territory in productively in hand before the Seven Times expired - a breach of prophetic arithmetic. The OT and HWA said 7.0 times. The OT did not say 6.83 Times. In his dissertation on the Seven Times in US and BC in Prophecy, HWA does not mention the complication of France once. "Manasseh" received the Louisiana Purchase from brother "Reuben." "Reuben" should have been under punishment until 1800, too. HWA's model just does not fit. And the Seven Times prophecy is fantasy.
Scriptor
Scriptor, it might come as a shock to you, but not everyone who believes in BI blindly believes everything HWA says. We know that HWA has a history of over a hundred failed prophesies, so his claims aren't regarded as gospel truth. We look at our bibles, we look at the evidence, and decide for ourselves.
So, because he opposed one false doctrine of Armstrongism we are supposed to praise him? He stood all his life for all other false doctrines of Armstrongism! He was a false teacher, a heretic, and a cultist.
Mark Wolfe 9:29AM said: “Steven Collins book, "The Lost 10 tribes of Israel...Found" is a great book on the subject.”
I completely agree. His 4 volume set is even more thorough. Mind you I disagree with the BI theory that the British throne is David’s throne and the royal family are descended from David via a daughter of Zedekiah ie Tea-Tephi, which Collins regrettably reiterates.
Anon 5:25PM said: “…the Anglo-Saxons possessing all of the worlds sea gates at the end of WW2, should have removed any doubt to BI's validity.”
In actual fact the BI “sea gates” is another error. The “gates” mentioned in the Bible re Israel’s dominance over his enemies had nothing to do with the sea or “strategic choke points in the sea” like HWA would claim and everything to do with land cities. Thus they were about the cities of Israel’s enemies that he would rule over.
Anonymous 12:45 "Scriptor, it might come as a shock to you, but not everyone who believes in BI blindly believes everything HWA says."
No, it does not shock me at all. BI was imported from a British White Nationalist movement and was mediated to HWA by G.G. Rupert of the Church of God, Seventh Day. At that time BI advocates were, of course, not Armstrongists. So there is no necessary connection between Armstrongism and BI. HWA did add a garnish of his own ideas to the British model.
You state, "We look at our bibles, we look at the evidence, and decide for ourselves." So why not have a look at this:
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2023/01/bubonic-plague-massacres-captive-women.html
No Armstrongists commented on it when it was originally published on this blog a few weeks ago.
Scriptor
Israel’s future
Ro 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Ro 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come OUT of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
The quote above is from Isaiah:
Isa 59:20 And the Redeemer shall come TO Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
Isa 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
Isaiah goes on to say that:
Isa 60:12 For the nation [goy) and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations [goyim] shall be utterly wasted.
This will be the time when Abraham’s great nation will be a blessing to the nations:
Ge 12:2a And I will make of thee A GREAT NATION (goy)
Ge 12:2b ... and thou shalt be (hayah) a blessing (berakah):
Isa 19:24a In that day shall be (hayah) Israel...
Isa 19:24c a blessing (berakah) in the midst of the land:
Zec 8:13a And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the nations (goyim),
Zec 8:13b O house of Judah, and house of Israel;
Zec 8:13c ... and ye shall be (hayah) a blessing (berakah)
"... the way the language of blessing and curse is constructed creates an unmistakable link to another tradition of blessing and curse: the Abrahamic tradition. Although the word pair curse/blessing is typical of the Deuteronomic covenant texts, the verbal phrase in which the word "blessing" occurs in 8:13 ("you will be a blessing") is reminiscent of the promise of Abraham in Genesis 12:2. There God promised to bless Abraham, and he will in turn become a source of blessing to the nations. Zechariah represents a similar trend. The people had been an example of curse among the nations, but they will become a source of blessing to the nations" (Mark J. Boda, Haggai, Zechariah, NIVAC, p.385).
Ge 12:3c ... and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
(Isa 56:6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;).
"Then God stated the highest goal for Abram's calling. All peoples on earth will be blessed through him. The verb may be ... translated "find or obtain blessing." God's primary way of working among the nations is through Abram's seed. Thus, to experience God's blessing, THE VARIOUS PEOPLES MUST INTERACT WITH ABRAM'S OFFSPRING. Having selected one family, God in a sense shows favoritism, but his design is not parochial. God was and is working through one family for the benefits of all families. Through Abram's seed he is achieving his goal in creating the earth, namely, people worshipping only him" (John E. Hartley, Genesis, NIBC, p.133).
Isa 14:2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.
"... according to the prophet's meaning, to be ruled by the people of God is the true happiness of the nations, and to allow themselves to be so ruled is their true liberty" (F. Delitizsch, Isaiah, KD, Vol.7, p.199).
