budaatum:
■Israel is a nation of Israelites, who you claim God's promise is for.
■I ask about Nigeria to see how it applies to non-Israelite you, and would be grateful if you would explain.

I didn't make the claims as instead it's contained right there in the books, right? As for who Israel is, it is the people, not the nation.

2. Why would you, after clearly reading what is written, think to ask me that? And how did you come to the conclusion that I am non-Israelite?

Kobojunkie:
I didn't make the claims as instead it's contained right there in the books, right? As for who Israel is, it is the people, not the nation.

2. Why would you, after clearly reading what is written, think to ask me that? And how did you come to the conclusion that I am non-Israelite?

Are you Israelite, Kobojunkie?

budaatum:
Are you Israelite, Kobojunkie?

Yep!

Kobojunkie:
Yep!

Explain how you happen to be Israelite, please.

budaatum:
Explain how you happen to be Israelite, please.

I already did that earlier.

Kobojunkie:
1. Only those who are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself. So, yes!

2. That would amount to expecting God to bend His Law .i.e change His mind or lie. And God does not do that, according to scripture.

And yes, it means the actual blood of Jacob courses through your literal veins.

Kobojunkie:
I already did that earlier.

So, anyone who "are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself" become Israelites?

Could you kindly show scripture that supports this doctrine please.

budaatum:
■ So, anyone who "are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself" become Israelites?
■ Could you kindly show scripture that supports this doctrine please.

1. How does one become an Israelite?

2. Jesus Christ informed you that He came only for the Lost sheep of Israel, did He not - Matthew 15 vs 24?

Kobojunkie:
1. How does one become an Israelite?

2. Jesus Christ informed you that He came only for the Lost sheep of Israel, did He not - Matthew 15 vs 24?

That does not imply to me that you are a "lost sheep of Israel"!

In fact, I read somewhere that Jesus was sent because "God so loved the world", as opposed to just the Israelites, as you claim.

Does the "world" become Israel when they "are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself"?

budaatum:
■That does not imply to me that you are a "lost sheep of Israel"! In fact, I read somewhere that Jesus was sent because "God so loved the world", as opposed to just the Israelites, as you claim. Does the "world" become Israel when they "are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself"?

This na simple logic things here naw....

Premise A: Jesus Christ was sent by the Father only to the Lost sheep of Israel
Premise B: God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son(Jesus Christ) ....
Conclusion: ?

What do you you think the only valid conclusion be, as far as those who Jesus Christ was sent to, from the above can and should be?

Kobojunkie:
This na simple logic things here naw....

Premise A: Jesus Christ was sent by the Father only to the Lost sheep of Israel
Premise B: Jesus Christ so loved the world ....
Conclusion: ?

What do you you think the only valid conclusion from the above can and should be?

First, that Premise A is a wrong premise, and that your "only" is a rogue addition, since we clearly read that "God so loved the world", John 3:16, especially considering God must have loved all its creations, which, according to understanding, were all created by God.

And second is that you are trying to twist what's written to justify your own understanding, since, by your own confession, "Jesus loved the world", and not just Israel nor it's lost sheep "only".

In fact, when Jesus said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, he still responded to the Canaanite woman who was never an Israelite, which might imply he did not mean what we read he said. He also at one time told Israelites to "go and do likewise" as the Samaritan, who was not classed as an Israelite nor was he a lost sheep of Israel.

He also ministered to Gentiles, and that in no way made those Gentiles Israelites nor lost sheep thereof.

What do you think?

Kobojunkie:
Because He calls me to do exactly that — trust and obey Him.

I didn’t know there's a phone in heaven. Can you hook me up with Big Sky Diddy's digits, lemme holla at him?

Kobojunkie:
1. Only those who are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself. So, yes!

2. That would amount to expecting God to bend His Law .i.e change His mind or lie. And God does not do that, according to scripture.

Taught by Big Sky Diddy hisself? Via heavenly Zoom classes?

Kobojunkie:
I didn't make the claims as instead it's contained right there in the books, right? As for who Israel is, it is the people, not the nation.

2. Why would you, after clearly reading what is written, think to ask me that? And how did you come to the conclusion that I am non-Israelite?

So I guess you're part of the Lost Tribes of Israel?

budaatum:


So, anyone who "are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself" become Israelites?

Could you kindly show scripture that supports this doctrine please.

