R U N the 1%?

If Jesus came into your church, would you recognize Him?  While my guess is completely subjective, I would guess that fewer than 1% would recognize the Messiah, King of Israel, if He walked into your church building.

No, He likely won’t come dressed as a homeless guy, though we should receive the homeless with love and concern.

He won’t be in a long robe and probably won’t have longish hair.  He will have a beard.

In fact, 99% of the images and ideas we have of Him are wrong based on simple reading of Scripture.

You won’t know based on a ‘gut feeling.’  Your emotions will fail you EVERY time.

You MUST be able to tell based on facts that are verifiable.  Scars?  May or may not work…

How then will you KNOW without a shadow of a doubt who He is and that He is the REAL deal?

Scripture tells us exactly how we can tell and it is precisely why Christendom has utterly failed at reaching the Jews.

Jesus (Yeshua) will be like MosesHe will keep and teach the Torah.  He did in His first coming and He will in His second coming.  (The first time as a lamb, the second time as a lion!)

He will show up at your church on a sabbath.  Will you be there, or will the doors be locked.

He will bypass the ham on the potluck buffet.  (You’ll be lucky if He doesn’t DESTROY whoever brought it!!)

He will be excited about the feast day!  (You do know that He is coming on a specific feast day that anyone understanding Lev. 23 can explain, right?)

He will be wearing Tzitzits.  Yeah, those tassel-looking things you think only the Jews wear?  Oh, yeah!

And, He will be talking about the glories of HIS Torah.

If I’m talking about things you’ve never heard, I totally understand.  You are in the 99% like I was.  I’m a seminary trained pastor who stood in the pulpit for 10 years before the light of truth began to peep through the cracks appearing in the traditions and doctrines of men that I had been taught.  Once I began to recognize the fallacies that the Protestant Church had inherited from the Roman Catholic Church, the scales REALLY fell off and Scripture began to fit together and make total sense…

More about MY story.

More about the false image of Jesus we have accepted and perpetuated.

If you are hungry to know the Messiah in a very real and powerful way, if you know there is more to what you have been taught, but can’t figure it out, if your heart is crying out for TRUTH, then this is the place for you.  Start reading and processing.  Chase links.  You will be challenged and many things you thought you knew will be tested, but in the end you will find a peace/shalom and a relationship that is beyond anything you thought possible.

If you’d like to contact me personally, use the form on the Contact Us page.  I am happy to answer questions or direct you to specific pages.

May our Father lead and guide you by His Spirit into all Truth!

Shalom!

_______________

If this post has blessed or challenged you, please consider sharing it.

About Pete Rambo

Details in 'About' page @ natsab.wordpress.com Basically, husband of one, father of four. Pastor x 11 years, former business and military background. Micro-farmer. Messianic believer in Yeshua haMashiach!
This entry was posted in A Thought... and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to R U N the 1%?

  1. Maruanda says:

    Shalom Pete, thank you so much for this post. At the beginning of the year it is always good to read these facts again to remind us who our Yeshua really is in Spirit, Truth and human form.

    Regards from a hot summer Cape Town!
    Maruanda

    Like

  2. That is the one man they will be sure to throw out into the cold of winter and they will say this: And I quote from Isaiah Chapter sixty Six and verse four forward: I also will choose their delusions,a nd will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake , they did not hear: but they did eveil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not. Hear the word of Yhwh, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hatedyou, that castyou out for my name’s sake, said, Let Yhwh be glorified: be he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed. (Ending of Isaiah chapter sixty six and verse four through five).

    Like

    • Pete Rambo says:

      Yep. I’ve used that very passage… it continues on through most of that chapter. It is clear, those who THINK they know who HE is, are in for a rude awakening… Thus the purpose of the article.

      We beg and plead for people to awaken from the pagan syncretized induced stupor, before it is too late.

      Like

  3. I forgot one thing. You made one tiny error in your article, ( tongue in cheek). He would not be walking into a church building. He will be the guy on the street and when Matthew chapter twenty five and verses thrity one to end of chapter occurs: They will say in astonishment “That was You?”

    Like

  4. Only God can “awaken” anyone. As that is gradually distilling into my mind I have a lot less stress. God never asked me to save anyone. He just asked me to keep being faithful to him.

    Like

  5. Kevin McMillen says:

    I’m sorry but you really have a lot to learn if you think that if Jesus came to earth today that he’d be wearing tzi tzis. The Word, the one we know as Jesus, is not Hebrew. He has existed eternally. He has not eternally worn tzi tzis. Tzi tzis were a requirement of the Mt. Sinai covenant which has ended. Their purpose was to remind Israel of God’s laws. Now that God has written his laws into our hearts and minds we have no need of tzi tzis. For the record I have been a Sabbath and Feast keeper for 50 years.
    If Jesus came to your church today, and if you were looking for a Jew, you’d be sorely disappointed. The body that he had two thousand years ago is not the body that he has today, nor would he be limited to a Jewish body if he came to earth today. He could come as a woman if he chose, since God is neither male nor female. The fact is, he’s not going to come in a physical body, he’s going to come in an all.powerful spirit body.

    Like

    • Pete Rambo says:

      I would disagree on multiple points…

      Yeshua remains a Hebrew of the tribe of Judah. He is the Lion of the Tribe of Judah.

      He will be obedient to His own Law, just as He was CE 30ish.

      God’s Law is not yet written on our heart, or ‘no more will a man teach his to ”know the Lord,” for they will all know the Lord’

      When He returns HIS robe will be stained with blood and a name will be on HIS thigh… no woman need apply.

