W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page   Contents Page for Volume  What is New





We Look in a Different Setting at this:



In what follows, there is the matrix of a reply from World Wide Web Witness Inc. to an attack made on certain aspects of a great and renowned people, their history, place and nature.

It was made and presented to us,  on this very important topic, one which is enshrined very often in hate, tilled with evasion and fertilised with provocation. In this way or that, it has been twisted to yield one of the 20th. century's chief follies, and has been one of the cruelties of much of Europe, for centuries. It has been our object, as always, to be precise, accurate and faithful in presenting the word of God in answer to this, so that its full flavour, relish and reality should be felt. When it is not, there is always danger; when it is added to, subtracted from and with or without conscious motive, twisted, it is far more perilous than having a twisted bowel. That can kill now, the other has potential for eternity. Some errors in this field, can rise to the very heavens.

What then is this topic, in this case ?

It concerns the singularly distinctive character of Jewishness, its problems, God's ONE AND ONLY SOLUTION, man's 'solutions' or 'handlings' of it (such as Hitler's famous 'final solution'), its Biblical definition in covenant,  the return of Israel to its place, and in particular the answer to 34 questions put with a very negative thrust.

These 34 queries appeared heavily directed, and were filled with denigration of things Jewish, this people's history, accomplishments and place, but much more interestingly, constituted in their setting, a thrust to dispossess Israel of its promises, and compromise both its logical premises in the word of God, and its locational ones in the world of mankind. It was not a military attack, but a verbal one, and the attack was not least on the very name of the people and what it comprised. It was not quite the normal attack and deserves attention.

This Chapter is properly taken after Chapter One above, which while not a mere preliminary to it, has knowledge for its base, from the Bible, which greatly facilitates understanding here; but it is knowledge which needs to be learned, mastered and applied.

A propos of this, we must focus on a staggering propaganda fact.

It is one of the most amazing inventions of Satan, that God is really not quite ... intellectual; that His words are really mainly value specifications; that whatever He is Himself, His word lacks precise power, decided impact and is merely a guide post in direction, not a mandate for man, not really ... equal to what the churches or the nations or the races or the peoples may INVENT. This sickly and anaemic child of human thought, however,  is a prodigy of rebellion, a product of imagination, contradicts the entire Biblical assemblage of history, proposition and prediction, and constitutes perhaps the greatest propaganda putsch of all time.

Starting from Satan's attack in Eden, and ending in the sublime irony of man's presumption with it to the very 21st century, man's own efforts to run things on such a vacuous or evacuated basis, denying the word of God  utterly, or as here, in practice,  while yet giving it lip service of some kind or other, have gained for him an F fail grade. Man's world is continuing to exist only by divine mercy, partly through the robustness of its original design, and yet as Revelation 9:20-21 make so clear, repentance is hidden from his eyes. The world continues like a drunkard, accosting lamp-posts with a familiarity that contrasts with its knowledge of, or willingness to follow the word of its Maker. This needs to be taken with all the seriousness of the Creator of DNA, of mind which deploys these supra-programmatic resources and the spirit of man, which devotes itself to God or destruction, which uses His salvation for mockery or for deliverance.

Bypassing the traps of dispensationalism and its opposite extremes, and facing this present attack with its political overtones, we seek to consider one thing: WHAT IS WRITTEN, in each of many Biblical contexts interfering not at all, knowing that in the end, their unity is glorious. The Bible AS the word of God is demonstrated in SMR Chs. 1-3, 10 with That Magnificent Rock 5 and many other places on this site. Our current area is WHAT IT MEANS in this JEWISH sphere, to the point of the attack. Avoiding the traps of the attack, which departs from what is written with surmises, simple ingorings and secular additions, we insist on all the Biblical contexts, one by one, and on honouring. It is ONLY when the word of God is interpreted by ITSELF (and which of us likes other views, philosophies, estimates to be used jointly with our words in interpreting them), that there is fidelity to the text, as Proverbs 30:6 exhorts us: Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and you be found a liar. That, it is not to be desired on both counts.

As to this attack, therefore: It is important to see the error of these contentions, as the word of God is for our light, and darkness lies solemnly in the world, its words and ways.  It is felt that the review of this position in this sort of question and answer manner, may prove helpful to some who may themselves  be meeting this kind of contention. Hence there is here provided the reply, substantially that which was given, but slightly revised for our present purpose, and with End-notes added. However, for privacy, which we seek to shield, merely personal elements are removed or modified, this aspect being retained or adapted only as the substance requires. The Excursion in *1 is added to the original letter: for further joy in the word of the Lord, which sings like a harp, this book and that, like the plucked strings with a message of one beauty.

Some may wish also to read: Barbs, Arrows and Balms 13 and SMR Appendix A which relate to the topic in various ways.


Hi Frank Smith.

It is pleasing to hear from you, even if there is work to be done.

I shall answer in the name, and according to the word of Jesus Christ, as my basis, and you must realise, that since He is very much alive, it is merely from a servant of His, that you are hearing. It is HE with whom you will have to do, eventually. It is He who will be at work now. For the present however, let me, a mere minister of His, present an answer.

It is nearly always a much longer procedure, as illustrated in an examination, to answer than to ask a question, perhaps one paragraph to ten pages. However, for your 7 pages, I am giving by way of reply to questions, rather more, but yet as answers to many short questions, in a comparison, very reasonable.

Before, however, you begin the letter to follow, it is strongly recommended that you move to the coverage of the prophet Micah, in Chapter 1 above. THIS IS THE ANSWER TO YOUR LETTER. What follows below is supplemental, and gives you some detail for which you ask, explicitly, though the material is in essence covered in the above Chapter.

While the material in Ch.1 noted above, is not for you alone by any means, in the writing of it, which began before your letter, account has been taken of the general nature your contentions, so that these are fully and repeatedly refuted from the text of the Bible, with a better understanding gained from points of which you seem unaware, or unable to make application.

In view of regrettable lapses from Biblical content and accuracy in your presentation, it appears really necessary for you to do this before you read what is below, if truth is your desire. Until you do this, it will not be appropriate to engage in further correspondence, as words would be likely merely to tumble in confusion, without knowledge. Knowledge is a first essential to informed discourse.

When, then, you have read, Chapter 1, please proceed with the next message, below. It assumes that you have read that material.

You appear, or the author of what you have sent appears, to want to make a number of culturally acceptable points (from the viewpoint of certain parties). Apart from the terminological matters you seem to want to say this, or to approve it, forwarding such things in your paper without criticism:

bullet 1) Judaism is Judaism because it rejects Christianity. (False, as will be shown. Cause and effect are here being confused.)
bullet 2)  Judaism is not the religion of the Bible. The thing bearing that name is a synthetic composite of much not Biblical. (Partly true - it is composite and unauthorised therefore).
bullet 3)  Christianity is Christianity because it rejects Judaism. (False, as will be shown.
Effects and realities are here being confused.)
Apart from that, you want to divide Israeli from Israelite. You can of course. The one term was used in ancient times, the other is common today. Israel is common to past and present, antiquity and the contemporary. Modes of address change, as British, Britisher, and so on. They do not affect the topic, merely indicate the contemporary parlance being used.

The terms do not really relate at all to what you seem to have in mind, as the usage of a secular government is not the criterion for Biblical usage, and the Biblical predictions are not to be found in contemporary Israel as their source, but in the Bible. The Bible, as the above commentary on Micah shows very clearly, and demonstrates repeatedly, deals with the Jewish people as those to return, in large numbers from many places, to the ancient site of Israel. What the secular and still unconverted government of this, for the present, predictively non-Biblical State, calls itself, is quite irrelevant to the point. The Biblical promises belong to them, as shown from the Bible, from its text, whether or not you or anyone else would like to have it otherwise, and even indeed, if some Israelis would like it otherwise!

Both curse and blessing have been the lot of the Jews, as you will find when you study the URL specified, and they occur in the manners prescribed by God. They are not susceptible to simplistic re-enactment, but apply as given, for the sequence given, in the way given. There is no substitute for knowledge; and indeed this is one major reason why the MICAH work has been made available to you, in case you really want to know this profoundly demanding topic, and understand it.

The divine word specifies what is to become of Israel of old, in later times, in subsequent times, and in end times, and this is it. That is all. Call them, or let them call themselves, what you will, what they will, what anyone will. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, and rotting flesh as bad.

In fact, of course, they have called themselves ISRAEL, and whether they prefer this or that adjective is merely a matter of contemporary taste and linguistic peculiarity.

There is more but let us take these prime-time points.


GOD, in Biblical expression, is of a different opinion to yourself/the writer of this material.

In His view, or if you are not aware of who He is, in the Biblical view, ISRAEL is a country which HE DONATED (cf. Barbs, Arrows and Balms 13, which shows just how far from the New Covenant they are, as a nation, and SMR Appendix A, which shows just how near they are to various specifiable promises made in divine integrity and kept by divine grace). ISRAEL is also a people which HE created for a purpose (Genesis 12, 15, 17, Isaiah 43:21). The last reads thus: "This people have I formed for Myself; they shall show forth My praise."

Their peregrinations spiritually and nationally, internationally are all traced out in considerable overall, historic detail (cf. It Bubbles, It Howls … He Calls, SMR Ch. 9). They are given review for you more briefly, in the above reference on Micah, which also touches other prophets.

God then (presumes would you say ?) to tell them their "latter end". Indeed, He marvels and expostulates because THEY DO NOT CONSIDER THEIR LATTER END (Deuteronomy 32:29). "Oh that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!" He considers, you see, that they HAVE a latter end, and that HE SPECIFIES what it is to be. You see this in Deuteronomy 32 and Leviticus 26, traced in stages. He specifies continuity to the end, when He comes to rule (as in Deuteronomy 32:43ff., Micah 7, Isaiah 2, 65). He is determined, HE STATES THERE, to RESCUE them when He sees that their strength is gone, at the end of the traced material, which Paul also cites in Romans 11, as specifically future to his own time, and coming in the very end of the Age.

In Romans 11 also, Paul, a Jew of enormous learning and intimacy with the race’s customs, religious and other, traces out the parable of the olive tree. The Jew provides the basic tree, and the evils they commit in terms of their broken covenant, become the ground of their removal from the tree, while the Gentiles are ‘grafted in’ in terms of what the Jewish ‘tree’ was supposed to do, but did not. The Gentiles were taken and made available by grace, as the Jews lapsed. The tree remains, and is susceptible to the Jews being ‘grafted in again’ as the apostle declares.

Meanwhile, the Jews, the parable in Romans 11 shows, are the occasion, in their fall, for the grafting into the divinely gracious tree, of many Gentiles; and for the time, Israel is blind (Romans 11:25) to their position (as some of your quotations well illustrate! and its government in various ways, linguistic or other, exhibits). This blindness, spiritually, applies, without cease to the nation, whenever it has existed, from that time of Paul’s writing, till the present! However as noted, at the end of the Age they are, says the apostle Paul, to awaken (as shown in Zech. 12:10) and return in large numbers to the Lord. They are to do this with profound repentance for their NATIONAL shame against Christ. For this in detail see The Biblical Workman Ch. 3, End-note 1.

From this it is clear that the Jews are deemed a people, an unchangingly determinable and categorisable people, one genetically continuing from Abraham*A, with whatever admixtures, a people who Biblically OUGHT to have received their Messiah, but a people nonetheless, for whatever reasons they may vary, and with whatever hatred and slander their enemies may tar them, with whatever slime endue, indeed. They are accountable as a people, to God, who made all people and called that nation in particular (cf. Deuteronomy 32:8), just as He specifies their continuance as divine Guarantor (Jeremiah 33) and concluding features as He personally intervenes in the Gentile era (Deuteronomy 32:39ff., Isaiah 66, Micah 7, Zechariah 12). All this is set forth in detail in various places in our site, but you may find it conveniently for yourself in the URL for MICAH as given above.

While then, Israel is deemed ‘blind’, their chronic condition remains as traced in Leviticus 26 far earlier. It has involved a cumulative series of rebuffs, rebukes and disciplines, different from all others in this, that it was specified in detail before it happened, as an example to them, and to all nations.