You're having a discourse with a nigga named Junkie, and you expect something logical?

budaatum:
■ First, that Premise A is a wrong premise, and that your "only" is a rogue addition, since we clearly read that "God so loved the world", John 3:16, especially considering God must have loved all its creations, which, according to understanding, were all created by God. And second is that you are trying to twist what's written to justify your own understanding, since, by your own confession, "Jesus loved the world", and not just Israel nor it's lost sheep "only". ....

1. what you just typed makes absolutely no sense of any kind.
Premise A:

24 Jesus answered, “God sent me only to the lost people of Israel.” - Matthew 15 vs 24

Premise B:

16. Yes, God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him would not be lost but have eternal life. - John 3 vs 16

Conclusion: ?

What do you think the only valid conclusion be, as far as those who Jesus Christ was sent to, from the above can and should be? [/quote]

Kobojunkie:
1. what you just typed makes absolutely no sense of any kind.

I think what you mean is that, what I typed makes absolutely no sense of any kind to you. And that's perfectly okay, though I do feel you can make sense of what I typed even if you disagree with what I typed, just as I am making sense of what you typed whether I agree or not, by asking you to explain what you type so I can better understand where I don't

If it so happens that there is a desire to understand what I typed, I'd expect you'd ask questions specific to what I have typed so that you may understand what I typed.

That said, thank you very much for your patience and your time. I am certain we will return to it in the future sometime, after we have suitably learnt to understand one another much better.

budaatum:
■ I think what you mean is that, what I typed makes absolutely no sense of any kind to you. And that's perfectly okay, though I do feel you can make sense of what I typed even if you disagree with what I typed, just as I am making sense of what you typed whether I agree or not, by asking you to explain what you type so I can better understand where I don't .

1. I can't make sense of what obviously doesn't make sense. You are given two premises, both taken directly from scripture — the words of the same Jesus Christ —, and asked what a valid conclusion would be after compiling both truths. Why would you think it would make sense to argue against one fact using the other when you were previously informed that both were valid?

jaephoenix:

You're having a discourse with a nigga named Junkie, and you expect something logical?

No, Jae, I do not "expect something logical". My discourse is simply to understand, logical or not.

The Bible is not always logical but it can still be understood for what it is. How much more so anyone here, if one tried. I'd in fact claim that is what makes the Bible a very good book to practise the development of the mind to acquire understanding. Or don't you think so?

Kobojunkie:
1. I can't make sense of what obviously doesn't make sense.

If a thing said by another does not make sense to you don't you think you ought to ask for an explanation so you can make sense of it? It's not as if you have assumed I write unmeaningful gibberish, or have you? If that were the case, I doubt you'd have understood any of my questions, which you've answered only because you have obviously understood them. Or is that not the case?

Please tell which part of what I typed you do not understand, with specific questions so I may explain it to you so you understand.

budaatum:
■ If a thing said by another does not make sense to you don't you think you ought to ask for an explanation so you can make sense of it? It's not as if you have assumed I write unmeaningful gibberish, or have you? If that were the case, I doubt you'd have understood any of my questions, which you've answered only because you have obviously understood them. Or is that not the case? Please tell which part of what I typed you do not understand, with specific questions so I may explain it to you so you understand.

1. Am I to take it then that you outrightly reject either or both of the premises in the question asked then? Yes?

Kobojunkie:
1. Am I to take it then that you just either or both of the premises in the question asked then? Yes?

No. You obviously should not do that, since you do not understand my stated objections to both premises.

I'd think you should attempt to understand what I typed first just so you do not take from it what I never said. Or do you not know how to seek understanding of that which you do not understand?

jaephoenix:

You're having a discourse with a nigga named Junkie, and you expect something logical?

The junkie actually said he/she once was a patient at a mental hospital during a discussion about “demon possession”. Junkie said demon possession is real. I asked if the junkie had been possessed before. Junkie said yes. By Jesus. Lmao

He never replies my questions anymore but I’m glad Buda asked how exactly junkie is one of the perpetually lost sheep of Israel or of “blood of Jacob”. Apparently it’s because the god spoke to him. The leprechaun on my shoulder spoke to me too and said that “Junkie’s mental Illness has psychiatric problems”

Kobojunkie:
1. Only those who are can enter into the Kingdom of God and are taught by God Himself. So, yes!

Although I have a good inkling why the god is said to have a kingdom I’m always amused at the notion of a god that wants to be a King.
What’s a king to a god? Lmao

Kobojunkie:
I already did that earlier. And yes, it means the actual blood of Jacob courses through your literal veins.

