These young men had opened their discussion with me by asking me if I was a "New Testament" Christian. When I did not respond promptly enough, they began their presentation to me by taking me down the primrose path of the Roman Road. My first question to these sincere people was this: "What is the New Testament, anyway?" In any sales arena, once you get the prospect talking or asking questions, you are on your way to a sale. Having told me that they were graduating students, they were more than willing to answer my question. Further, since they had claimed that glorious status, it was up to them to explain the term. One of them told me that while the Old Testament dealt with the Jews and The Law, the New Testament was primarily for the Gentiles and operated under Christís Grace. He flatly stated that the New Testament Church was not to be concerned with The Old Law, which had been abandoned at The Cross, but was to emphasize Christís Grace.
The other student nodded in agreement but then added that Almighty God had been unsuccessful with the Jews, who had a history of sinful ways. Thus, Our Heavenly Father had to put out a new plan, bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles who are the non-Jewish people. The student then added, as though it was an established fact, that Almighty God had done His Best with the Jewish people, but when they rejected His Son, He decided to extend the plan of salvation to all the world, all men, whosoever will, to accept and have the peace of knowing that they would go to heaven when they die.
I had, heard that theology promoted for years, but did they have Scripture to back it up? In all of their answers, only a summary of which is written above, they still had not answered the question: What is the New Testament? If you are going to, talk about something, especially if you expect to teach others, you ought to know what the terms mean. What is a testament? What is a covenant?
On the way, to get a cup of coffee with them, I went past my car and picked up my Bible. While enjoying coffee, I went on to teach my surprised students that in every case in the New Testament both the word testament and the word covenant were translated from the same Greek word diathťkť. It is Strongís Greek word # 1242* as I had it noted in my Cambridge Wide Margin Bible. When I opened my Bible on the table before them, and they saw all the notes I had put there in the margins, they knew that they had been "had." Both words mean "a contract." Well, what is a contract? What is this New Testament (contract) under which someone must perform according to a specific thing before I can become a Christian?
By now my young friends were both frustrated and curious. They thought that they had answered my question, and here I was asking them the same question again. They simply could not understand what my question had to do with the Plan of Salvation. Quite frankly, as we shall see, it has everything to do with it.
If you are under the New Testament, and it is a binding contract of some kind, who is the Party of the First Part and who is the Party of the Second Part, and what performance does that contract spell out in lawful terms? What is the consideration? When does, or did, it go into effect? If you cannot answer these questions, do not feel ignorant, for these graduating students of a very well-known Bible College could not do so either. For them, my questions were just as if the Bible had hundreds of blank pages.
Any contract is binding on all Parties, and each of them can legally force the other to perform according to the terms, exactly as set forth. It is an exclusive document. In other words, if you are not named in it, you are not a Party to it.
When I had stopped at my car, which is a mint condition Lincoln Mark IV, the young men remarked about it. So, in talking with them over coffee, I asked them if they had a car while here .at school. One said he did not. The other pointed to the street in front of the restaurant to a nice looking older Chevy pickup sitting at the curb. I asked him if he meant the blue one with the expired meter. He bounded out to feed the meter before he came into conflict with the law. I asked him later if there was some price at which he would sell me that pretty truck. He admitted that at some price, heíd sell it, but it would be high, "a lot more than the book value." I told him that in this case, money was no object. Suppose I bought that blue Chevy truck, and drove it home. How would the public ever know that there was a contract between us? You would be the Party of the First Part, and I would be the Party of the Second Part, and the object of the contract would be the pickup. How does the world know that I own that truck now that you no longer own it? Well, the license plate, except to a police officer, would not prove it. Nor, in fact, would the contract itself, for no one would ever see either it, or the subsequent title, as they would both be locked away in my safe. No, they would properly assume some contract must exist, or within a few days the "blue light" would come by and take it away from me. Does that make sense?