In the Messianic Age, the House of Judah and House of Israel will fulfill the promises to Abraham; this great nation will be a blessing both physically and spiritually to the goyim.
You have to understand that in the wake of MLK's death, many wypipo decided the way to deal with the issue was to stay away from it publicly and try to avoid the topic outside their homes. They brought up.the next generation on those terms. The downside was that this resulted in a bunch of wypipo carrying around a pointless, backlash-ridden defensiveness that many cannot let go of for some reason.
You know folks the reality is that it doesn't really matter if USA and UK are descended from the ten tribes or not.
Why is that? Because since the death and resurrection of Jesus, salvation is available to any nationality on the face of the earth. God can call who He decides.
So while BI may be interesting, and people can speculate where the descendants may be, it doesn't actually affect a thing.
What was unbiblical was the way the church took this belief, in times past, and in some grouping still today, implying that those physically descended from the ten tribes had some sort of advantage.
The Bible shows that it makes no difference what sex you are, what nationality you are, or what 'status' you are (e.g. slave, poor, rich etc), all are equal in God's sight.
So lets put BI where it belongs - something of interest and speculation, but which means nothing when it comes to salvation or any thoughts of 'superiority' or 'inferiority'.
Let's just do with BI what we should always have done. Throw it in the garbage. Granted, some garbage can be interesting, but it is still garbage!
Scriptor
Many topics have been bought up and debated to death over the years. Writer "time will tell's" so called "Mickey Mouse millennium" being one example. So don't expect everyone to jump in every time you bring up some (old) topic.
Well, there is that, but also people tend not to keep track of posts once they are off the front page.
Many topics and doctrines have been refuted and debunked exhaustively. COGlodytes ignore that, and keep bringing up their Armstrongism (the HWAcaca) as if the refutations had never been provided. So far as I can tell, it's twenty three years and counting, and it's very rare indeed when the minds that HWA closed are able to be opened by rational, objective discussion. For years I could not fathom how this was possible, since humans are creatures of logic. Through watching the followers of Qanon, Young Earthers, holocaust deniers, and people of similar ilk, I have gained a better understanding of Armstrongites.
12.50 pm
I strongly disagree. If a person believes in BI, they will experience pressure to
live a Godly life, especially since modern Israels fall and punishment appears near.
People who disagree with BI, do so because they want to live their lives in "holiday mode."
Scriptor,
I thought your article was good, but was turned off by the politics in it and in one posted response that you particularly liked. It really takes away from your effectiveness.
Well, 8:41, from your statement, obviously you believe that the end justifies the means. So, in the code you live by, if a bogus, racist theory falsely induces one to live a Godly (your buzz word for Armstrongite?) life, then it's OK to teach it. I would disagree with you that the Armstrongite life style is Godly. It gives people an excuse to treat nonmembers of the group as less than, versus the way in which members treat one another. It causes people to look forward to horrible things which are supposedly going to befall nonmembers. Boy, that'll teach 'em they shoulda listened to us! It also promotes incredible self-righteousness based on customs and beliefs practiced very rigidly through sheer will power. It blinds people to the righteousness which just seems to almost naturally flow from devout Christians from other churches, such as Catholics and some Protestants.
There are a number of side issues concerning my past article, some of them quite useful, but I am particularly interested in how Armstrongists respond to the data. That seems to be absent. It is as if fact does not matter which is in accord with the spirit of the times in some quarters of America. And BI is not passé if Armstrongists still believe in it, publish it and conduct faux archaeological projects based on it. It is like saying sin is passé because it is an old, time-worn topic.
The Mormons share background with Rupertism-Armstrongism in the Restorationist Movement. They believe Native Americans are descended from Israel. Genetics seems to have made no difference. They have softened their position by saying that Native Americans are descended from a number of sources, Israel being only one. This makes me wonder if Armstrongists have BI under questioning consideration or if they are just going to stand pat. Will the next generation of Armstrongists even care about BI?
Scriptor
There are certain reasons to be open to genetics as a potential source of evidence. But one shouldn't simply discount the skepticism or assume that genetic evidence is more reliable or certain in its interpretation than other kinds of evidence simply because it arises from a scientific field rather than a humanistic one.
UCG new line in Beyond Today: The Biblical Identity of Britain's Royal Family. Huh? The writer disagrees with Eze 21:27.....it (the thrown, oops, the throne) "shall be no more..." b/c how could you give something that doesn't exist?? Answer: Ezekiel 21:27. These HWA clones just also don't believe Ps 89:44: the throne has been cast to the ground. They can't believe the prophecies of "build up your throne to all generations"-Ps 89:4 and "his throne as the sun before Me"-Ps 89:36 are for the future when Jesus Christ comes to rule. Prince Harry? Oh dear I better stop commenting.