Since God attributes to them as a people, a certain unwillingness to do what they are told (cf. the evaluation of God in Isaiah 30:8-11), and this is cumulative as noted for Leviticus 26, there are very serious consequences specified.

In the Isaiah verses cited in Ch. 30, God indicates further that their attitude to HIM (that is, overall as a characterisable nation, other than the believing ‘remnant’ as the Bible calls it), is this:

"Get out of the way,
Turn aside from the path,
Cause the Holy One of Israel
To cease from before us."

In spite of its other errors, in some ways the material which you have sent simply to bear this out!

It seems to postulate that the Jewish people are not really answerable, accountable, describable in terms of their Maker, and their Caller; and this, in defiance of the Bible. Now our site is a BIBLICAL SITE and says so. Hence the usage is BIBLICAL. If, since we are human and hence fallible, at any time, we err from the BIBLICAL position, we shall plan to correct this, of course. In the present instance, so far, we find that you are erring from it, not we. Now you do not have to follow it; but there is little point in your being concerned if we do.

Cars go on roads, and we go on the Bible. History goes according to the Bible. NEVER have we found a contrary case, whereas all merely secular and other religious scenarios fail in this. IN terms of historical accuracy, the Bible has no peer, near peer or even any competition. It speaks from millenia past; it happens to this day. Again, on that topic, see the URL given above, as also SMR Ch. 9.

*A As Webster points out in some detail, although there has indeed been some racial mix, there is a core of racial characteristics which are readily specifiable, just as there is a cultural milieu, and a religious series of parties and views, not only in Judaism, but more broadly in the various groupings and leavens within the nation. These tend to cover their culture, past, hopes, condition, position, persecutions, aspirations, differently construed, but with much in common from a common past and vastly impactive religious structure, dissipated in much, polluted in more, though it is.


Webster’s dictionary does not seem to mind our approach to the word Jew. With us it is always defined relative to our stated standard, the Bible. Webster says this: JEW - "after the return from the Babylonish captivity, any member of the new Hebrew state; hence any person of the Hebrew race or people or any one whose religion is Judaism." Hence on this basis, any Israeli of today is a Jew, and belongs to the Jewish people. ALSO (for Webster, as you see, is not narrow!), anyone whose religion is Judaism. Further, the ancient Israelites in Esther were called Jews repeatedly (e.g. Esther 2:5), and again in II Kings 16:6, as in Jeremiah 32:12.

People can ignore that profoundly important historical document, the Bible if they wish, but they cannot invent usage at whim. In any case, the point, as noted is wholly unimportant, since vocabulary does not invent facts, but as here, may simply denote changing styles. In fact, the only change worth noting is the secular Israeli government’s preference, in accord with its secular position, for the differentiation of Israeli, though it sticks with ISRAEL, very rightly, obviously and inevitably, since that it simply what it is.

Now as to Webster, this is the dictionary most famed, perhaps, of all. It also does not hesitate to refer to the Jewish people in terms of the Hebrew race. There is no time specification. The only fact in your presentation is this, that Israeli is the new nuance for the secular State’s adjective. Wonderful! But this has no logical significance at all. Its relevance is zero to any endeavour to divorce Israel from the Jews, the Hebrews, the race, their identity in history and their future in the Bible.

The reasons for this Webster procedure are of course that the Jewish people is a phrase which has a history, and whether you prefer Hebrew (which Webster has here in functional interchangeability) or not, that history gives them a certain distinguishability from others; and the religion gives a more or less independent additional criterion. Now of course the current Jewish State is, as shown in our site repeatedly (e.g. the latest volume), the predicted Jewish People, Hebrew People, but in any case, the Israel of old, whatever terms one may desire, for this or that reason, political, social, polemical, rhetorical and so on, to use. The name has no ambiguity.

Proselytes were always a possibility. That is notable in Isaiah 56:6-7, where the ‘stranger’ who not ONLY joins himself to Israel’s religion and place, but is FAITHFUL to the Lord, is given the most blessed inheritance in the land! There is no change. That has been the ancient manner of Israel, and constitutes part of its being, Biblically defined as here.

Interestingly, I have known one young person who had been brought up in Christian circles, and became a convert to Judaism, say this:

I AM A JEW. The meaning is clear. It is in this instance, religious, not racial. That coincides with what Webster’s dictionary has to say on this. There is a Hebrew people, a Jewish people, and the Jewish State embraces them, though not all of them, since many have not yet returned.


Naturally, since Israel as a NATION is Biblically FURTHER defined as being in direct collision with God, as shown, in fact abhorred the One sent (Isaiah 49:7), and is on record as being contrary to receiving the deity of the Messiah, which is the Biblical indication (Psalm 2, 45 etc. - see Joyful Jottings) which traces and treats such Psalms), then as to that nation, THEIR desires MUST be expected to be contrary to Biblical definition. Therefore if nomenclature comes up, it would be all but predictable that they would not relish the continuity which the Bible ascribes to their identity, and hence the verbal usage which reflects it. To use a different adjective, however, is not a divorce, and the loss of two letters from the end is not a severance but a distinguishing feature of their new, brave face to the world, before their predicted return to their Lord, who gave them special features in the first place.

What you have to try to understand is exceedingly simple: losing God by rebellion when the position is one of divinely instituted and nationally accepted covenant (as in Joshua 24:14-21) is not to lose God by an axe. He CANNOT be cut off. If this covenantally connected people kill the Messiah, yes they come into the brunt of the covenant, its negative features to the uttermost, certainly.

But these are only PART of it. God has unilaterally undertaken, as in Deuteronomy 32, to deal with their rebellion, to remove their pride, injure their dignity, make them a mockery (and your words themselves seem very close to doing just that), UNTIL they being weakened, and having been chastised, return to Himself as in Romans 11, and Ezekiel 36-37 and Micah 7. Your litany of negatives, however exaggerated, generalised falsely and unwary of detail, unsustained repeatedly by anything approximating evidential needs, is wholly irrelevant therefore to their identity, except to confirm it as being at least in trend in some places, with their negative predicted and divinely imposed history!

Further, we are not a citizens of the State of Israel, but of the Kingdom of Heaven (Philippians 3:20), and our nomenclature is here like that of Webster’s dictionary, for precision of speech, and the Bible for accuracy of exposition of it.

So yes, in answer to the question on your page 1, I think I do fully realise what is being said at that point {to diminish the place and the religious significance of the return of the Jews, in these times}, and that it is unhistorical, unbiblical and to my own mind, rather escapist and evasive.

You cannot escape your past by using a word! The essence of the JEWISH PEOPLE according to the Bible (and use ‘Hebrew’ as an alternative, like Webster if you like), is their history of race, place and religion. They, or some of them, may now want to change that, in order to reduce certain elements of their history; or, a particular government of the day may so desire. It is most understandable. It is also most irrelevant to what they are.

God traces HIS PURPOSE, and THEIR PLACE before Him, and those who follow the precise fulfilments of all His statements concerning the people of this land, destined to return to it and perform militarily as they in fact have done (as in Zechariah 12, prior to the conversion to the Messiah specified in the later verses of that chapter), are not likely to disallow the entrancing fulfilments of what is Biblically declared in advance. They are defined, named, historically overviewed, their movements, as if by historical satellite seeing time rather then space, recorded in advance in their vast dimensions, and the overview proceeds with precision, enabling ready charting of the people.

This phenomenon is exceedingly impressive, according to the metier of scientific method. What does it say; what does it do; how do these things relate; and what is the competition… It does what it says, all parts cohere, there is no competition.

As to the Jews, for their part: what the book they took says, happens. Not only does it specify their past, present and future in detail; and yes, for the present, MOST clearly specifies to what extent they will KEEP what is commanded in that book. It also focusses their end-time activities with great coverage, much of which this writer has seen like an opera, in his own life-time. Thus, you or they can say what is desired and simply try to make it happen, make it apply; and, on the other hand, God says what He desires. In this case, DOES happen. It is MOST visible in my own generation, and so to the present.

He has the additional advantage that what He says, always happens, and this of necessity, and that He knows all things, including motives… and indeed, including yours or anybody else’s.

The Bible, then, uses continuity of verbal specification. Political parties or fragments may desire another course, and who would prevent it ? It is their life as this is ours. But those who SPECIFY the BIBLE as their domain, will of course FOLLOW IT. In view of many declivities (predicted - cf. Answers to Questions Ch. 5) and many other places on our site), it may seem to some that Churches no longer bother. This is not the case.

Now as always, there are those who follow the most accurate book in the world. And they are many.

What then do we find ? BIBLICALLY speaking, the Israel of old and Israel of today are one people, with one accountability, and their race is specified through Abraham, and that has long earned and used the term ‘Jew’, though now politically the term ‘Israeli’ is used. This cannot however quash the historic realities, or the Biblical specifications, predictions and fulfilment. ISRAEL it was; ISRAEL it is.

The vocabulary of God is good enough for me. It is also indicative of the factuality of history. It is interesting that in a political speech some years back, Benjamin Netanyahu, who, you will realise, is Jewish, spoke of the immense fulfilments of Biblical prophecy in the case of Israel. In this point, he is right, AND Jewish!

To be sure, the term ‘Jew’ is used extensively in Esther and again appears in Kings, to refer to the race from Israel, and those with it in religion. To institute a divorce from the historical reality is contemporary, but the contemporary without history is mere desire; the facts do not alter. The records do not alter. They cannot be re-written for aspiration or whom, caprice or contention. We must keep to history, to fact, to reality. Modes do not change matters. IN fact, it seems to me little to the point to discuss the words. It is done to help you; but it is the facts which matter. To repeat for emphasis: A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

In mathematics as in history, if you define your terms you are at least clear. Our site is the Bible as made clear, and its meaning is what we trace, using its terms. They are apt, accurate and revelatory of fulfilment.

Now it is of course true that JUDAISM is not purely BIBLICAL (or to be precise, Old Testament) religion. Far from it! NO one here is saying that it is; Jesus did not say that it was; nor did He hesitate to challenge it with precisely the accretions and agglomerations some of which you may have found, which were to become traditions (Mark 7:7), unauthorised and foolish, and making VOID the word of God. Judaism moreover has schools. You cannot just generalise, however accusatory may be your thrust. Fact, specific, elemental, accurate, particular facts ALWAYS matter. What does it contain ? Old Testament plus this, minus that, with distortion, with practices, customs and so on; and with some, more also, yes it is so. It has been characterised from Christ as so. It changes nothing; it makes apparent how just is the judgment of God on their unbelief, which He specifies repeatedly, itemises directly and applies continually.

There is, then, in your approaches here, apart from what will be noted later, their inaccuracy or imprecision, or improper generalisations and applications, nothing to the point at all, concerning our Biblical exposition, the Bible’s statements and the Jewish history, that of Israel which has been, now is and will be. It is all as declared, and Jewish rebellion is simply PART of it, whether verbal, practical or anything else.


Thus the Bible (the Old Testament part) is not excluded, even if other things are included in all forms of Judaism! Its text is indeed, for many, a matter of the most strenuous thought.

The idea that Christianity is such because it rejects Judaism is not however, possessed of any of the measure of adventitious plausibility (because of political interest) of some of your other propositions, even though we could not accept them all from the evidence, and could find no relevance in any.

Christianity is NOT related to JUDAISM at all, except that Judaism, according to our Founder, whom you will know to be Jesus Christ, was a VARIANT from the Old Testament by accretions and dismissals, moral and doctrinal (Matthew 23). Judaism is heresy based on the Old Testament historically, and varied in kind, always rejecting the central theme of the Old Testament, the Messiah to die around 30 A.D. (The Shadow of a Mighty Rock - SMR, pp. 886, re Daniel) , to work miracles, to be denied by the nation, to be killed, to rise again, and to be the crux of all relationship to the only God there is.

That is the DOCTRINAL position.

Historically, of course, Christianity is related to Judaism in this, that one of the parties of the Judaistic religion rejected miracles and another more specifically added traditions, so that they both in measure could be in accord in being against the Messiah when He duly came on the date predicted, and could help to kill Him. (See Luke 11:45-54, Matthew 22:23 to the end. In the latter case, the two parties within Judaism appeared to come in relays, whether pre-arranged or not!)