Now, so that we will understand any contract a little more specifically, suppose that I left my keys to my new truck in the ignition, and some person jumped in and drove off with it. What would you call that person? You would call him a thief. Yes, but why is he a thief? There is only one reason! When push comes to shove, his name is not to be found on the contract, that conveyed your blue pickup to me. If his name is not in the contract, then he is not a Party to the contract regardless, of any other extenuating circumstances. No matter what worthy cause or reason that thief had to take my truck, the blunt fact is that he JS a thief because the contract does not include his name!
Now, with that lesson on the law in mind, what is the New Testament (contract) that you claim to be a Party to? Who is the Party of the First Part, and who is the Party of the Second Part, what is the "blue pickup" involved, when did the contract take effect and what was the "consideration" that made it lawful? If you are a New Testament Christian, you should have no trouble delineating these terms to me. This should be Basic Bible 101, and yet not one Christian in a thousand can answer that one question. Where do you find the terms of the New Testament set forth in Scripture?
I pointed my two young students to Hebrews, Chapter 8 at verse 8:
"For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah..."
These words came from the King James Version, but I want to add here. However differently we Christians believe on other matters, these same exact words, and intent, appear in the Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims and every other old and new translation on my library shelves. Now that you have read this verse, Who is the Party of the First Part? Answer: The Lord. How reliable is this contract? It is as reliable- as Almighty Godís Word, and that is beyond question. Now, be careful in your answer: Who is the Party of the Second Part? Does your Bible say that the Party of the Second Part is the Gentiles, meaning some non-Israelite people? Is the Party of the Second Part, either "all men" or "whosoever will?" No, the exclusive contract is with only two entities, the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Do you see that?
Now, the question to be resolved is this: If you are not part of either the House of Israel or the House of Judah, what right do you have to the New Testament contract, whatever it is? Donít you see that if you are not of one or the other of these entities, you have no right whatever? You are just like that thief making off with my blue Chevy pickup, claiming some kind of right when none really exists! We do not care about all your "extenuating circumstances." We are not interested in your humanist philosophy, posing as Christianity, that insinuates that Almighty God would not be either fair or loving if He made His Contract only with the Israel people. One of these young men tried to introduce the foolish idea that the "Gentiles" were supposed to be "grafted in" and be thus granted a place in the covenant. I reminded him that only olive branches can be grafted into olive trees. You cannot graft in either figs or sugar maple branches to olive trees.
The other young preacher suggested that it was the non-Israelite Gentiles who, in Jesus, had become "spiritual Israel." I asked him if he could show me the term, "spiritual Israel," anywhere in the Bible and he admitted that he had never seen it in all the years he had been studying at Tennessee Temple. I told him that the Word of God states that the New Testament is made with the same people, that is, the sons of the same people, that the Old Testament was made with! Read the next verse:
"Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when 1 took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and 1 regarded them not, saith the Lord."
So, we see here that Almighty God has not changed His Mind, and abandoned His People Israel in favor of "all men" or "whosoever" but made the New Testament with the very same people as before. Tell me, if you are not the children of these fathers of old, what business do you have claiming the Rights and Privileges of this New Covenant?
Of course, they had to admit that they really could not make any such claim if they were not of either Israel or Judah. After a number of years in Bible school, with their spiritual future all carefully laid out, they suddenly had the expressions of someone on the outside looking in. I told them not to let their heart be troubled, for we need to read the terms of the New Covenant to get the rest of the story. It really does have a happy ending for it is the worldís most beautiful love story.
Now that we know who the Party of the First Part is, and who the Party of the Second Part is, what in the New Testament contract is the object, like the blue pickup, of the contract? What is to be done, and by whom? Here is What the Word of God has to say about the terms of the New Testament as set forth in Hebrews 8:10:
"For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; 1 will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and 1 will be to them a God, and they shah be to me a people."
So, you see, contrary to what your preacher teaches you Sunday after Sunday, the New Testament Church is based upon the New Testament contract which specifies Godís Laws twice and never even mentions the matter of grace once. Where do they get this nonsense that the Law has been done away with and they are some New Testament Christians living under simple grace? Donít you see that without the Law in full force and effect, there would be no value whatever to any Grace that might be later bestowed upon us?