Lmao. You sure it’s not the blood of Abraham?

Kobojunkie:
1. Am I to take it then that you outrightly reject either or both of the premises in the question asked then? Yes?

I note an edit. The answer is, Yes, I outrightly reject both of the premises in the question you asked.

As explained. Premise A is a wrong premise, and your "only" is a rogue addition, since we clearly read that "God so loved the world that he sent his only Son" to to the world, John 3:16, and not to the Israelites "only" as you inferred, especially considering God must have loved all its creations, which, according to understanding, were all created by God.

And second, by your own statement, "Jesus loved the world", and not just Israel nor it's lost sheep "only", and there's nowhere recorded that those who accepted him became Israelites.

You will find, in Exodus 12:48-49, that "If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. There shall be lone law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you", which implies one has to join the Jews/Israelites to be accepted by God, but Christ made no such demand, so much less Paul who clearly stated that "salvation has come unto the Gentiles to provoke them (the Israelites) to jealousy, whom he had come to minister to.

And to point out the hypocrisy of the Israelites, (assuming interchangeability with Jews), wrote, "If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?". In clear contradiction of Exodus 12:48-49.

Do ask for clarification of any part you do not understand, please.

budaatum:
■ I note an edit. The answer is, Yes, I outrightly reject both of the premises in the question you asked.

■ As explained. Premise A is a wrong premise, and your "only" is a rogue addition, since we clearly read that "God so loved the world that he sent his only Son" to to the world, John 3:16, and not to the Israelites "only" as you inferred, especially considering God must have loved all its creations, which, according to understanding, were all created by God. And second, by your own statement, "Jesus loved the world", and not just Israel nor it's lost sheep "only", and there's nowhere recorded that those who accepted him became Israelites.

Sigh! I think I have answered as much as I can in this.

2. I didn't write any of what is contained in scripture so I cannot be said to have inferred the explicit statements found right there in scripture. I can either accept it or reject it.

Kobojunkie:
Sigh! I think I have answered as much as I can in this.

2. I didn't write any of what is contained in scripture so I cannot be said to have inferred the explicit statements found right there in scripture. I can either accept it or reject it.

Kobojunkie, you are not telling me "what is contained in scripture"! What you are telling me is your own interpretation and understanding of what you've read written in Scripture just as we all are. Please note the difference.

And you can try to understand it more too, unless you want to claim you have done all the learning that there is to be done.

budaatum:


No, Jae, I do not "expect something logical". My discourse is simply to understand, logical or not.

[b]The Bible is not always logical [/b]but it can still be understood for what it is. How much more so anyone here, if one tried. I'd in fact claim that is what makes the Bible a very good book to practise the development of the mind to acquire understanding. Or don't you think so?

This explains the whole concept of religion. If anyone accepts religion with all its illogicalities, then where would it end? Look how Junkie is expanding his colorful imagination and saying all kinds of illogical shit, which many people would gobble up without blinking if it came outta an authoritative mouth(like a pastor etc). So where does the illogicality end? I can even add that lm also American, using Junkie's illogical logicallity

KnownUnknown:


The junkie actually said he/she once was a patient at a mental hospital during a discussion about “demon possession”. Junkie said demon possession is real. I asked if the junkie had been possessed before. Junkie said yes. By Jesus. Lmao

He never replies my questions anymore but I’m glad Buda asked how exactly junkie is one of the perpetually lost sheep of Israel or of “blood of Jacob”. Apparently it’s because the god spoke to him. The leprechaun on my shoulder spoke to me too and said that “Junkie’s mental Illness has psychiatric problems”

Yup. Flying Spaghetti Monster, my Lord and Master, said the same to me. We are connected spiritually. Amen

budaatum:
■ Kobojunkie, you are not telling me "what is contained in scripture"! What you are telling me is your own interpretation and understanding of what you've read written in Scripture just as we all are. Please note the difference. And you can try to understand it more too, unless you want to claim you have done all the learning that there is to be done.

1. WOW... So even though those two premises, I directly copy-pasted from the Scriptures, you accuse me still of telling you my own interpretation?

Anyways, I think I have more than answered you on this. Whenever you decide to let Scripture speak for itself, let me know.

Kobojunkie:
1. WOW... So even though those two premises, I directly copy-pasted from the Scriptures, you accuse me still of telling you my own interpretation?

You did not copy them from scripture.

Post chapter and verse for them plesse so every one can go see for themself!