The "bloody slaughter" myth is a lie.

I also find it interesting that someone who pretends to be Catholic seems to believe that the holy land belongs to the (Muslim) Arabs.

Either way, it was the Arabs who attacked Israel in 1948. And that Israel survived the attack and the following attacks was a miracle.

If you believe that a couple hundred thousand Jews actually planned a war against one hundred million Arabs led by the British-trained and equipped Transjordanian army you are insane.

You are.

You claim the fact that the Israelites live in the land now is "godless" and that the land belongs to the Arabs.

You are denying that G-d kept His promise by denying my people the right to live in the land of promise.

Where did this "bloody slaughter" myth originate anyway?

Israel was already settled by Jews before World War II. Then happened the Holocaust and for a few months the world thought that maybe all the stories told about the blood-thirsty Jews were lies.

But three years later it was forgotten and the Arabs were allowed to attack the Jews to "throw them into the sea" under the leadership of the British-trained Tranjordanian army led by British officers and under the "spiritual guidance" of Hitler's good friend, the "Grandt Mufti" of Jerusalem, Yasser Arafat's uncle and mentor.

The attacked were Jews that survived the Holocaust and fled to British territory and middle-eastern Jews who had escaped Nazi-allied Iraq and other Arab countries as well as native "Palestinian" Jews.

And when the Arabs failed to throw the Jews into the sea and a second Holocaust was avoided, the legend of the "bloody slaughter" of "natives" (because obviously the attacking Arabs were "native" to "Palestine", like Cairo-born Arafat) was born, because what other explanation was there for the Arab defeat?

How could it be that for the first time in history a routine slaughter of Jews failed to materialise? How dare the Jews to fight back for the first time in thousands of years? Why of all peoples did the Arabs fall victim to such a novelty. It's unfair. Everybody else was allowed to kill the Jews whenever it came handy. Why did the dream of a Jew-free middle-east have to fail so quickly when Germany had the thing going for Europe for years?

Or in the words of Palestinian Arab leader Al-Husainy in a draft declaration of German-Arab cooperation submitted to Germany:

"Germany and Italy recognize the right of the Arab countries to solve the question of the Jewish elements, which exist in Palestine and in the other Arab countries, as required by the national and ethnic interests of the Arabs, and as the Jewish question was solved in Germany and Italy."

It was outrageous.

And we are back to the blood libels.

But to top it all, the lies are not told by honest fascists in black uniforms and skull symbols on their hats. No. They are told by self-proclaimed Christians and Muslims.

And suddenly the invading Arab armies were forgotten and the war was not between Israel and many Arab states but between evil Zionists and a "native population" (who themselves barely fought in the war and were told by the invading armies to leave the very country the armies claimed to want to "liberate").

History changed. It CANNOT be that a small group of Jews beats an empire. It must not be. It would be a miracle and it must not be.

Hence an Arab attack becomes a Jewish slaughter of a native population. And suddenly all Arabs in Palestine, including those who migrated to Israel from Egypt in search for jobs in a Zionist-created economy, were more "native" than Jewish communities that had lived in Hevron and Jerusalem for over 3000 years until thrown out by the Arabs during the "Jewish slaughter of native Palestinians".

"does this have something to do with the "worthyiness" of the people?"

Not at all.  However you do know my feelings on the use of the term "worthy".  All are worthy, for God created all, but some are simply not ready to render unto God that which is Gods.

Is this all that you do for "research", look into more books and texts?  I'm asking because it's all that you mentioned.  Do you have no life experiences that aid you in proving or disproving the validity of what you read?