To understand this teaching, think of yourself speeding down the highway and being pulled over by a State Trooper. He has your speed posted right there in his radar gun. You have violated the Law. It is the Trooperís job to give you a citation that may cost you $100. You know that you will have to pay. Still, he is looking at you and making a decision as to whether or not to actually give you the citation. Suddenly, for no apparent legal reason, he decides to let you go with a warning: "Take it easy through here." His warning was grace, for by the Law, he should have given you a ticket. Now, suppose that there was no such thing as -a highway speed law? First, the trooper would have no right to even stop you. If he did stop you and then gave you his grace, of what value would it be? No value! He could not have given you a citation anyway!
Do you see how subtle the deceiving ministers are, by destroying the value and beauty of Grace by teaching the lie that the very essence of the New Testament, Godís Law in our minds and hearts, has been done away with at The Cross? Then, if the deceiver can seduce you into eating swineís flesh and the broth of abominable things, he can get you to where you will be forbidden to enter into the Kingdom as set forth in Isaiah 65:1-7 and Isaiah 66:17.
Can you imagine these young preachers by this time? They had believed that they were New Testament Christians. They had been taught, and firmly believed, that this meant that the Law had been abandoned at The Cross, and that Grace had supplanted it for the past 2,000 years. Now, here comes Nord Davis, Jr. teaching them that even the wonderful New Testament applied only to some long-forgotten entities called the House of Israel and the House of Judah. To make matters worse, it now appeared that all non-Israelite "gentiles" seemed to have no part in the New Testament in the first place! As with the dog-lady in the Foreword, they could not steal, beg or wish their way into that exclusive status, even if they wanted to do so. The plain fact is that the New Testament was never made with "the church" at all, and the Bible never says so. Instead, it was made with a very distinct racial and national entity, with implications dealing with matters of the Law. Who, and where, is Jacob-Israel in this day and age?
Letís see if we can figure it out. First of all, when did the New Testament contract go into effect? Some say that the New Testament began with St. Matthew, Chapter 1 and verse 1. Here is what St. Paul has to say on the matter:
"...And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."
- Hebrews 9:15-17
So, the New Testament went into effect at the very instant that Christ died on The Cross. At that instant, wherever the House of Israel and the House of Judah were located in the dispersion, they suddenly had the Law written in their minds and in their hearts. At that moment, Almighty God became a God to them again, and they became His people again. Wherever the Jacob-Israel people were located, from that time on, Christianity began to grow. Why did this happen? It happened because Godís law became an intrinsic part of their minds and hearts. Yes, they were sinners but the difference is that they knew they were doing wrong when they did it. Other peoples, as is clear around the world, do not seem to have this internal guiding gift of The Law written in their inward parts.
There is a school of incorrect theology which teaches that the blessings of the New Testament are now applied to the body of believers which they call, The Church. Yet, long after The Church had been established, St. Paul in Hebrews still goes right back and proclaims the New Testament on the two houses of Jacob-Israel. The New Testament, as you will see as we look closer and closer at it, is a national and a racial blessing. The main thing to resolve is which people are the inheritors of that blessing.
We might study for a long time trying to prove who Israel is in the world today. Why, instead, donít we find out who is driving "the blue Chewy pickup truck?" Does it make sense that whoever is driving the "blue pickup" is the Party of the Second Part in the New Testament contract? Who is it that, through their activities down through the last 2,000 years, seems to display that they have the Laws of Almighty God written in their minds and hearts? Who is it that just happens to have the natural propensity and the intrinsic desire to know and do the ways of God? Who seems to have the bells ringing in their gene memories such that when the Christian gospel is preached, they just naturally respond to it?