7.30 AM
HWA and other groups used terror religion to mold members into Borg drones. The traits of these drones seems identical to the commie's "new man," ie, a willing slave to the state. Christ never behaved this way. He always honored the independence of everyone He interacted with. By contrast, motivation by healthy respect for negative consequences is biblical. John the Baptist in Luke 3:7 stated " ..you brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the coming wrath."
I find it odd that anyone would consider the idea of BI to be racist, provided you look at it from a Biblical perspective.
The thing is, why would you want to be descended from the ‘lost tribes’ of Israel? Because they were a failure. Having agreed with God that they would be a representative nation of God’s way, they didn’t live up to what they had said they would do. Ultimately God took away that privilege to serve Him, and opened up potential salvation to every human being that would respond to God’s calling.
Wanting to be a descendant of the ‘lost tribes’ of Israel is a desire to be a part of a failed nation – a nation that failed the eternal God!
It was only by God’s mercy that He did not bar descendants of Israel from salvation. In His mercy He still allowed individuals of Israelite descent to still have the opportunity of salvation, in spite of them failing God as a nation.
Now having said that, certainly there are people that have completely misapplied the events of history, and feel that it is superior to be descended from Israel. That version of BI you could call racist – but the Biblical version of BI shows that God is a God of mercy, who looks upon all humans as equal, even those that failed Him.
The reality of Biblical BI is that, but for God’s mercy to Israel in allowing them to still have the opportunity of salvation, they could well have been disenfranchise from having a part in the plan of God. But this did not happen, and God has allowed Israelite descendants (wherever they may be), to still be on an equal footing with the other nations of the world.
Yes, God has put Israelites on an equal footing with the rest of the world because God is not a racist.
Questeruk
I think it was always implicit when I was in the WCG that "Israelites" were superior. One evangelist went around the country preaching that "Israelites" would rule over the Gentiles forever. The punishments of God on "Israel" were seen as transient.
Scriptor
Scriptor,
Yes, I agreed that it was often implied by some of the ministry in WCG that the Israelites were superior. I did make that point in my previous post:-
"Now having said that, certainly there are people that have completely misapplied the events of history, and feel that it is superior to be descended from Israel. That version of BI you could call racist – but the Biblical version of BI shows that God is a God of mercy, who looks upon all humans as equal, even those that failed Him."
However my main point is that a 'Biblical' reading of BI (or wherever the lost tribes did end up) is not in itself racist, for the reasons I stated.
Some comments:
Whenever you talk about racial matters it stirs up envy and hostility even if you aren't aware of it.
The Armstrongists, as you like to call them, showed up after you spoke first. This is what wise people do.
BI didn't come from HWA, understand that, he just took it up as a well-known fact because it connected with prophecy (as many did before him).
Today, because of gross apostasy, a lot of you are like Paul, fighting against a truth that you don't want to believe.
Now someone quoted Jer 8:8 but didn't really shed much light on it. A better translation may be: "How do you say, we are wise and the law of the Lord is with us. Did He truly make it in vain? Was the pen of the scribes in vain?" The answer is that it was not in vain and that Christ would come later to magnify it in both letter and spirit.
Some have argued that if we are to keep the whole law (fact is, we aren't), then we need to wear tassels and offer animals. Nonsense. Don't you know by now that we don't command circumcision even if that is in the law? Some parts of the law are to be kept while others are not. And it is Christ who decides that.
Also, someone above said that the phrase "lost sheep of Israel" is just a misnomer. Really? Doesn't he know that Christ used that phrase in Mt 10:6 and Mt 15:24? This is why some sheep don't listen to your lying voice.
Re BI, as I said before, there's plenty of proof out there but today's hysterical critics have a desperate desire to cover it up. You might cite genetics and try to make me believe it but if I quote to you from the lost chapter of Acts you won't accept that evidence. Truth today is now in the eye of the beholder. And to say that the genetic sciences reveal all truth you deceive yourself because the sciences contain some good and some evil from the forbidden tree. Even the great scientists change their theories and opinions.
Anonymous 1:46
In your comment, you referred to BI as a "fact," even a well-known one. It is neither a fact nor is it well-known. Then you express disbelief towards the science of genetics. Science may have been used by men for evil purposes, but this is not a reflection on the scientific method and its repeatable results. You need to give this some thought.
Scriptor
Post a Comment