These parties did not agree with Him, just as Hitler did not agree with them, and Titus, the Roman who invaded Jerusalem, did not agree with them. All parties killed. Christ however healed. That is one difference. Some of course of the Jews DID believe, indeed many thousands, and their history is traced to some extent in SMR Appendix C, to the point. These Jews retained Jewish genes, released themselves the Jewish national religion, Judaism, but at the same time, fulfilled the Jewish book, the Old Testament (it came through them - Romans 9), followed its specifications and did what the Jews were all supposed to do, in terms of the Old Covenant: recognise and receive their Messiah. Some of them were all of the Christian apostles. ‘Jews’ is a very broad term, and generalisations about need extreme care if any meaning is to be conserved.
But what of Christianity ?

Christianity is related to the BOOK GIVEN TO THE JEWS, and noted formally in terms of the Council of Jamnia, referred to as around 100 A.D. That Christian book is now called the Bible. The part with which the Jews were concerned was the Old Testament. This they specified and as Paul, racial Jew and former prime exponent of Judaism says (Romans 9), they duly handed it down.

Those who, following it (as shown in exemplification in Acts 13:13ff.), became Christians were thus faced with change. They would then racially be Hebrews (as the New Testament book of that name indicates); but religiously, they would be Jews (in the religious part of Webster’s definition of the term) no longer, since the nation is the entity specified in the Old Testament to have a beginning, middle and end, rejection of Messiah and so on; and they were in conscience no longer able to participate in it. However, they were still racially Jews, Hebrews. They became what is commonly called now, Hebrew Christians. Congregations of this sort of found quite often.

It is important, factually, to stress this. The Christians who HAD been Jewish in BOTH senses, now divorced from ONE part of it (the national, formal, ceremonial religious part), but could not do so with the other, since it was in their DNA.

Thus the statement presented to us, about Christianity and Judaism does not approximate the truth. The book indicated, from the Jewish part of its assemblage (the Old Testament), THIS: the Messiah! The Messiah, in turn, Himself indicated as declared from Moses that He could (Deuteronomy 18:18ff.), what was to be done, just as Isaiah had predicted.

As forecast, so He did to the uttermost part (cf. Matthew 26:53-54), what was prescribed and it was precisely this which made the Christian position unrebuttable. It made it unique, contemporary, miraculous in foundation, Messianic in consummation, based on the word of the prophets, and on the One whom they predicted. Judaism was merely a partial departure from part of what Christianity accepted, and a summary denial of its basic Old Testament theme.

Christ, however, is the basis of Christianity; predicted in the Old Testament, given through the Jews; fulfilling it; and declaring in Person, in manifest clarity, the very nature of God, acting in His name, and rising from the dead. This is a highly distinctive, personally related religion, as far from being what is not something else as could be. It is what it is, and has the infinite God in its midst, starting with the manifestation of the same in personal power and presence, according to the Book.

However, just as SEEING history is greater than reading about it, in graphic intensity and capacity to realise and investigate, so is Christianity more (but not less) than the Book. It continues what Judaism misused. It shows completed, what Judaism dismissed.

Christ, alive, did what He would, showing not less but more than predicted, an constituting the living basis of Christianity., HE is the foundation of Christianity, and as to Him, He is not a rejection, but an acceptance, living and infinite in wisdom.

Those who as advised from Deuteronomy, to do, followed Him, became Christians. They were following

1) the Old Testament and
2) the One whom it predicted, complete with date of death and
the words which He gave, all as authorised from their own Old Covenant.


One might simply add that it is also not true that Judaism is such because it rejects Christianity, at least not in any definitive sense.

It is true that Judaism, the religion of the nation in its official format, which was instrumental in the murder of Jesus Christ, would of course get deep moral and spiritual wounds from this conduct. That would have an INFLUENCE upon it, without doubt, as any other murder does on anyone else who commits it.

However this is not the same as saying that it is such BECAUSE it rejects Christianity. It represents, as you in part rightly indicate, a series of elements, and of course the Bible was a foremost cultural and religious emblem; and it represents the REJECTION of that Messiah, of which that book in their hands or in their Temple, so dramatically and so often SPOKE. Their own prophets (as in Isaiah 49:7, 42-53, Micah 5) foretold what they would do in this respect…
It is not, then, Judaism because it rejects the Messiah; it rather rejects the Messiah because it is Judaism, a system which Christ denounced for its unspiritual pretensions, gross leadership and travesties of the religion of the Old Testament. What it was, came about in MANY ways; and we need not pretend omniscience. What it did, ILLUSTRATED what it had become; just as Christ’s judgments on it specified this. That generation, He indicated, would have laid on them the iniquity of the many who led to it, which they too well embraced (Matthew 23:27-35).

Christianity is that religion which adopts, accepts and uses the Old Testament as handed down by the Jewish people, as also the Messiah as specified in great detail in that book. In principle, realising the truth of the claim (in Amos 3:5) that God covers in advance the history of the people whom He called of old, the Jews, they can take the Messiah who came, whose date, whose works were as prophetically specified, whose treatment as given, whose death as foretold, whose resurrection as declared from of old, as genuine. His coming and the nature of it is a covered item and cannot thus be fake. If it were, the Bible would have omitted a crucial role for one doing all this and not being it. Its message is the contrary of that. It COVERS the case, and THIS is the case, and what is given does not omit.

The Christian people, then, in part BECAUSE of the book given through the Jewish people, and in crux, because of the Messiah being the authenticated one, in deed and performance, fulfilling the terms of the prophetic identikit, on the honour of God, and the power of His works, the wonder of His nature, receive the Messiah. He was of course specified to be Jewish in Micah 5, and Isaiah 11, and further, to be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5), and work in Galilee wonderfully (Isaiah 8-9).

Christians, in principle, are also those who accept the results of the Messiah, in His salvation as predicted (it quotes in the New Testament from Isaiah liberally in this connection). Christianity, Biblically defined, accepts the bodily resurrection as forecast likewise (cf. Joyful Jottings 25), and the judgment to come.

Christianity ? It centres in the Messiah to replace Moses (Hebrews 1-10), and is the consummation of the religion of the BOOK OF THE LORD (Isaiah 8:20, 34:16), whatever may or may not have been the relationship of this or that part or party, partisan or other, of the Jewish people to that book at any given time. (As you see with Josiah and Hezekiah, that could vary ENORMOUSLY.)

It is a book-defined, and a Christ-defined religion, that started with Genesis as far as the book is concerned, and continued to Revelation, via the Messiah, Jesus. The book is called and received as "the book of the Lord" (Isaiah 34:16), an the Lord as God the Sent (Isaiah 48:16, John 1:1, Philippians 2:1-10, John 8:58). It is moreover a religion which requires a personal dealing with the living Christ, without priests other than He, according to the book, but in a way which is a dynamic reality: Hebrews 8-10, makes the former point, and John 5:39-40 makes the latter very dramatically!

It is as far from rejected Judaism as a Boeing 727 is from a rejected motor-cycle with engine trouble.

Amongst the earliest worshippers of the Messiah were those informed by the book, and conducted to Christ. As even Herod could see, this was the place to find out; and Christians are those who then continue with Him.

Since this people accept the Christ who insisted on the whole and total truth of the Old Testament (as in Matthew 5:17-19), it has all these things, duly interpreted in its own terms and in those of the Messiah, which blend with its earlier statements to perfection. It thus both accepts the Old Testament, and likewise the testimony of Christ (see SMR Appendix  C and  D), found in the Bible including the New Testament, since this too was forecast, and its mode of confirmation was by Christ indicated.

Christianity comes from the author of the Bible, the Sender of Christ Jesus, the only Saviour (as stated in Isaiah 43:8-10 and Acts 4:11-12) who is statedly in the Old Testament, GOD, and in the New Testament CHRIST, God the sent (Isaiah 48:16, John 1:1). He, as specified in the Old Testament would be the case, performed the work through death (Isaiah 53, Colossians 1:22, Galatians 6:14), being in the form of God and becoming man in the most singular event of history, with all its results.

Biblical Christianity focusses on the Cross, on what it signifies, as in Galatians 6:14. The Temple, for all the current contention in those who are not believers, is no longer relevant (SMR pp. 822) being replaced by the Messiah’s ONE sacrifice once for all (Hebrews 8-10). Nevertheless, it still has a form of relevance to the Jewish past.

Many pray for the Jewish People, whatever the current Israeli state may do with terms or history; and many expect the imminent conversion, belatedly, of many of the Jewish People in Israel, as predicted in Zechariah 12:10, Romans 11.

Your reference to cabals and Jews is a strange one {emphasising Jewish schemes for hegemony}, and your generalisations about Jews would need evidence including the acceptance of this statement by all leading Jews - for THEY are part of the WHOLE! Indeed, since it IS a generalisation, you would need far more evidence than that. As to revolutionaries, Marx was a Jew, but Marxism is not the religion of the Jews, nor would masses of Jews, Israelis, consider it. Many Jews, Britishers and Arabs have all sorts of amazing ambitions, and join in this or that clique. This does not make them all one, or the whole characterisable in this or that folly of some.

Such things, qua careless generalisation, are in fact just one more attempt, or at least procedure, to tar a people with the sins of some, without evidence to this effect, simply giving opinions based on the alleged errors of some, in tainting the alleged ambitions of all.

Since it involves in one claim, the demonic, it obviously COULD not be the religion of any Orthodox Jew who accepted the most elementary teachings of the Old Testament. No support is given for the numerous derogatory anti-Jewish statements which you make, which appear on the whole, to be gross over-simplifications of various mutual involvement of SOME Jews with SOME other cultures, and the involvement of SOME Jews with the world seizing efforts in which many Americans also and others, are likewise involved.

This horrid thing is not specifically Jewish, but has a long history of its own. It has close reflections or parallels in some other world religions as shown in Highway to Hell. (Barbs, Arrows and Balms 30). Some Jews certainly may appear in one kind of this pathology, just as some English people, for example, are Freemasons, and some very notable ones! This however does not begin to incriminate the English AS SUCH, in freemasonry, or indeed in any form of world rule, religious or other.

Einstein, to take one example, was almost fanatical in his desire to avoid the use of the atomic bomb for ANY purpose, and was appalled at the devastations which could result. His interest in peace was notorious. Various historical efforts have of course been in fact made by some of this oppressed people (and as to that, see Hosmer’s noted Story of the Jews), whose oppression was PRECISELY as the Lord in the Bible predicted it would be (cf. Leviticus 26).

Zionism in particular has had various approaches. There has been much movement, dissension and so forth, as Ben Gurion’s book, ISRAEL, A Personal History, so precisely attests. Varieties of view were notorious, and divergences of the most radical kind.

It is quite hopeless to vilify everything Jewish or the Jewish religion, to generalise with the generalists and ignore historical method and criteria of judgment, when historically, the land and the people, the passions and the hopes, are diverse, and the site is inhabited by various people of vastly different outlooks, ambitions and procedures. Nor does world Jewry have … accord.

Journalistically, it has been interesting to follow Jewish research on the Jews, and to find the extreme differences among them, about what they mean, should mean, could mean, would like to happen, view as ideals, all in their multiple diversity of view. There are those who want to capitulate to Arabs, or the UN; or to continuity; or to peace at any price; or to some kind of new world; or to being left alone for a while, which of course does not happen, Biblically, because as a nation, they STILL have not accepted their Messiah.

There is no one formula, good or bad, to cover them either as a race or nation, except their past as a nation; or religiously, except in this, that there are various parties and partisans of various positions and panaceas, who argue, it is said, most robustly and at great length! There is a desirable narrowness in not allowing words to flow past facts; and another, as mathematics as in religion, define your terms and stick to the definitions in your resulting work, in the former; and heed God’s definitions and way, in the second, and stick to this (Matthew 7:13-21).