Letís be fruit inspectors for a moment. As you look around the world for a great Christian testimony, have we found it in the Chinese people? No, they have their heathen religions, mostly Eastern cults based upon secular humanism, but it is not Christianity. How about the Negroes in Africa? No, then religions, and even the form of Christianity brought there by Christian missionaries, has yet to produce a single Christian nation in all of Africa, even after a hundred years of trying by thousands of sincere people.
How about the most obvious people, those who like to call themselves Jews and Israel? Canít you see that for 2,000 years they have never shown that the Law was written in their minds and hearts since The Cross! If there is any one thing consistent with Jewish people over the centuries, it is that they have never accepted the Christian message, Gospel or Way of life. They demonstrate no evidence at any time of Godís Laws being written in their hearts and minds. If not now, when?
To preach and teach that the anti-christ Jews are of the House of Judah or the House of Israel, is to actually deny the intended effect of Christís death on The Cross. To believe that the Jews are descended from ancient Jacob-Israel may be as wicked a philosophy as any around, for in that one teaching, you are testifying that Jesus Christ did not accomplish His Mission when He went to the Cross, because the Jews have never had the Law written in their inward parts, as specifically established, and set forth in the New Testament contract.
By this time, the young Bible students were completely baffled. They understood every point as I taught it to them. But if the Church cannot be the Jacob-Israel entity of the New Covenant, because the blessings are racial and national in substance, and the Jewish people cannot be Jacob-Israel because it is obvious over the past 2,000 years that the Law was never written in their minds and hearts, pursuant to the New Testament contract, then who are the Israel people in the world today?
Again, in what people do you see driving the "blue Chevy pickup?" As you look at the world today, and think back through history, has there been and is there a race of people who seem to have the Law written in their minds and hearts from the moment of The Cross? What-race of people do you find written about in Foxeís Book of Martyrs? Do you see any Negro or Chinese people in those illustrations? No, they are all your forefathers of Europe being bound to The Stake. Do any of those people appear to be of the Jewish race so far as you can tell? No, all of them are Caucasians and they were being put to death for their Christian faith. Does it seem, after reading your copy of Foxeís Book of Martyrs, that perhaps the Caucasian people might just be the people "driving the blue Chevy pickup?" Are they the very ones who have accepted the Gospel of Jesus Christ by the millions over the years since Our Saviour died for us a couple thousand years ago?
I have in my library a very old book printed in 1680 by Rev. John H. Thompson titled A Cloud Of Witnesses.* A glance down the Table of Contents, I find the names of Alison, Bryce, Cochran, Finlay, ... Nesbit, ... Potter, Smith, and Watt.
Not one name is Jewish so far as I can tell. Not one has a Chinese or East Indian name. The last testimony of one James Robertson, who was executed in Edinburgh, Scotland on December 15, 1682, was eighteen pages long. He had a lot to get off his chest before he died. It begins on page 240 with these precious and inspiring words:
"Dear Friends, True Lovers of Zionís Righteous Cause, ... (ending).... Farewell to all things in time ... Farewell Holy Scriptures. Farewell prayer, meditation, faith and hope. Welcome Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-Welcome praises for evermore."
Here are two witnesses, a man who was executed for his faith in 1680, and the scholarly translators of the Icing James Bible, both telling us that it is among the Caucasian people that you are to look to find Zion, the people of the New Testament; and the lost sheep of the House of Jacob-Israel. These translators even stated that King James was the Hopeful Seed, alluding to the seed of the Scepter of Judah set forth in Genesis, chapter 49. No other people fit, in such exact detail at every point, those marks of Israel identification throughout the Bible. What other people have fulfilled, and seem to be fulfilling every prophecy set forth in the Holy Writ? There are only three classifications of people ever taught to be the Israel of God in Bible prophesy. One is The Church. The second is the Jewish people, and the third are the Caucasian people, who as a racial group, have become Christians, of one brand or another, in the hundreds of millions for two millenniums. Who else has published all the Bibles, sent missionaries everywhere, and been the helping people to all who suffer famine and natural disasters? With precious few exceptions, that divine appointment, that calling from the foundation of the world, has fallen upon those of us of the Caucasian race.