Yes KFC, as a matter of fact I did attend sunday school, but only for a short period of time due to the fact that my father was transfered overseas.  What I learned there was not the jewish histories nor even very much about Jesus, but of something far more important, that of the parable of the mustard seed.  In all fairness I must say that what I learned there in sunday school was the impetus that I needed as a child to further explore the spiritual.

lula posts:

Yes, this passage is in the NT, written by St.Paul to the Romans 11:25-27,

"25 For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, (Lest you should be be wise in your own conceits), taht blindness in part has happened in Isreal, until the fullness of the Gentiles should come in. 26 and so all Isreal should be saved; as it is written: "There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob", 27 and this is to them my covenant: when I shall take away their sins."

KFC POSTS:

Ancient Judaism had oral Tradition as does the Catholic Church have Apostolic oral Tradition. The Protestant forefathers revolted from the Church and rejected Apostolic oral Tradition so it's not surprising that you, following Protestantism' own brand of tradition, makes statements such as this.

It's dogma developed and taught by Protestant oral tradition that holds sway over your interpretation of this passage of Scripture. To you,  "All" literally means every Jew, en masse will be saved and "Isreal" literally means in the modern physical state of Isreal.  But that you rely on Protestant oral tradition to come to this interpretation of Scripture escapes your notice. Again, why did you delete my post in which that was pointed out?

What does the clause of v. 26  mean? What's the correct interpretation?

You have often said,  "It's all about Him". So practice what you preach and apply "All Isreal" to Truth..."All Isreal" means all  those who accept Christ as Lord God and keep His commands, the summation of which is to love God and one's neighbor for God's sake. 

Ever since Adam and Eve fell into sin, it's been a spiritual battle for souls...In Genesis, God promised a Redeemer of all mankind....again, it's all about Him....Scripture is clear...it boils down to those who accept Christ and those who reject Him.

"All Isreal" consists of only those of ancient Judaism who were faithful ..only they retained the adoption...only they are the "remnant". The rest  belong to Satan.

The kind of "remnant' here is a group that is left over from a larger group.

I'm not going to belabor the point other than to say that a literal interpretation of this clause requirers the interpreter to satisfy the total inclusiveness of the word "all" and that hasn't been done by anyone and for good reason becasue it doesn't mean what you say it means.

Besides that, from St.Paul's use of the word "all" in other parts of Romans as well as his use of the word "remnant"  we can properly conclude taht he is including all the remnant of Jews from the Old Testament taht are added to all the remnant of Jews in the NT, such as both comprise "all Isreal".This way, God saves "Isreal" just as He intended to from the beginning when He gave His promises to Abraham.

Yeah, I would also use the word "all" to mean "some of the lot".

And the theology you know quite well is Protestant theology that comes from the Protestant forefathers and handed down through Portestand oral tradition which falsely teaches that Baptism is not necessary for salvation and doesn't wash away sins which is what your are repeating here.

Acts 22:16 fully supports that Baptism washes away sins. Christ didn't institute the Sacrament of Baptism and command that Baptism be done on all converts for no reason.

Excuse me Lulapilgrim, but what makes you think that the baptism of which Jesus speaks and instructs his apostles to perform is a baptism of water? 

Did not John the baptist say "I indeed baptize you with water, for repentance.  But he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to bear.  He will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire."?

Can you explain this?

you keep saying this over and over and over.  I showed you where it was the blood of Christ or the calling on his name that washes away sins.  You admitted it by saying clearly it's God who washes away sins.  Then you resort back to this yet once again.  Do you know how absured this is? 

Ok, let's look at this from another angle shall we?  Go to Matt 15:1-20.  I'll put in only the first portion. You read the rest:

"Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees which were of Jerusalem saying, 'why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders for they wash not their hands when they eat bread?'  He answered them 'Why do you also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?  For God commanded saying Honour your father and mother and He that curses father or mother let him die the death but you say whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, it is a gift, by whatsoever you might be profited by me; and honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free.  Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.  You hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you saying, This people draw nigh to me with their lips but their heart is far from me.  But in vain they do worship me teachng for doctrines the commandments of men.  And he called the multitude and said to them, Hear and understand; Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a man, but that which comes out of the mouth this defiles a man. 