You will notice in the verse 21, the end of wandering around, something the Jews were - if you like - very good at for 40 years in the wilderness, a course not to be desired, one resulting from a lack of faith in reality, graciously made available to them (I Corinthians 10:1-10, Hebrews 4:2). They teach many things, and they are not divorceable from any of them, though guilt may be eternally covered for any of this or any other people who receive the ransom for the purpose, provided (Galatians 3:1-3, Romans 5:1-12).

In conclusion: Judaism is a generic Jewish religion as it continues over time, one imbued with various highly diversified parties of quite different views. It is not only based on the Bible, and Christ made this quite clear.

The Jewish People are a racial people and a national people. They may be, and are Biblically defined. When they depart from their religion, BIBLICALLY they are still Jews, merely apostate or wandering ones. It is the seed of Abraham, of specified world history, which the Bible stipulates. There is liberal provision for proselytes in the ancient definition.

Many Jewish people in power have desired, from time to time, to divorce from God, formally or informally, and this can express itself in vocabulary issues. All people need to be clear, so that those who use the Bible may adopt its terms with its definitions, when expressing themselves as so based. To understand them, you need to know what is in fact being said (as by reading it! and being intelligently and accurately able to cite it), and to compare it with the Book.

There is no greater fact, in terms of scientific method, known to this author, than that several millenium in advance tracing of the point of origin to point of restoration, nationally and then religiously of the Jewish people (as in particular, for example, in three steps in Ezekiel 34-37 - Messiah, restoration geographically, restoration spiritually). One should add that not less is the Biblical precision in its creation account and its various testable propositions.

Let us however keep to our chosen point, the Biblical account of the Jews.

Many elements of this are exhibited in stark detail in many places on our site (cf. SMR Chs. 8-9 esp. 9). By contrast, NO science has continued unchanged in its claims and statements and declarations for anywhere NEAR so long as the Bible has, and has, in particular on this comprehensive topic. This helps to exhibit the dignity and power, authority and historic uniqueness of what is before us in this people, relative to what the Bible declares of them, what they are, have been, how they began, how they continue, what critical points arise in their career, how it will end, and with what events of note.

Further, it is far harder to predict the actions of peoples with wills, than that of material things. God has spoken the last word on the subject, as also the first. The Jews are back as predicted, have become a nation SUDDENLY as predicted (Isaiah 66:8-9, prior to the devastations to be wrought), indeed they have even called themselves ‘Israel’; and they are to be attacked as predicted in Ezekiel in a latter times event (Ezekiel 39:8). What they rejected is specified in many places, not least Isaiah 52-53.

As to their return from the penalties imposed, the destruction of their city (Daniel 9, Matthew 24:1ff., Luke 19:42ff.), it was not only to be dramatic, but contested, not only contested, but a matter of triumph over vast arrays of power. They were to become a hot item then, a burdensome stone to all who attacked them and Jerusalem; and this of course is precisely what has happened (Zechariah 12, stated BEFORE the mass conversions to their Messiah, who is there depicted as having been pierced).

IN CHRIST (Luke 13:1-3, John 8:24).
Is it there, or vacated, ignored ?

The Jews, then, in this latter end time before the return of Christ (as in Zechariah 14), WERE to be enormously successful in sustaining their place, against vastly numerically superior enemies as in that context also (Zechariah 12); and they have been. Jerusalem was to have been divided in two in these conflicts (Zechariah 14) before the return of the Messiah; and it was so divided. The Jews were eventually to return, and not only this, regain power over the city of Jerusalem (Luke 21:24) and this they have done.

Their sins, like those of all men except the God-man, are varied.
They are not fully universalisable, for "we have turned, every one to his own way", as the Jewish prophet Isaiah is inspired to note in Isaiah 53.

Further, as we have often noted on our site, MANY Jews are Christians, and ALL the apostles were JEWS, yes all CHRISTIAN apostles were Jews, and ceased to be Jewish only in religion, since the nation took a particular stance on Christ, which they neither did not could share (as in Acts 4:19ff., 5:29ff.). Jews have been extraordinarily variable, many following Christ, many some form of Judaism, many in varied hues of thought and folly, like the Gentiles in their own measure; but the NATION ISRAEL does not accept Christ, the Messiah. In this, there is a uniformity, not of all Israelis of course, but of governmental proclamation and indication.

All the material noted here is extensively supported on our Site, where you can, if you wish to be studious, study under JEW or ISRAEL the hundreds of references. In no small measure, these are presented to do one thing, show in Christian Apologetics, that what the Bible says, happens, has happened, is happening, and must happen. There is nothing like it. It is NOT the religion of the Jewish People, nor of the Israeli Government; and it was not ACTUALLY the religion of Israel in Christ’s time, for otherwise He would not have been crucified, but recognised by the authorities, as He was by thousands of the Jewish people of that day, in Israel.

Indeed, the religion of the Old Testament was so far from being that of the Israel of Christ’s day, that the penalty of destruction of their symbolically prepared temple, followed their murder of the living Christ, of whom it testified. Thus, as Christ, with Daniel in fact predicted, after the death of the Messiah, with divine justice came the devastations to be wrought on Jerusalem and from Christ’s mouth, on the Temple.

NOT having Christ as your Saviour is as dangerous to Jew, Arab, Englishman, American, Australian, as to the Jew who follows his nation, his own thoughts, or his own philosophies (and there are of course many famous Jewish philosophers from various ages, with very varied thoughts). Trying to call the shots for God is perilous. It is mere mouthing. What He says, goes; and what He says about the children of Abraham, and the successors of those who crucified Him, goes, is going and will go. It is just a matter of opening the eyes, first on the Bible, and then on the world.

We at World Wide Web Witness Inc. teach what we find in the Bible, defend it with reason and show by reason that the Bible is of necessity the word of God (see SMR Chs.1-3,10 for example). In so doing, we teach of Israel that:

it is a God-guaranteed people,
once living in the covenant,
who violated it, were subjected to its curses, and
continue without the Lord;

who are by divine faithfulness to repeated promises back in their land,
are defined Biblically as being allotted this place,
have fulfilled all the negative as well as the positive statements of the Bible concerning them,
are fulfilling them,

and who without merit as a ground, and in fact contrary to DEMERIT,
have been blessed in this restoration,
though with much travail as they continue outside their own Messiah -
to whom in large numbers they are next predicted to come;

while also, they are to be subjected to massive attack,
in which God Himself is most interested, and of which He has millenia ago, indicated the outcome.

What it says, we teach. What it says, we see. Bear this statement in mind with the answers below.


(For the original text of these questions, see  *1 below)

Some of these questions are close to repetitious and thus in answering thoroughly, and pointing out results en masse at times, it seems best to cover and recover a point, though this is not always done. This is one of the consequences of presenting to us, so much, so suddenly, with so little explanation and background.

It must be said that no literature can be understood without study.

Hence all your apparent attempts to divorce the Jewish people from the Jewish people, by showing they did not live up to their Jewish (divinely provided Jewish) provisions, are quite in vain. The curses which they inherited according to the religion of the Jewish people, are part of the history of the Jewish people, and hence part of the history of the same. They even HELP to DEFINE them. Leviticus shows that for you.

 Your 34 Questions, now, answered in Biblical context:

Question 1). Have the Jews been a blessing to all nations?

Ans.  1) Yes, because the Messiah was born of a Jew, and He is the truth, the only salvation, and His is only verifiable religion, never falsified, always verified, alone capable of providing truth as demonstrated in SMR Chs. 1-3, Barbs, Arrows and Balms  6 and  7, and elsewhere.

Also, yes, because they are an object lesson for good and evil: for the trustworthiness of God in bringing them back to their land, precisely as He promised, DESPITE their unfaithfulness (as in Ezekiel 36,37) so showing all the nations, as God says in those chapters, the power and wonder of His word and name (Ezekiel 36:36). That too Is a blessing, and as far as this writer is concerned, a prodigiously important one. It is a verifiable and concrete illustration of a fabulously rich aspect of the knowledge of God: His mercy, reliability and His discipline.

Question 2) Have the Jews been "Circumcised In The Heart?"

Ans. 2) Some have been. In some periods, there was great devotion and revival, and this was their place (Joshua 24:14ff., II Kings 18ff., II Chronicles 34:32ff., II Samuel 7); but very often they failed. This is a question you may wish to ask of yourself, since you ask it of the Jews. Some have not been. God condemns them for lacking this quality in Jeremiah 9:26. The negative for many of the Jews and for much of their history, is divinely announced, and is one of the two possibilities brought to their attention from Leviticus on, and in Deuteronomy 27-28 as well. There Moses even used two mountains, Ebal and Gerizim. The one was the site for the cursings, the other for the blessings. The result merely affirms their intimate and special relationship with the Lord, the more clearly, dramatically and characterisably.

Question 3) Do the Jews glorify Jesus Christ?

Ans. 3) The apostles were Jews, and glorified Jesus Christ. Thousands of Jews at Pentecost and thereafter, and now, do glorify Jesus Christ. Jews have been amongst the most amazing geniuses, and Einstein’s contribution helped to end World War II. It did more, but not less. There are then varieties in this beliefs and accomplishments, but as to glorifying God, the nation does not do so in that it rejects His ONLY appointed salvation, at this time. (As to Einstein, he at least SAW that truth REQUIRES a source that man is not, per se, in himself - cf. SMR pp. 299). So it was predicted that it would fail; and that Christ would not (Isaiah 49:7, 42:1-4). There fallen role, spiritually, has been long as Hosea predicted in Ch. 3.

Question 4) Do the Jews declare that Jesus is God?

Ans. 4) Once more, then, it is the NATION which does not at this crucial level, glorify God, just as was Biblically predicted for this period (Zechariah 12:10 follows great wars in the defence of Jerusalem, and for Ezekiel's display on the point, see SMR Appendix A), even though the Jews are now back, as again Biblically predicted. Yes, and indeed, they killed their own Messiah, as Biblically predicted (Daniel 9, Psalm 22, Psalm 2, Isaiah 52-53, 49:7). This bifurcation, once again, merely affirms what the Bible says, with precision, about their performance.

Question 5) Do the Jews show forth the praises of Christ, God's Son?

Ans. 5) As above.

Question 6) Have the Jews carried the message of "personal" and "national" Salvation to the ends of the Earth?

Ans. 6) As above.

Question 7) Do the Jewish people have God's Spirit in their hearts?

Ans. 7) Yes, in many cases, notably Paul and his various associates, and a vast army of those dispersed as in Acts 8. The nation did not, as predicted; many did; as predicted. Again, the folly of generalising is apparent. Some do; some do not.

Question 8) Was the New Covenant (Testament) written to Jews OR ISRAELITES and what is the difference between the two?

Ans. 8) It was written to all peoples (Luke 2:28-32), as Christ of whom it is written was for all peoples; and Christ went to the house of Israel FIRST (as in Matthew 15:24-26).

As Jews are part of all people, and Israelites are so also, it was written to both as well as to all others, including whatever race to which you yourself may belong. The apostle Paul discourages arguments about words (I Timothy 6:4) instead of discussion about the substance. The term ‘Israelite’ was often used in the Old Testament of members of the nation of Israel, and the term Jew, as in Esther, is used readily of people who, through race or religion, are of this temper of heart and disposition. Whatever word is used, the Gospel was to any, to all, with new or old language, this or that intonation, so long as the meaning is there. Only in prophetic form was the New Covenant written to the Israelites of old, in that frequently found usage (as in Jeremiah 31:31ff.).

Question 9) Are the Jews the "lost sheep of the house of Israel?"

Ans. 9) No. The "lost sheep of the house of Israel" in the case mentioned to the Syro-Phoenician woman, cited above, are obviously those OF the Jews who, not having the faith in the Lord which would lead them, like Simeon and Anna in Luke 2, to recognise the Lord, were still outside the kingdom of heaven. Christ in the nearby Syro-Phoenician area (Matthew 15:21-28), indicated that SINCE He was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, THEREFORE, He could not accede to her request. It was only when she drew a picture of little dogs under the table getting the crumbs, that this lady could receive help.

