Peace and blessings always...
I woke up at about 3:45 this morning, couldn't go back to sleep so I found myself randomly going thru stuff online when I came across this: Biblical apocrypha
It is an interesting read, but when I got to the last paragraph, I realized something very subtle had been done:
The Lord Jesus used the Scriptures as His final court of appeal. As noted above, Jesus said, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). To the devil, Jesus consistently responded, “It is written…” (Matthew 4:4-10). Jesus affirmed the Bible’s divine inspiration (Matthew 22:43), its indestructibility (Matthew 5:17,18), its infallibility (John 10:35), its final authority (Matthew 4:4,7,10), its historicity (Matthew 12:40; 24:37), its scientific accuracy (Matthew 19:2-5), and its factual inerrancy (John 17:17; Matthew 22:29).
The writer very subtly connected "the scriptures" with "the Bible"! Throughout the writing he is clear that for him the Bible is both the old and new testament, but, as I wrote back to him, Jesus/Yeshuah wouldn't have known anything about the new testament, therefore, the scriptures he was referring to could only have been the old testament! This was the only word of God he could have referenced as being written already. This is a strategy often used to seemingly link two concepts as the same when they are actually different.
There is a quote of Sir Isaac Newton’s that I used in my book, At About the Time of the End; God and the African/Edenic Adamic Family, which states,
"At about the time of the end of the world, a body of men will be raised up at Jerusalem/Israel, the Holy Promised Land, and turn their attention to the scriptures and demand their literal interpretation (in the midst of much clamor and opposition)".
Prince Doctor Shaleak Ben Yehudah gave us this quote back in 1975 in the School of the Prophets in Dimona, Israel, and when I looked it up back in 2012 when researching for my book, I found all kinds of references to it. Today, except for my book, you cannot find those references, it’s like they never existed! Now, this is deep; when I first Googled “At about the time of the end” this morning, the search engine went right to my book. A little while later, I had to enter the whole title in order to arrive there. Entering the first line of Newton's quote does not redirect to anything from him! He foresaw that there would be opposition to any demand for the literal interpretation of the scriptures, and the question is why would the literal interpretation draw opposition?
There is much feverish archeological digging taking place in Israel today to substantiate the scriptures, but even more so to prove that there was a kingdom of Judah that was prominent!
There is no question about the existence and extent of the northern kingdom, which was known as the Kingdom of Israel, but the world has simply been lulled into accepting that the Jewish people represent all the people of ancient Israel, when even Israelis know that's not true and argue amongst themselves about their place in the total picture. There are obvious contradictions which no one challenges, such as this:
Who was Rachel?
Rachel (Hebrew: רָחֵל, romanized: Rāḥêl, lit. 'ewe') was a Biblical figure, the favorite of Jacob's two wives, and the mother of Joseph and Benjamin, two of the twelve progenitors of the tribes of Israel. Rachel's father was Laban. Her older sister was Leah, Jacob's first wife; their mother was Adinah. Rachel
14 Thus saith YHWH: A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping, Rachel weeping for her children; she refuseth to be comforted for her children, because they are not. 15 Thus saith YHWH: Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the YHWH; and they shall come back from the land of the enemy. 16 And there is hope for thy future, saith YHWH; and thy children shall return to their own border. 17 I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself: 'Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a calf untrained; turn thou me, and I shall be turned, for Thou art YHWH my God. 19 Is Ephraim a darling son unto Me? Is he a child that is dandled? For as often as I speak of him, I do earnestly remember him still; therefore My heart yearneth for him, I will surely have compassion upon him, saith YHWH. 8 They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them; I will cause them to walk by rivers of waters, in a straight way wherein they shall not stumble; for I am become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My first-born. Jeremiah 31
Rachel died in childbirth bringing Benyamin-- whom she named Benoni/son of my sorrow-- into the world, so she never knew him, she only knew, raised, and loved Joseph. Rachel would lament the loss of her sons, Joseph, and Benyamin, but especially Joseph whom she was much more familiar with. So, why isn’t Joseph/Ephraim spoken of in the context of being the son of Rachel? Why is she portrayed as a Jewish/Judean matriarch since Judah's mother was Leah? I hope you get the picture I am trying to paint here; this is not being anti-Semitic, but rather pro truth.
Final point: in Jeremiah 8, quoted above, the statement is made that Ephraim is the first-born. This goes back to Genesis 48.
14 And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the first-born. 15 And he blessed Joseph, and said: 'The God before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God who hath been my shepherd all my life long unto this day, 16 the angel who hath redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named in them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.'
The name Israel is directly connected to the House of Joseph/Ephraim! There is no Israel without Joseph/Ephraim!
4 They hold crafty converse against Thy people, and take counsel against Thy hidden ones. 5 They have said: 'Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.' Psalms 83