The Jacob-Israel people, Godís Caucasian race, do not hate anyone except those who are ordained to be Godís enemies. We are Godís servant people, those destined by God to be the helpers and the healers of others, even those, to use the Scriptural word, who are the dogs among us. For two hundred years, since Oliver Holden wrote it, we have sung the Coronation hymn:
"Ye Chosen Seed of Israelís Race,
Ye Ransomed from The Fall,
Bring forth His Royal Diadiem
And crown Him Lord of All."
What did the translators of the King James know, and the martyrs for Christ know, and Oliver Holden of the Massachusetts Bay Colony know, that our ministers have taken from us? They never told us that "the Gentiles" are in fact the lost sheep of Israel, scattered across the world, generally north and west of Jerusalem, some 745 years before Christ. We have never been told the glorious truth that instead of being racial outsiders struggling to be "grafted in," we are actually those peculiar and stubborn sheep who eventually hear His Voice and follow Him. Isnít it exciting to know who you are, and that while you were yet a sinner, God has called you into His marvelous light? Isnít it wonderful and humbling to finally know that you and your children are inheritors of the Kingdom to come by both faith and race through the Election of God?
If what has been written here is the truth, are you going to let anyone take it away from you? No! Then you are worthy to be included among those Christians found in Psalm 149 who have been given a major task to do before Christ is to return again. May The Lord grant you wisdom to understand His Word. Amen.
After this lesson, you will understand why Almighty God had his ministers give the following benediction. Most of you have heard it a thousand times. It is found in Numbers 6:22-27:
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, on this wise ye shall bless the childrenof Israel saying unto them, The LORD bless thee, and keep thee; The LORD make his face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace."
False preachers always stop with this verse. There is one more verse that they do not want you to think about: Stand up and demand that your preacher also bless the Christians with the last verse:
"And they shall put my Name [Christian] upon the children of Israel; and 1 will bless them."
Glossary Of Several Terms Used In Star Wars, Lesson One.
Sometimes in listening to ministers on television, I come away with the impression that they suppose that Alexander The Great invented the Greek language for the benefit of Christians years later. The Greek is a military language and many of its idioms have military connotations. The first word that we need to examine is the New Testament word, lost. Jesus said He came not but unto the "lost sheep of the House of Israel." Do you think we ought to know what "lost" means in this and other verses? I asked my young students and they told me that it meant "unsaved," that is, an unrepentant sinner bound for hell. Curiously, there are two words "lost" in the- New Testament. One, where the salt has lost it savour. It is identical to the English word lost. However, in every other case, including the lost sheep, the Greek word is apollumi. It is Strongís word #622 and, as your preachers really know who have studied Greek, it means apo, put away, and llumi, in punishment or chastisement. So, Jesus Christ said he came not but unto the "put away in punishment sheep of the House of Israel." That phrase has a national significance not a personal salvation understanding. That is very different than supposing that the word means an "unsaved" individual. When you read your Bible and come upon the word lost, you are to substitute the phrase, put away in punishment. Suddenly, the whole Scripture will take on a startling new meaning. The Greek word lost never means unsaved in the meaning that it is most commonly used today. Are the lights going on for you?