Those were they, just like those in our own country now, who though they might have known much about it (or not), had not to that point repented of their sins of judgmentalism or whatever else, and in the love of Christ, been accepted, redeemed freely and forgiven; they had not been adopted, sealed by the Spirit as in Ephesians 1 and translated into the kingdom of heaven. The house of Israel, ITS lost sheep is quite demonstrably therefore, the JEWS. The same phrase is used in Matthew 10:6, in line with the injunction NOT to go to the Gentiles, no not EVEN to Samaria, but RATHER to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This makes the point to the contrary of what you are apparently in vain seeking, and it is made very dramatically.

Question 10) Are the Jews the "children of God, scattered abroad?"

Ans. 10) No, assuredly not. The Jews, the nation, are what we have found them to be in the dictionary and in the Bible, and are a disciplined people, with a Biblically defined past and future; and through the free grace of God, already recipients of part of this grace geographically as in Ezekiel 36-37. They are not however yet converted, and hence not the children of God at all. As this is to speak of the NATION, we noted that the individuals are whatever they may be; and it is ill-advised to generalise in such matters, being merely one form of inaccuracy.

Question 11) Are the Jews the servants of God?

Ans. 11) As for 10). God does on occasion use the term ‘servant’ unusually, as when He called Cyrus a servant of His, though statedly, that king did not KNOW God. In that sense, He fulfilled what God wanted, and served Him, though not knowing Him in the heart. However, apart from such usages, they are not at this time, so, as a nation.

Question 12) Are the Jews a Holy Nation and People?

Ans. 12) As for 11).

Question 13) Are there any Jews mentioned in the "faith chapter" of Hebrews 11?

Ans. 13) "The Jews" is a strangely inadequate term for the task assigned here. Many Jews are mentioned in that chapter, such as Moses, Abraham.

Question 14) Are the Jews a righteous nation?

Ans. 14) Assuredly not, since they broke the covenant and killed the Messiah, with help from the GENTILE governor, Pilate. However, there was a different earlier time (Isaiah 26:2), where "the righteous nation that keeps the law" is referred to. Even so, this was a variable indeed, and often it was simply a believing remnant, as noted in Micah, who were the operative, or active ingredient in this regard. Now of course, they are afar off, as predicted.

Question 15) Are the Jews bringing forth the fruits of God's Kingdom?

Ans. 15) They are bringing forth the flowers and trees predicted (cf. SMR pp. 790ff.), but again, the terminology used is here clumsy. Spiritually, SOME Jews are, MANY are not; and the NATION is not because of its OFFICIAL unbelief in Jesus the Messiah. ONLY the Messiah could save such a people (Isaiah 41:26-42:6), and ONLY when that predicted assembly of Jews comes back as in Zech. 12:10, repenting of having put Him to death, will they, as others, find that "He made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him" - II Cor. 5:21.

Question 16) Are the Jews kind to strangers in their midst?

Ans. 16) Sometimes this is the case, as a missionary book I have been reading attests.

Question 17) Are the Jews called the "children of the living God?"

Ans. 17) It depends what you mean. Hosea 1:10 assigns such a title to the people addressed by Hosea (Judah and Israel), in terms however of a remnant of this people as defined (Micah 5:7,8) who after much discipline, exemplified in the harlot and her history as noted in the book of Hosea, after a long time, will come to faith in Christ. Your terminology in these cases is rather like using millions of dollars signs for a boy’s pocket money. For the task in hand, it is too general, and therefore not apt. Is it possible you are just using what someone else wrote, in these questions, without much knowledge even of the site to which you are addressing them ?

Question 18) Do the Jews admit that they are not God's People?

Ans. 18) They vary enormously. Generalisation would be ludicrous. There are many ferments at work in their midst.

Question 19) Do the Jews have all of God's Word?

Ans. 19) They normally COULD have it; and it is doubtless available within the nation. If however you mean, or whoever wrote these anomalous questions means, do they believe it as a NATION? NO. Why ask ? It is not a matter of difficulty. Do many believe it as individual Jews ? But of course, for there are many Hebrew Christians. For now they are "blind" as Paul specifies in Romans 11:25, awaiting the UNTIL … to which the apostle alludes.

Question 20) Are the Jews a Great and Mighty Nation?

Ans. 20) They have fulfilled that assignment under David and Solomon especially, a king whose exploits are being increasingly uncovered archeologically, and whose empire was very considerable, his organisation, his commerce as well as his wealth. The whole evoked the almost unbounded admiration of the great Queen of Sheba, bearing her great gifts.

NOW they are not at all such; but with the power of God gratuitously
behind them BECAUSE He has taken pity on His name, as He stated
in Ezekiel 36:21, great victories, amazing ones, have been accomplished
as predicted in Zechariah, with absolute precision by GOD.

These have been against those seeking to push them into the sea, and such things, coming with mighty power and much money. When a mouse can beat many cats, it might be thought of as a mighty mouse; but this is not so here. It is the LORD who has undertaken as He states repeatedly, from Deuteronomy to Zechariah, from Micah to Isaiah (Isaianic Excursion of Scoop of the Universe 47).

This guarantee is spelt out not only in Jeremiah 33, Deuteronomy 32, but in Isaiah 54:4-13). Though as the very preceding chapter in this prophet depicted, they behaved with the uttermost shame, in slaying their Messiah, esteeming Him afflicted of God, even though He was wounded to cover transgressions: yet God in His faithfulness sketches out the everlasting mercy to be shown, when, despite the long sufferings to come, they shall, as Hosea so dramatically illustrates, come back to their land, and to their God.

Similarly in Isaiah 44:6, the Lord is shown as the Redeemer of Israel, asking them: "Have I not told you from that time, and declare it ?"

When you are looking at the things of the Lord, it is well to remember II Peter 3:9! HE does not need to hurry.

As repeatedly, then, He here in Isaiah as in Hosea, as in Micah 7, identifies Himself, them, their history, His intentions in the very face of their conduct, all in due time, all by His own redemption, all by the uttermost certainty of promise, all as in Isaiah 66, in Zechariah 12, as in Ezekiel, where on their return, there is a conflagration when the Lord intervenes on their behalf, and the Gentiles rejoice with their restoration.

The issuance of these predicted battles following their return to the land, after their disastrous dealing with the slain Messiah, was to be after a little while, this: IT would be a nation not again to turn to idols (Ezekiel 37:23), and one to have the Messiah Himself in their midst (cf. Zechariah 14:5). This is seen also in Zechariah 12:1-9, and then in 10 for the second step. This is soon to be, as in Romans 11, Luke 21:24.

It cannot too much be emphasised, however, that ANY greatness in ANY nation or people or person is ONLY from the work and activity of the Lord, for as Paul the apostle declares, "I know that in me, that is in my flesh, there dwells no good thing" - Romans 7:18. It is always, for one, for any, for all, derivative, a matter of "Christ in you, the hope of glory" - Colossians 1:27. Reflect on this for it is necessary for you to see the divine perspective when seeking to interpret the word of God.

Question 21) Do the Jews possess the "gates of their enemies?"

Ans. 21) Not entirely. They possess a good many of them in Jerusalem, however, and in Israel currently. Since they are not yet AS A NATION converted, their turmoil is added to the amazing and predicted defeats of their enemies.

The predicted scorn and scoffing, which your questions do surprisingly seem to incorporate as an illustration of this phenomenon, was indeed to be suffered for their predicted breaches of covenant; and their return as a specifiable nation of Israel, also was to be performed; as also the triumphant wars, which the Lord has Himself in faithfulness to His word, secured for them, now they are after so very long, back to their "apportioned" land. It is a series of precise things particularly converted, like chemical equations. There is no one to hold all! It has to be studied, like anatomy. You do not just attempt to GENERALISE THE BONES. This is the problem inherent in you form of question. The terms are too vague, too general, are not apt to the point you make

Question 22) Are the Jews a "company of nations?"

22) It would be odd if, at this stage in their historical pilgrimage so often traced proleptically in scripture, they were. They are to become ONE NATION by divine decree (Ezekiel 37:15-22). As noted, God ALWAYS fulfils His word, not yours, or that of some anti-Semite, or other position-taking approach. He HIMSELF speaks, and He Himself fulfils what HE says.

Kings of course came from Abraham, through some of his children, such as Ishmael, who was not joined to the covenantal line. It is not merely Abraham who is the criterion of the race, but the line God chose through Him as indicated specifically in such scriptures as : Genesis 21:12. In the very topic of Ishmael being discussed, the divine message is that this one is not the line, but that Isaac, child of divine intervention, is to be the one. ALL the nations of the earth, however, find for themselves the fulfilment of the promise of Genesis 12:3, as noted in Christ, the promised seed. This is the Biblical position, incontestably clear. Re-writing the mind of God is scarcely history, and smacks of profound presumption, to say no more! The Bible is not available for writing; it is written.

We are looking at the Book. This is what it says. Exponents of it say as it says. Making war on the God of the Bible is not new. It is the alternative to accepting what He says.

Question 23) Are the Jews above all people in moral excellence?

Ans. 23) There is no evidence for such a proposition, though some have been amazingly philanthropic, some exceedingly industrious, clever and so on.

There were indeed times when, as noted in an earlier question, when they sought and were wrought on by the Lord, and made an impact, were geared by the greatness of God, and extinguished, as with Josiah, the evils, giving a fine example to the nations, as also with Hezekiak (and in his case, the Lord in perhaps a prelude to what is soon enough to come, they were used to give an example of what the Lord in His power is prepared to do to those foolish enough to challenge His people, who wait for Him).

The slain of the aggressors against Israel were many when Hezekiah went to the temple and the prophet, to find the will of God concerning this bombastic, God-defying braggart, as Sennacherib the Assyrian, appeared to be! Where did the power come from ? from the Lord who was pledged to hear, who saw their zeal, and the impudence of the enemy, and acted, as a signal to all time.

Question 24) Are the Jews today called through Isaac?

Ans. 24) Again, your terminology is inadequate, and vulnerable to illicit generalisation to the point of being almost meaningless. "The JEWS" ? They are called through Isaac if by that you mean, Are genetically definable Jews the offspring of Isaac: that however is almost an identity proposition.

If however, as would seem more likely, you mean, Are they of the faith of Isaac ? again, the terminology is inadequate and blunt for the question. "The Jews" ? Some are, some are not; the nation is not. The racial criterion however is the divinely instituted one for the blessings to be bestowed in God’s own way and time, even if, like the harlot in Hosea, their degrees of rebellion have been almost unbelievable, and their hardness of heart as a NATION; and to this race God is expressly committed to take just such steps as in Ezekiel and Micah, are traced, indeed as in Genesis.

Question 25) Have the Jews ever lost their identity?

Ans. 25) No, although they have suffered grave dangers of complacency in Babylon, of simple physical extermination by Hitler, later than he, of extermination even of their extermination-history by some seemingly fanatical persons, and now of their place in history by others who seem unable to focus on the simple promises of God. In such a case, it is as if it is imagined they cease to be under the covenantal curses because they are strong, or long; or to be under the divine futures, because these are long. Indeed, one is forced to wonder how much of the actual Bible such questions imply, as they appear to ignore basic principles, and to add ones hostile to Biblical doctrine in both Testaments!

As Paul makes clear in Romans 11, patience is necessary. God is not to be hurried. They are still all too readily recognised for their own safety. The promises of Deuteronomy 32, Jeremiah 33, Ezekiel 36-39, Micah 7, Isaiah 54 do not cease to apply, and their referent is still as clearly defined in unique characteristics of their past, in such places, as it always has been.

Question 26). Have the Jews ever been called by a "new name?"

Ans. 26) NOT as a nation, since this is for the time WHEN THAT IS APPLICABLE AS NOTED ABOVE. It is, nationally, not before that.

In the meantime, of course, as in Isaiah 65:10ff., they bear the curses, while those individuals who, Jew or Gentile, take the new name (Isaiah 62:2, or "another name" - Isaiah 65:15), being grafted into the Jewish olive tree, flourish in spiritual things.

However it is unwise to be ignorant, as Paul states in Romans 11:25ff. also, on this point: that blindness IN PART (you see there how HE avoids this anomalous and injudicious trend towards explicit or implicit generalisation) has happened to Israel. It has done so, the apostle declares, UNTIL … events come to end this state of affairs.