Then his disciples said to him, did you know that the Pharisees were offended, after they head this saying? But he answered and said Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted, shall be rooted up.  Let them alone, they be blind leaders of the blind.  And if the blind lead the blind both shall fall into the ditch. "

The point of the story is external washings could NOT keep the Pharisees or anyone else spiritually clean.  It's the same with baptism.  It's NOT about the externals.  Physical water baptism is an external and a work.  It doesn't save nor does it wash away any sin.  Sin comes from within, from the heart. 

in v2 only traditional interpretation and expansion of the law required this cleansing, (Lev 22:1-16)

The false religion of legalistic Judaism like all false systems (RCC included) cannot change the inside so it is left to manipulate life on the outside.  That's what false religion is all about.  It's not about a relationship but about legalism and adherence to the church leaders' traditions. 

I see alot of similarities between the Pharisees traditions and legalisms and that of the RCC's traditions and dogmas.  They're pretty much the same.  It's like the modern RCC is the replacement for the Judizers of old.  Maybe that's the real genuine replacement that has taken place.  Makes much more sense. 

BINGO!  Exactly.  It has NOTHING to do with natural water!  Notice the word "but"?   External baptism does NOTHING to remedy sin.  That was John's whole point. 

OH, you said this yourself.  Good you admit it.  Now go to the gospels and read what Christ had to say about these traditions.  Hint:  they were NOT good.   So it's a GOOD thing we "Protestants" have rejected these oral traditions.  Not a bad thing. 

"Jesus said to the multitude and to his disciples:  The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat (like the RCC sit in Jesus' seat) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, but DO NOT do after their works; for they say and do not.  For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be born and lay them on men's shoulders' but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers (too many rings?) .  But all their works they do for to be seen of men, they make broad their phylacteries (catechisms) and enlarge the borders of their garments (robes).  And love the uppermost rooms at feasts and the chief seats in the synagogues (cathedrals & Bascilica), and greetings in the markets (big whigs) and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi (Father, Priest, Bishop, Pope).  But be not you called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ; and you ARE ALL BROTHERS.  And call NO MAN your father upon the earth; for one is your Father which is in heaven.  Neither be you called masters (God's vicars on earth) ; for one is your Master even Christ.....but who unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!  for you shut up the kindgom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, neither suffer you them that are entering to go in.....woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!  for you compass sea and land to make one proselyte and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.  (by their traditions).....even so you also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity..."  Mattew 23

It's funny you say this on one hand and then when convenient you like to point out the thousands of "protestant" religions?  Isn't this a contradiction?  I'll answer that...

Yes it is.  Because the "Protestants" don't have oral traditions.  Maybe some of the cults do but true Christianity has no outside traditions they adhere to equal to the scriptures.   How can we if we're so fractured as you say?  Makes no sense. 

It's the RCC who has handed down oral traditions as did the Pharisees.  Not the Protestants as YOU SAID YOURSELF.  Let me go on the record and I'll say it big and plain.  I HAVE NO ORAL TRADITIONS THAT I ADHERE TO THAT IS OUTSIDE OF SCRIPTURE CALLING IT EQUAL TO SCRIPTURE. 

You do and you admit you do.  So please stop saying otherwise.  It gets tiring. 

Again hopefully for the LAST time.  There is NO such thing as Protestant oral tradition. 

All means all.  It means the promises made to the patriarchs are irrevocable.  Israel must be restored.  As a Nation. 

Look at v25.  Israel's blindness is partial and temporary.  The fullness of the Gentiles means the full number of Gentiles who will be saved during this temporary blindness.  After that God will turn again to the Jews and will save "all Israel" just like it says. 

The clause in v26 meaning "there shall come out of Zion the Deliverer and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob?" 

This means Christ's rule is related or associated with Zion.  Check this out; this has not happened yet. 