The second word I want to address in this section is the word church. Christians suppose that this original Greek word meant some sort of assembly that is devoted to Christian worship, preaching, praying and prophesying. Some think it means an assembly, ekklesia, to have a warm Christian fellowship, singing and praising God, and so forth. If you will look up the word assembly in Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, you will again find the national intent of that word translated church. According to Vine's, a church is "a body of citizens gathered to discuss the affairs of state." When Jesus said, "I will build my church," He was saying that He would build an assembly that would be informed as to the affairs of state, that is, the proper use of government. During one of His church meetings, one of the disciples asked. "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the Kingdom to Israel?" [Acts 1:61 Christ's answer was no in a round about way. I contend that the question would never have been asked if the preaching and teaching in the assembly, ekklesia, had not been about the affairs of state. So, can there really be a separation between the church and state? Of course not, for the very idea of "the affairs of state" is built right into the word church. In early New England, and throughout the American 17th Century colonies, they did not improperly call their buildings with the steeple and the bell, often used for worship services, churches. They were called "meeting houses" and it was there that the "affairs of state" were openly discussed. Patrick Henry gave his stirring speech, "Give me liberty or give me death!" in such an assembly meeting in Richmond, Virginia. It was quite properly a church. Thus, a New Testament Church can only mean "an assembly of Jacob-Israel gathered to discuss the affairs of state." One of the Gifts of the Spirit, that all Christians are to have is the Gift of governments as set forth in I Corinthians 12:28. The proper word for the so-called churches today, where the "affairs of state" are never discussed, would be an assembly as set forth in James 2:2. There the word is sunogoge, or synagogue in English. I never attend synagogues. Please do not invite me to go to one.
The third word is Gentiles. I asked one of my students if he was a Jew. He told me that he was not, but rather he was a "gentile." Your preacher will tell you with a straight face, even though he has had Greek and Latin, that anyone who is not a Jew is a gentile. How silly! There is no such thing as a singular gentile in the Greek! Gentiles is from the Greek word ethnos. Look up the word gentiles in your Strong's Concordance, and you will see that it is his Greek word # 1484. Hold your finger there and look up the word nations. You will find that it is also Strong's Greek word # 1484. So, both gentiles and nations are from the same word, ethnos, and mean exactly the same thing. Wherever you see the word nations, you may substitute quite freely the word gentiles. Wherever you see the word gentiles, you should really insert the word nations. They mean one and the same thing in both the Greek and in the Hebrew and gentiles is one of the few words that the King James translators transliterated from the Latin. Since both gentiles and nations mean a collective group, and have no singular meaning, you cannot be a gentile any more than you can be a nation. The Greek language has not changed since 330 BC when it was invented. I refuse to let the ministers change it in their effort to invent a new humanist religion which they like to call New Testament Christianity with its mission to the Gentiles. What is being taught today as fundamental Christianity bears no resemblance to what was taught in America when the Pilgrims and the Scottish Covenanters came here and gave us a government based upon Biblical principles and liberty and prosperity in America was the envy of the world. How can I answer the question, "Are you a New Testament Christian, a Gentile saved by Grace?" Now, you know how to answer it, if you have the time to do so. You must take the time if it appears that the Christian has ears to hear. One minister called me on the phone from the mid-west and told me that my early Star Wars pamphlets had truly opened his eyes. He told me that he had twenty years experience in the pulpit and never come across so much truth. Truth, I told him, was a gift of God which was ordained for him to understand just now. I asked him if he really had twenty years experience in the pulpit, or just 3 months experience 80 times. He admitted I was probably correct.
The fourth word is people as found in Hebrews 8:10 in the Great Contract. What do we know about this word "people?" Are they whosoever will? No, the New Testament contract specifically states that it is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, and not with "the church" or with some new group of non-Israel people. Almighty God, through the pen of St. Paul who was quoting Jeremiah 31, used the Greek word laos for people. He could have selected the Greek word ochlos, meaning a crowd, throng or multitude. He did not select the Greek word, demos, meaning some common, vulgar people as spoken of in Acts 12:22. He did not select the Greek word thnos, meaning a common nation as in Roman 10:19. He did not use the Greek word for people, anthropos, meaning mankind in general as translated "men", i.e. people in John 6:10. If salvation was for All Men, The World, etc., any of these Greek words could have been used to make anyone a "New Testament Christian." But Paul did not use any of these words here, but instead the Greek word Laos. Here is what the authoritative VINE'S has to say about this very specific Greek word, Laos:
"Laos is used of a people at large, especially a people assembled, a people of the same race and language."
Is it time to rest my case on this matter of peoples and races?