Then, when they are returned, as Paul indicates, it will be as "life from the dead" (Romans 11:15). If their falling away, says he, was occasion for blessing for the Gentiles; what then will their return be! What but life from the dead!

What then is the case when their "acceptance" to use the term of Paul, arrives ? Then all who come to Christ by faith at that time, will, with all who have already come, have the new name promised. No race has it for a trade-mark, none is excluded, and God takes His people when and where HE SAYS. It is well to be clear that when HE says, HE ALONE is God. No racially inclined programs are available to remit His word; and if He prefers to bring the Jews after their blindness in part until a given time, that is His affair. We cannot exclude what the Lord includes.

It is most unwise to be ignorant here, as Paul indicates. " I do not desire," says the apostle, "that you should be ignorant…" About what ? the temporary blindness which is merely a phase before the regrafting, or "acceptance", the consummation for Israel.

Question 27) Are the major heathen nations aligned against the Jews alone?

Ans. 27) This question is odd. They are not aligned at all, except to the extent perhaps that the UN makes various anti-Jew and other alignments. Increasingly of course, as often shown on this site, the nations of this world become aligned more and more against God in their politics, education, religions, pseudo-science and so on.

Again, on alignment, many nations of Islam in its pan-Islam pact of 1991 in Teheran, and its declarations of last year, are aligned indisputably and direly against Israel! With their money and oil, their vast lands and ways, they pose no less a threat than they did in 1948. If it had not been for the dismantling of the Gulf War, giving protection to fulfil divine undertakings, what might have been! But then it was not. God is always reliable, to chasten and discipline as the Jews found out! and to bless, even in that preparatory way of which Paul speaks in Romans 2:1:

Question 28) Are the modern day Jews described as "a great lion?"

Ans. 28) One wonders why you are interested. Actually, in Zechariah 12 it is a very different situation from the one so often and so ineptly introduced in these largely irrelevant questions (and for the underlying reason for that degree of irrelevance, see the URL given at the outset, namely http://webwitness.org.au/galevents1.html). It is the LORD who is HIMSELF the LION OF JUDAH (Revelation 5:5), being born in Judah, and it is HE who so acts, a point His enemies who trade on His longsuffering have often lived to regret, and died to ponder... yes for death on this earth is by no means the end (Mark 9).

As Moses makes so clear in Deuteronomy 32, Israel was STRONG and mighty when they abided in the LORD, for HE is; but when they rebelled, even to the uttermost, why then the reverse applied, and their Friend turned to reprove them. If God is for you, who can be against you, but if God is against you… It is well to make peace with One who IS love, and is not to be subverted, but is the truth (I John 4:7ff., Colossians 1:19-23, John 14:6). It is well for them, for you, for any. It is well if you have the blood of Christ by faith in Him, then to consider His commandments, for they are not grievous, and include this: Judge not, that you be not judged.

Question 29) Did the Jews deliver Jerusalem from the power of the heathen?

Ans. 29) It DOES say of the TIME WHEN (as in the last few decades) Jews will, in their land, repel invaders, that "he who is feeble among them in that day will be as David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the Angel of the Lord before them". It is GOD who ALONE will be glorified, not anti-semites or semites; but both will be put firmly in place (Isaiah 2:17), if they have pretensions to glory of their place, race or person. God however is committed to doing great things; has in MANY things already done them, for Israel in my own life-time, with customary precision.

Question 30) Has the Jewish "people" ever had the name of "Great?"

Ans. 30) This too is a strange question, like asking is 2 + 2 = a. Had the ‘name’ ? Where ? It is GOD who has delivered, as He predicted, Jerusalem from the NATIONS, from the non-Jews, to whom it was given when the Jews lost it, as in the Leviticus 26 prediction. Though many now have expressed admiration and amazement at their doings in the 20th century, in battle, it is in fact as predicted, a work of God!

In addition to scheduling their downfall, however, He specified dimensions of various kinds in the next steps in the scenario. Thus Jerusalem would, at a certain point to come in history, as Christ spoke, in Luke 21:24, be no more be "trodden down of the Gentiles". This is now is approximately the case, again verifying that God does what He says, OF what He says, keeping His definitions both clear and checkable.

Deuteronomy 4:6-8 would, however, seem to imply such a term as you use. There God attributes to some, the saying, "Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people!" This, to be sure, was to occur IF they kept the way shown. The Queen of Sheba was, perhaps with this in background, exceedingly impressed.

However, in actual fact, as indeed Deuteronomy 4 implies, the stress is always, whether for Christian or church or Jew or Israel, that it is GOD who brings the power and the glory, to whom one must look, and it is GOD who appoints Jew in Daniel in Babylon, or Israel and Israelite in the Middle East, with this name or that, but the Abrahamic line according to unqualified promise (Genesis 17), to WHATEVER HE SOVEREIGNLY SEES FIT TO DO.

It is useless and vain to play God with puttings down or up, of this or that. GOD ALONE does that. And He does not play, but speaks and does.

The facts of people’s actions, of the appalling failure of the Gentile nations, in amazingly precise parallel to the follies of Israel of old, are enough to remind us that God warns NON-JEWS who get top-heavy with this or that judgmentalism, not according to His word: "For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either!" - Romans 11:21. This is for those whose boast is not in the Lord (cf. the unchanging stress as in Jeremiah 9:23-24, 13:15-19.

God detests hauteur, and superiority in the poor medium of vaunting flesh, whether through immoderate debasement or exaltation. Gentiles are not AS Gentiles any better, and their pride can well equal that of any Jewry.

Question 31) Have the Jews been great colonizers?

Ans. 31) They have been great wanderers, as the idiom indicates, great dispersion has been theirs ACCORDING to the DIVINE PROMISE of punishment which they have inherited. It is not wise to glory over them, however, but to be humble. On this especially see the URL noted. As to colonisers, however, this is not relevant except as missionaries; and yes, their utmost was the greatest missionary of all time, by name Jesus Christ, whose team included Paul, whose world program for the day, was astonishing, and it included the Jewish apostles whose spreading of the name of the Lord, born into Judah, was prodigious. "Jews" racially have done many things, and those who have done what their own scriptures directed, and put their trust in the Lord have done some wonderful things in outreach.

Question 32) Do the Jews recognise Jesus as Messiah?

Ans. 32) This seems oddly repetitive. SOME did, some did not; the nation did not.

Question 33) Will you continue to teach that the "Jews are ALL of Israel?"

Ans. 33) It is difficult to know if you know to whom you are talking, in so questioning - unless it be to yourself. You see, your question presupposes a fact, which you have not verified. See above URL for an answer showing different usages of "Israel", and in particular, SMR p. 1097; and see from pp. 1089 on. It is necessary in all things to be accurate, disciplined with evidence, and to speak as the logic and evidence allows. It is necessary to realise that in such a case as this,  precise questions need to be asked, with precise meanings. In the use of many terms, contexts relate to meanings, and from the various contexts given, various results are found, as specified in SMR Appendix A. It is so here.

However, in Ch. 1 above, you find, for one case:  the relevant requirements of a guaranteed Israel nation, its failures, the ingrafting of Gentiles, the regrafting of the Jews in an episode long delayed, while they have been blind "in part", until the second phase of Ezekiel 37 sets in. In that sense, Biblically, Israel the nation is the covenanted one often guaranteed as shown, and its people so guaranteed, with whatever proselytes or immigrants duly received, are the Biblical butt of the grace of God for the purpose which He has specified.

See on this,

1) Question 20 above,
2) THE BIBLE OUR BASIS in all Definition, section above, and Ch1 above.
See in detail, also, our next section below - Practical and Procedural Points Reviewed.

In view, however, of the inaccuracy of your question, and the irrelevance of many questions to anything to the point of your claims, it would almost seem that in this case, material has rather loosely flung towards us, some things that may fit some kind of dispensationalism (we are in fact, anti-dispensational - see Biblical Blessings Ch.3) , as if it related.

It has a somewhat bizarre appearance, and seems so outlandishly unbiblical in complexion, with things asked in terms too unqualified and accordingly alas, inept for the purpose, that one really is obliged to suggest a procedure. If people wish to make a confrontation, it is suggested that first you carefully READ what you have in mind on our site, and if this engages you, then CITE it. In particular, it is best to read Ch. 1 on Micah, as noted at the outset, for this gives you Biblical background in examinable detail.

It is time then to ask questions that relate to what is written, whether on our site, or in the word of God, the Bible, if you want to show some discordance imagined between the two, To reflect what is in your mind, or in the mind of someone else and to talk to us about it as if it were ours, or in the Bible does not really help anyone very much, UNTIL the data are established. You must SHOW what you wish to indicate, to be so, from the source in question.

As we reach, because the Bible does so, the point at which much of Israel is to come to the same Gospel as all others, for there is no other (Galatians 1), and all the practical components of Israel, those already saved and those to come as specified in Romans, so that these come to be agglomerated: what then ? When this happens, then those who have already taken the new name will be combined with those who now do so.

Thus the Gentile contingent and the Jewish ones will be complete and the whole Christian church, with all the saved, duly drawn both from Israel and the Gentiles; and then it will be one. No wonder Paul says:

"For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy
through their disobedience,
even so these also have now been disobedient,
that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy.
For God has committed them all to disobedience,

that He might have mercy on all.

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God. How unsearchable…!"

Having reviewed these things, there is a request for one to make: In future, therefore, if you wish to correspond in this sort of approach, as distinct from seeking counsel, one must ask and stress that, after taking time to look at such things, you CITE what you wish to discuss from the SITE or sites in view, and then we can see whether you understand or what it is that you have in mind.

Two important lessons stand out:

1) It is never apt to attribute to someone else, what you think, and he does not. This by no means has to be intentional, in order to happen!
2) It is misleading to compress thought into words which do not hold it, when that is the thought of someone else!

Question 34) Have the Jews been foremost in ending slavery?

Ans. 34) The nation of Israel was singularly bad in this respect in the days of Jeremiah and paid for it! (Jeremiah 34). Jews have often been USED in servile ways, having been EXCLUDED from many professions, ABUSED by pogroms, and made SECOND CLASS CITIZENS, as Hosmer so well attests.

In this respect, at times, it is they who have almost seemed like slaves, as once in Egypt. It is variable, but they like many others, have been oppressed, with this distinction, that it has been over millenia, with zeal by many nations.

Your casual residual question is without anything resembling evidence or relevance as you may now realise.


Now that we have finished with these questions, which at times seem more to express a reviling of a people than an understanding of the Bible, and which do not always seem above inaccurate representation, however inadvertent, let us see the general error implicit in them.


It seems that you are trying to make it appear that Israel is not, never has been, much chop. You seem to imagine that this is some new opinion, or one not in line with the thinking of the one or site you appear to want to attack, for quite unknown reasons.

But GOD as we have OFTEN on this site, indicated, as from Isaiah 30, makes a very strong indictment against them. They have as a nation rejected the covenant, the Messiah, forfeited untold blessings, become as one hunted who once hunted, as Deuteronomy indicates would be the case; but have been returned as promised, unbelieving as predicted (see SMR Appendix A), and have won through in their land against incredible seeming odds, as predicted, taken Jerusalem back as predicted, and in so doing, have come close to announcing the end of the Gentile Age (Luke 21:24). In this, the power - by faithfulness that is God’s own fidelity to unconditional promises cited at length from the Bible, is of God (cf. Psalm 62:11): for power belongs to God.

Is this assured ?

One would rather hope of those expressing such acerbic criticisms of the Jews, that instead of seeing how close it may be possible to go to the challenge of GOD as expressed in Romans 11:18 or 21 (and please check this) , in this racial field, namely this: BE NOT HIGHMINDED,  that they  should instead seek to humble themselves, and see that Jew or Gentile alike, unconverted, is alien from the life of God;  and those who are converted must not be highminded (Ephesians 4:17ff., Ephesians 2:1-10). What does it say ? "Do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you" - (Romans 11:18). These, they are those of the Mosaic covenant (Romans 10:31-10:21), they are those "pursuing the law of Moses", however blindly (Romans 9:31). They are none else*2.