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.  And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains and shall be exalted above the hills and all nations shall flow into it.  And many people shall go and say Come you and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us his ways and we will walk in his paths; for out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.   Isa 2:1-3

I find it interesting that we even have to discuss what "all" means.

Lula specifically said that "all Israel" means just some of the Israelites. It's weird. Of course "all" means "all". That's what "all" means.

What does it mean when G-d gives the holy land to Abraham and his descendants and then commands the descendants of Jacob to live there? To me it means that G-d gave the holy land to Abraham and his descendants and that the descendants of Jacob should must live there (and about half of them do, so we are good). I cannot imagine that it means that the land belongs to random people who managed to invade and were allowed to stay during Turkish rule (although they might have a right to live there too, just like anybody else who wants to live there and manages to behave).

I always thought that this is one of the most impressive quotes from the Bible.

Oddly enough, there is the same discussion in Islam. There is the old school, who say that G-d's word is forever and that Israel belongs to the Jews. And then there is the new school, which claims for itself the gift of prophecy (although it doesn't acknowledge that it does) and says that this has changed since G-d informed the world about it in the Bible and the Qur'an.

I guess it is about one's opinion about what "eternity" means. Some people believe in the traditional eternity, others use a new, improved and much shorter eternity that is easier to deal with.

I understand what she means when she says remnant.  While all Israel will be saved not all individual Jews will be.   Like Judas.  He was not saved.  You go back to the OT and you'll see Jacob was chosen, but Esau was not.  Isaac was chosen but Ishmael was not.  You look at the Jews during the times of the Kings and the Judges and you'll see some were good godly leaders and some were not.  King Ahab for one was a wicked Jewish King.  King David was a good Godly king.  Both were Jewish.  Both were not "saved." 

While there will be a remnant of Jewish believers in the end all Israel will be saved meaning God will save the Nation intact and it will be from this nation that he will rule (Psalm 2).   

just like all is all, eternity is eternity.  I go by the definition of scripture not man's opinion. 

I never heard of a short eternity...sounds like an oxy moron to me. 

lula posts:

KFC POSTS:

The New Testament is full of passages that when put together teach Baptism and it's effects.  

---THAT CHRIST'S DEATH ESTABLISHED THE NEW AND ETERNAL COVENANT IN HIS BLOOD, BAPTISM IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION 

St.John 3:5.

"Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

"Unless a man be born again"... By these words Jeus declared the necessity of baptism; and by the word "water",  it is evident that the application of WATER is necessary with the WORDS of St.MATT. 28:19 INVOKING THE BLESSED TRINITY.  

St.Matt. 28:19,  

16 And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. 18 And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. 19 Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

----That BAPTISM IS FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS..... St.Peter told the Jews "do penance and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins.

Acts 2: 36-39

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. 37 Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38 But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

kfc posts:

In acts 22:16, Ananais told Paul to "....be baptized and wash away thy sins invoking His name" . ....and St.Peter said "be baptized.."  What do they mean by "be baptized"? How's that done?

Are you saying that after Pentecost, when St.Peter baptized those thousands of converts, it was only an external washing?

The Christian rite of Baptism is a spiritual washing, KKC that regenerates the soul and washes away sins. That is accomplished not by the water used in the rite but by the merits of Christ's death on the Cross and invoking the name of the Blessed Trinity, the Holy Spirit descends and washes away or cleanses the stain of sin away with sanctifying grace.

 Sin is a free will offense against God and His commands. He says don't commit aduiltery and if you commit adultery you have committed a sin against God and His command. Sin comes from the world, the flesh and the devil, not from the heart. We sin  through our thoughts, our words and actions.  Sin is a stain upon our immortal soul. We acknowledge our sins by confessing them and  by  repentance,  with the firm intention to sin no more.  If we are truly repentant and only God knows for only He knows our heart, then our sins are forgiven..washed away  by the gift of sanctifying grace thourhg  the Holy SPirit.