Our purpose is not to add to the errors of the nation of Israel, for it is one which is already oppressed to the point that often God indicates what He will do to those who ADD to their oppressions (see for detail on this, Ch. 1, End-note 1). It is not wise, nor is it our policy, to ignore the predictions of God, or the curse element of the covenant with the Jews, which in fact is so strong as to constitute a prediction in itself in the locations sited, and one abundantly fulfilled.


Actually ‘ALL Israel’ means what a context in question will require (for example in Romans 11). If you take Israel in some metaphorical sense, then it can mean the body currently doing what Israel failed to do, as may be in Galatians 6:16. If, on the other hand, you take it in a context of terms uniquely tenable for the descendants of Abraham, then it is that.

When the context is JEW and GENTILE in their DIVERSITY, and the immediate context is the removal of blindness, it is apparent that the major emphasis of such a phrase, is on the completion of what had hitherto been incomplete, but is completed by the removal of the stipulated blindness, at the stated time. Thus comes the tally of the Jews WHO WILL BECOME CHRISTIANS. Red and Black, if taken as two sides, do not suddenly mean the opposite when the TOPIC, as in Romans 11,  is distinguishing them and showing their history. If here it also extends to a contextually new embracement of Gentiles by the ‘term’ Israel at the end, so often used to refer by contradistinction to the Jews in this context, then so be it.

It would however be hard to show such definitional variability in such a context! It would in general be rather like showing orange pips in an apple! We do not find them here. It becomes an intrusion into defined terms by mere predilection. It is necessary to let the author distinguish his terminological changes, if He so desires. To alter what He has defined already, becomes co-authorship. This is unwise!

But it makes here no difference to our present point. All the Jews to become Christians will do so, and so the whole complex drama of Jew and Gentile each coming to the one Gospel in many ways and places, will undoubtedly occur. The site of Jerusalem is specified by Christ (Luke 21:24) and emphasised in what might be an almost amusing emphasis, were it not for the exceedingly great reluctance of some to accept what is written and written clearly - in Zechariah 12:6.

Here we learn, in these evangelical textual premises, that "In that day I will make the governors of Judah like a firepan in the woodpile, and like a fiery torch in the sheaves: they shall devour all the surrounding peoples on the right hand and on the left, but Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place - Jerusalem."

It would be like saying of this author, "He shall write and teach, and shall again resume residence, and Melbourne shall he inhabit in his own place - in Melbourne". No greater emphasis is possible! No greater breach is conceivable than ignoring it, in any context. Again in Zechariah 14, we find many nations coming to battle against ? why yes, of course, who might have guessed it: JERUSALEM! It specifies the parts in no small measure (14:10). We even find that Judah will fight at Jerusalem (14:14). We find nations coming there.

But what of the approach to the outpouring of the Spirit of God on the people ?

"It shall be in that day that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem", the LORD declares. His word then notes the Gospel impact in that place, as "they look upon Me whom they have pierced" And who are they who, nationally, have done this thing ? We have heard in this matter of the Jews, it would seem, yes, distinctly, of the Jews. It was THEIR national affair. It was so then, it is so here. The land had as it has, a name: Israel. It is best to let God determine these things; for, you see, HE KNOWS what He is doing (first), and will do it (second). He indicates clearly His intentions to contextually clear categories, and then does what He says. It is always so.
His clarity is not compromised, if His definitions are kept.

Thus, after this thunderous emphasis on geographic meaning that we have now noted, we find an equally thunderous emphasis on the spiritual awakening of which Paul speaks, exposed in Zechariah 12:10. It is specifically Jewish, with details provided, a spiritual advance flight over a sin-stricken nation, liberated in the Gospel. We even find which is the order of divine action in the revival, among the Jewish people. It is in that day that a fountain is opened for sin and uncleanness - for whom ? "for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem" - Zechariah 13:1. It is not someone else; it is named, it is the guaranteed name, the guaranteed people, both for the severity of God, as Paul notes, and here, for His goodness.

These then are matters for understanding, not untextual vitriol, and it is always especially unwise to force one’s own thought on the word of God. Changing a contextual meaning for anyone, re-defining a term, is always a strange idea unless the writer indicates that such a novel step is to be taken. Then it is simply a matter of showing, honestly and frankly, that this is so.

All one has to do, as we have pointed out in SMR Appendix A, is to take each Biblical passage in its own context, be faithful and true to each without presumption, as if to read the mind of God in one place from another, in perfect oblivion of what He is actually saying in one or the other. This once established for a particular context, is compared with all others, as you might do in a letter, to ensure that you have harmoniously grasped each part, and all.


It is what one does with anyone, properly: one PAYS ATTENTION to all the evidence, all the differentials, all the common elements. A good writer leaves one in no doubt. The scripture in these fields is marvellously clear, when one ceases to grind away at some preconception*3, which often taken from some extreme of some party, becomes the be-all and end-all, and in fact merely ends all understanding. That is the case of Mark 7:7, by NO means exclusive to the Jews! Gentiles have much aptitude here also!

If now to be factual, and avoid the error of romancing with words about things that are not applicable, you want to discuss things - and if your task is Biblical understanding, that is fine.
Just cite the scriptures you sincerely want to understand, and we can discuss them. Cite anything you think is wrong, show from the context concerned, with accuracy and care, and the Bible that it is so, and that will be helpful. It is especially important to avoid citing things which seem to exist only in your mind, or in that of the author of what is being sent; for this is not helpful, being too vague and tenuous, definitionally obscure, with relevance of the most distant and at times, negative kind. Where the issue is a teaching, one must first make sure one HAS the teaching, and be able to SHOW that one has, citing it clearly.

On the other hand, to seek counsel is an entirely different matter. Your own thoughts then have their proper place, for this can then be the theme. Then as a Christian site, our concern is to relate them to the mind of Christ, as revealed in the Bible. This may endorse them, qualify or negate.

In Chapter 1 above, it is suggested you will find, if you study it, ALL you ask in DETAIL and in considerable scriptural background, all cited. In turn, it provides other references.

So we have asked each other some questions. There is no offence; but lessons are to be learned.

As to the Bible, it is our responsibility to teach with care what it says, always being willing to be corrected by it; and we find nothing in anything to the point of argument addressed, in what has here been sent to us, and this partly because some of the basic Biblical accounts and record concerning the Jews, which affect what we teach or have taught, have not been understood, or perhaps even known in the group to which you belong. The reasons are given in detail in Chapter 1 above, but to the point of your requests, here.  Our interchange has not been unproductive, since as Paul says of incorrect teaching, presentation of other positions must be (factions, he calls them),  that the truth be made manifest, and how lovely it is (I Corinthians 11:19).

How firm it is, and how sure! God has always presented the facts so clearly, whether as to the first coming of Christ or the Second; and these are avenues to His triumphal entry in Christ, things important to know, to see: so that if you believe, your faith is stirred, if you do not, you may begin at least to see the necessities of seeking Him who has spoken, to nations, to mankind, and has come WITH LIFE that lasts, beyond the grave.

With all good will,

In the service of Jesus Christ,
the way, the life and the truth -

from Robert E. Donaldson
for World Wide Web Witness Inc.
Philippians 1:20-21


*1 ORIGINAL QUESTIONS AS SENT, inside inverted commas:

"Now ask yourself the following questions and honestly answer in your own mind from what you now suspect to be the truth." {This however is not actually the case, for there is no possibility of such a thing, that what is flatly contradicting the word of God, should be in accord with it, and hence be true, cf. Validity, in That Magnificent Rock Ch. 5,  and Barbs, Arrows and Barbs 6,  7, SMR Ch. 3;  and Proverbs 8:8.}

"1). Have the Jews been a blessing to all nations?
2). Have the Jews been "Circumcised In The Heart?"
3). Do the Jews glorify Jesus Christ?
4). Do the Jews declare that Jesus is God?
5). Do the Jews show forth the praises of Christ, God's Son?
6). Have the Jews carried the message of "personal" and "national" Salvation to the ends of the Earth?
7). Do the Jewish people have God's Spirit in their hearts?
8). Was the New Covenant (Testament) written to Jews OR ISRAELITES and what is the difference between the two?
9). Are the Jews the "lost sheep of the house of Israel?"
10). Are the Jews the "children of God, scattered abroad?"
11). Are the Jews the servants of God?
12). Are the Jews a Holy Nation and People?
13). Are there any Jews mentioned in the "faith chapter" of Hebrews 11?
14). Are the Jews a righteous nation?
15). Are the Jews bringing forth the fruits of God's Kingdom?
16). Are the Jews kind to strangers in their midst?
17). Are the Jews called the "children of the living God?"
18). Do the Jews admit that they are not God's People?
19). Do the Jews have all of God's Word?
20). Are the Jews a Great and Mighty Nation?
21). Do the Jews possess the "gates of their enemies?"
22). Are the Jews a "company of nations?"
23). Are the Jews above all people in moral excellence?
24). Are the Jews today called through Isaac?
25). Have the Jews ever lost their identity?
26). Have the Jews ever been called by a "new name?"
27). Are the major heathen nations aligned against the Jews alone?
28). Are the modern day Jews described as "a great lion?"
29). Did the Jews deliver Jerusalem from the power of the heathen?
30). Has the Jewish "people" ever had the name of "Great?"
31). Have the Jews been great colonizers?
32). Do the Jews recognise Jesus as Messiah?
33). Will you continue to teach that the "Jews are ALL of Israel?"
34). Have the Jews been foremost in ending slavery?"



The intensity and immensity of the Biblical emphasis on the identity of Israel is to be found, as we see in these pages, on every side.

Let us therefore adduce some more emphatic moments in this field

so that it is HERE that we find that the Lord's portion is His people,
but there are multiplied examples of more than atomic force, to this effect.

Thus, it is, yes JACOB who is the determinant in lineage, and this is the line; and similarly, to Abraham, as we see elsewhere in this presentation, came the effective directive. It is the word of GOD specifically to Abraham that it is in Isaac that his seed is called, NOT in someone else, such as Ishmael, who ACCORDINGLY is sent from the household (Genesis 20:12).

It is the line, beyond doubt and with emphasis, personal, practical and profound, in ISAAC  and then in JACOB that the affair finds itself.

Further, in Jeremiah 51:19, we have this:

Who, however, are those designated by the pronoun "them" ? It is the peoples of idolatry. True, Israel often turned this way, was chastened, chastised, progressively, even cumulatively in the end, but THIS is the Portion of Jacob, his God: what is accorded to him. Let him rebel; God is still there; let him bring upon himself vast stretches of time and place, dispersion and widespread contempt as in Leviticus 26, where it is all predicted, but still, the Lord is the same; the promise to Abraham is the same (Genesis 17), they will be returned just the same (Deuteronomy 32, Hosea, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah), and this,  CONTRARY to MERIT, and DESPITE DEMERIT (Ezekiel 36). It is not a reward; it is the OPPOSITE of any reward. It is a faithful undertaking of God, which He plans to fulfil, and now in 2001 has all but completely fulfilled already!

However, as to the absurdly simple question, who they are to whom all this applies, why then, it is JACOB, and that is the line. That is what it says.

Similarly, and indeed in a quite remarkable parallel which is broader than what Jeremiah says, and includes it, like a jug next to a set of water glasses, is this in Zechariah 10:4-12, part of which is here quoted:

"From his comes the cornerstone,
From him the tent peg,
From him the battle bow,
From him every ruler together.
They shall be like mighty men, {as in Zechariah 12, precisely}
Who tread down their enemies
In the mire of the streets in the battle.
They shall fight because the LORD is with them,
And the riders on horses shall be put to shame.

{This last point makes it clear that substantial military powers will be invested against Israel, that it will by NO means an easy fight, just as assured one because God has determined to MAKE it so, in faithfulness to His word, which is far more immutable than the hardest granite, and more merciful than the kindest mercies of man.}

"I will strengthen the house of Judah,
And I will save the house of Joseph.
I will bring them back
Because I have mercy on them.
They shall be as though I had not cast them aside...
I will sow them among the peoples,

"And they shall remember Me in far countries.
They shall live, together with their children,
And they shall return.
I will also bring them back from the land of Egypt,
And gather them from Assyria...
Until no more room is found for them."

The question to our point here is one. Here in the post-Babylon days of Zechariah, we are learning that the Lord plans to disperse Israel (just as in Isaiah 11:10-11 we learn He will rescue and return them a second time, and this in a Messianic chapter, with Christ depicted in His regal role). The LORD plans to show them mercy and bring back from many countries, in mercies implacable, incorrigible and assured, following the disciplines of a grievously similar depth! He has declared that He will restore them at length even spiritually (the second step in the progressive prophetic milieu of Ezekiel 37 - Zechariah 10:12 acts as a result to activities such as those of  Zechariah 12:10).

But who are these, noted in Zechariah 10 ? They are those from whom the Messiah is to come (as in Isaiah 22:24 - " 'And I will hang on Him all the glory of his father's house, the offspring and the posterity... In that day,' says the LORD of hosts, 'the peg that is fastened in the secure place will be removed and be cut down and fall, and the burden that was on it will be cut off..."). They are those to be successively removed from their land, and successfully restored to it, and planted, and to find help and hope in the Lord at the end, as in Hosea 3, and 13.

BUT WHO are they ? Oh, the same, always the same, Judah and Israel, the two kingdoms comprising the Jewish nation of the day. Ask Hosea, he will tell you (1:4,7). Israel, the one whose king was Jehu; yes, and Judah. But what of Zechariah ? For this, where better to go than the context of Zechariah 10:4ff., which is quoted above, so signally concentrating, focussing on some party from whom all these wonderful things are to come: the tent peg (on which so much hangs as in Isaiah 22), the battle bow, every rule, so that they win triumphal victories "because the LORD is with them". Yes, and the CORNERSTONE (as in Psalm 118:22, cf. Isaiah 49:7). That - the Messiah, it is He alone who is allowed and required to have such honour, such distinction (as in Isaiah 42, where in the very midst of the glory to be that of the Messiah, Almighty God makes it clear that HE does not give His glory to another, implying, as 48:16 states, that the Messiah is God the Sent, the one of Psalm 45).

We are not dealing with trifles. It is God who has come, will come, does come, and has organised the phases and ways, the gospel and its impact, the symphony of wisdom as in Romans 11, and the end of the day as in Revelation 19.

Let us then GO there, to the contextual preliminary to our quotation of Zechariah 10:4ff., above.

In Zechariah 10:3, we find named, the party so signally identified, there as everywhere else that we look for this:

"For the Lord of hosts will visit His flock..." and WHO are His flock ? Let us read on then: "THE HOUSE OF JUDAH", and of this party He declares this, that He "will make them as His royal horse in battle." It is then we see the additional features of their gifts and the singularity of their destiny, albeit one with many a sad interlude. Here however it is the eventual triumph, which comes to final fruition ONLY when they find HIM, whom they had lost in rebellion and folly.

Before that (as in Zechariah 12, early verses), HE STILL faithfully is prophetically pledged to do wonders, but soon to follow, as also in Zech. 12:10, comes this outpouring of His Spirit, and as in Zech. 10, this working of the Lord with them as a people once more known to Him. "And they shall walk up and down in His name, says the LORD" - Zech 10:12. "I will be their God, and they shall be My people", Ezekiel 37:27. "Afterward, the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD , and His goodness in the latter days," says Hosea, in 3:5.

So do the prophets speak, interweaving like a tartan of exquisite composition.

Although the other tribes were demolished so badly by Assyria, the Judah in the South (as the main name tag body) remaining, so that it is to Judah and of Judah that He speaks in this part of Ezekiel, yet many Jews of Jacob and Isaac are to come to this hub, and be regathered in a new unity, says the prophecy (of Ezekiel 37:19-22), and it is then, following their geographical return (Ez. 37:9-10), that their spiritual return comes in its time, to be effected (Ez. 37:12-14).

Forget now Judah and Ephraim (37:16 spells it out): they are integrated who disintegrated, and the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah, will be no more, synthesised from past division into present congregation in the Lord. Then we read in Ezekiel of the unifying power of God for this stage of their career, a blessed one, since -

"They shall not defile themselves anymore with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions,; but I will deliver them from all their dwelling places in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them. They shall be My people, and I will be their God.
David My servant shall be king over them...
Then they shall dwell in the land that I have given to Jacob My servant, where your fathers dwelt... and My servant David shall be their Prince forever."
WHO will dwell there ? Ephraim and Judah, the whole of the line of Isaac, called, that is who (cf. Ezekiel 37:19).

To be sure, they will be joined in spiritual unity by the others who, NOT Israel, but Gentiles, come direct: by those others with no Old Covenant commencement, by those not covered in any earlier part of the mosaic coming to its eventual and glorious unity in which Paul exults, praising God for His wisdom in Romans 11.

They will be joined as those COMING TO THE SAME PLACE OF GRACE, yet not starting in the same place of covenant; for the Old is fulfilled in the New, and those without come direct; and so is the wall of partition broken down; but what is not broken down ?

There is ONLY ONE.
His propositional speech to mankind is ONLY ONE. It is written.
His only-begotten Son sent to mankind is ONLY ONE: He was crucified and returns (Zechariah 14:5), to judge, as He first comes for ALL His people, who believe in Him, now made one, just as all believing Jews are made one, whatever their tribe.
His illuminations are many; His exposures of meaning marvellous;
the history of the many in many ways on the earth, it is manifold;
but as for the word to mankind, it is ONLY ONE.

As to the Israel, the body defined and called:

To be out, then in, then out and disciplined, and then back again, it is ONLY ONE. There is and can be no other; for as shown above, there is NO OTHER BODY so assigned such a destiny. Its name: ISRAEL. Its place ? ISRAEL.

The end of the matter ? NO EARTH (Isaiah 51:6).

That is the ultimate end of the matter. NO earth or heavens are left, because quite simply "there was no place found for them"; but the redeemed agents, the children of God, are taken past pilgrimage, when this enormous, complex, multiple, manifold and brilliant display of the work, wisdom and salvation of God, being complete, the pure precincts without curse, contention or calamity, replace the junior model, the fallen mode and the polluted scene (Revelation 20-21). How futile it is to worship, to require, to direct the STAGE, for at every stage, it is the Stage-Director who directs the stage, stages and the end!

It is useless to quarrel with the Almighty. He uses the scenery HIS WAY. He MAKES it. HE is the Maker, the Creator, of worlds, history and holiness, and to worship Him in the beauty of holiness is worth far more than all lands of this earth, all riches and all possessions.

Having been crucified in Jerusalem within Israel,  by the Jews, the LORD has them re-assemble, and experience the full measure of their guilt; but God, He does not abdicate. He does as He says. Foolish the ones who ignore this fact, or what He declares. There is NO counsel against the Lord.

WHO will dwell with the LORD forever (Revelation 5:9-10, 7:14-17, 22:3-5), once the LORD has finished His testimony and saga on earth ? Those who come to Him in that ONE Gospel, prepared and preliminary (Ephesians 1:4), predicted and active in the Old Testament (I Peter 1:10ff., 2:22ff., Isaiah 52-55), who come on account of that ONE Christ who was to come, and has come (II Peter 1:16ff.); that ONE Gospel consummated and paid in redemption by the ONE Christ in that ONE offering, as exhibited in the New Testament (Hebrews 9-10) in that ONE Book God has presented to mankind:  one body, one Lord (Ephesians 4:4, 1:10), one God and Father, whose word has stood, stands and will stand forever (I Peter 1:24), even when the former things no longer so much as come to mind (Jeremiah 3:16).


It is one of the sadder things of much theology, that OPPOSITE EXTREMES often arise, so that someone takes a point, possibly even seeing its spiritual portent and thrust, and then ignoring everything else, very like a dog given and bone and rushing to bury it, bumping into people and things on the way, ignores its setting and precise definition.
It would demolish mathematics and mock history were such procedures followed (as sometimes, prior to correction, they are!).

Then some other approach is taken, in rather a similar way, a point excised from its setting, ignoring its definition, and this is carried, possibly with added zest from reaction to the obvious extreme and inaccuracy of the prime action, so that two camps arise. Middle ground can and does often readily become a war zone, a no man's land, and as the author has repeatedly found, a place where fire can be directed from BOTH sides. It is true that this can discourage occupation of such middle ground, but it does not reduce its value.

Now it is not of course, that BEING in the middle is the best way. It is just that when extremes have arisen, and maintain themselves sometimes with the efforts or endeavours to counter some opposite extreme, something far from both extremities is just. HOW it is found, however, is NOT by simply opting for the middle, like some sonorous lecturer, but rather by finding the facts from the Bible, and refusing for the sake of any party, to go beyond, or not as far, for that matter, as it in fact goes. IF one does this then the contested areas, for example, of ONLY psalm singing, infant and 'believer's' baptism, predestination and will, dispensational and various millenial approaches to prophetic presentation, gospel and church authority and so on, dissolve like morning mist.

It is not that we do not all have much to learn, for how otherwise could we GROW in knowledge and grace, as II Peter 3:18 affirms we must do! It is that reckless extremes and pugnacious party politics, often mixed with various measures of unbelief have led to wholly unmaintainable extremes, cut like butter by the word of God, sometimes appearing to exist more by the JUSTICE of their departure from the OPPOSITE extreme, than by any genuineness of their own. Here we must distinguish between the MAIN thrust of a position, often very right indeed, Biblically, in at least one element, and the ADDITIVES, which may arise either from the RUSH of thought or from the REACTION to those who attacking the position, perhaps quite wrongly, can lead to a fortification of the original point, so that it ceases itself to be Biblical.

All this requires one thing, other than faith in God and in His word as His: it means that EACH context must be taken to mean what it says, not some philosophical fibrillation imposed on it. It is nothing whatsoever to do with figures of speech, which in any literature, depending on the skill of the author, are made clear (Proverbs 8:8-9) and adorn the work.
This is merely one aspect of taking what is there on its own grounds and indications.

The need to the point then is this: that each utterance should not be made a servant to some other, but a potential friend. EACH word of God has its own integrity. WHEN justice is done to each context, and philosophy is excluded as germs by antiseptic in an operation, then the relationships of each and all may be justly considered, and a virtual homogenising which denatures the word of God, is AVOIDED, while overview arises the more readily without confusion or distortion.

Thus, as shown in Predestination and Freewill (PF), to take only one example, the Weselyan INSISTENCE on the SCOPE and grandeur of the love of God is utterly right, and the utter refusal to compromise on this point is Biblically based. However the failure to instal and realise in theology the utter sovereignty of God, without carnal admixture or compilation with flesh in any way, is inadmissible, repugnant to the word of God equally, just as is the case with many of those who rightly stressing this Biblical premiss, make it a point of honour to ignore the scope of the love of God. Spurgeon rightly stressed the importance of each aspect here.

The precise applications and definitions of terms for these things, are found in the above noted volume, but the general trend is as noted.

For others of these extremes cases, see for example, Questions and Answers  13, Biblical Blessings Ch. 3, esp. End-note 1, and Tender Times for Timely Truths Ch. 11, Barbs, Arrows and Balms 25, with  SMR pp. 98-99, Questions and Answers 2.

Camps are great fun in vacation; but warring camps often are mere militance. Where the case is categorically different is this: when someone either 1) does not believe the Bible as the word of God, and so inserts his/her own thought more or less unconsciously and without concern; 2) does not limit interpretation to the Bible, and so does the same in a more formal way; 3) removes from the Bible what it says, and so as in 2) removes the issue of interpretation at the outset. This is not a camp battle, but a frontal assault!

The point made here is this, that in addition to these follies, is one more: in pugnacity of impropriety, to follow a tradition,

One has often been harried for this insistence on Biblical purity, by traditionalists or those veering to those diminutions of the divine splendour of utterance from God, as if the very knowledge of the traditions were quite the most vital thing, or in some way even comparable to the knowledge of the word of God, but the ways of this world are not limited to what calls itself the world! After all, if one is showing what the word of God says, by all means appreciate traditions if they do not compete in fact or implication; but by NO means add them! (Proverbs 30:6).