      Like

      • Kevin McMillen says:

        Guess what Pete, your article wasn’t talking about when Jesus actually returns, it was talking about a fictitious entering of Jesus into ones church. You asked if Jesus were to walk into your church today. Also the Greek masculine His is irrelevant to who God the Father and Jesus really is because it says that God made male and female in His (yeah it says His but that’s merely a grammatical necessity). God has both male and female attributes because he made both in “” His” ” lol, don’t get too technical, image. No God doesn’t have the sexual organs of either. That’s just ignorant to think so.

        Me thinks you take symbolism too seriously!

        Like

  6. Kevin McMillen says:

    Pete, this is Kevin McMillen, I really don’t want to come across as offensive but sometimes truth hurts. Just as Jesus hurt the Jews 2000 years ago with truth. Yes, true christians are to keep the sabbath and the feasts but if you are German, or Italian, or Scottish/Irish like myself, we are not Hebrew. We don’t have to use Hebrew words to express ourselves. We don’t have to use extra biblical Jewish customs to worship God, like prayer shauls. The old Mt. Sinai covenant ended 2,000 years ago. The New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is not a continuation of the Mt. Sinai covenant, it is a continuation of the Everlasting covenant that has existed from before the foundation of the world.

    I’ll post my understanding of the covenants later.

    Like

  7. Kevin McMillen says:

    Here’s an old email that I sent a friend explaining the covenants.

    ********

    Thanks, I’ve been dealing with those who misunderstand Paul for years. Even sabbath keepers who claim Paul was a false apostle because of their misunderstanding him.

    The WCG, HWA and his clergy class have confused many. I think they might have done more harm to the understanding of the bible than good.

    I know many who believe that the New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is just a continuation of the old Mt. Sinai covenant. It is not. It was added til the Seed, Jesus, came.

    There is an Everlasting covenant, what I call a Salvation covenant, that has existed from before the foundation of the world. The New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is a continuation of that covenant, not the old Mt. Sinai covenant which was merely added because of transgressions.

    The first mention of the Salvation covenant was in the garden when God told the serpent that the woman’s seed would “bruise his head”. A prophecy of Jesus.

    Noah was under the Salvation covenant. Abraham was under the Salvation covenant. The New Covenant that God will make with Israel and Judah in the Kingdom is a continuation of the Salvation covenant. And the covenant that we are under now, the New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is a continuation of that ongoing, Everlasting, Salvation covenant.

    There’s only one covenant that can give Eternal life and the old Mt. Sinai covenant isn’t it!

    Kevin

    Like

    • Pete Rambo says:

      Life is in Yeshua’s blood and we are to walk as He walked… obedient to the Commandments. Quite simple until peeps try to parse it all into differing weights and measures for different peoples and times…

      Like

  8. Kevin McMillen says:

    Something that I wrote on this blog:

    https://truthsnitch.com/2018/08/27/refuting-the-pagan-origins-of-the-lords-day-myth-part-2-did-the-roman-catholic-church-change-the-sabbath-from-saturday-to-sunday/#sthash.9MsqPQj6.dpbs

    ******************************************

    Kevin McMillen
    MARCH 4, 2019 AT 1:25 PM
    Tiff, I really think you’re getting too technical with what sabbatarians are claiming when it comes to Sunday keeping. Honestly I can’t speak for all sabbatarians because there are so many different views just as there are among “Sunday keepers”. There are some who believe in keeping Sunday like the Sabbath, no work. Most believe that any day can be kept, though that view is more recently promoted because of sabbatarian arguments.

    Just because pagans didn’t gather weekly on Sunday does not negate the sabbatarian argument that Sunday was a special day for sun worshippers. Constantine’s edict about the venerable day of the sun proves that.

    You’re whole argument swings on the fact that pagans didn’t gather on Sunday, to which I also say, who cares. Sunday was still the day of the sun, just as Saturday was the day of Saturn. I get a kick out of people arguing with Sabbath keepers claiming that Saturday is just as pagan as Sunday. Just as hilarious are Sabbath keepers who say Saturday is the Sabbath. No it’s not. The Sabbath is from sunset on the day we call Friday til sunset on the day we call Saturday. The pagan names we use are irrelevant.

    As I mentioned above, the idea that the early church got together on the “first day of the week” comes from a total misunderstanding of scripture. Just as the idea that the Old Covenant equates to God’s law. God’s law was in existence long before the Mt. Sinai covenant. Abraham kept God’s law. Just because Gen. 1 doesn’t have a systematic list of all of God’s laws doesn’t mean they didn’t exist.

    Heb. 11 talks about Abraham seeking a city which has foundations whose builder is God. Do you know of any scripture in Gen. that tells us just when Abraham was told about this city? It’s not there, but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t told.

    We know that Abraham obeyed God’s voice, his charge, his commandments and his laws. Ge. 26:5 are we to conclude this only means Abraham obeyed when he was told to leave his country or when he was about to sacrifice Isaac?
    No, Abraham knew what God’s laws were. People sinned long before Mt. Sinai but Paul said where there is no law there is no sin/transgression. So the law had to exist long before Sinai.

    That doesn’t mean that we’re saved by law keeping, far from it, there has never been a law given that can give life, as Paul so clearly says. Sure, some Sabbath keepers are legalistic, but I know many Sunday keepers who are legalistic.

    Anyone who keeps any law thinking they’re going to gain any brownie points with God is sorely mistaken. This is coming from someone who has kept the Sabbath and Feast days for 52 years. I know where my salvation comes and it comes solely from the death and life of Christ. But law breaking is still sin, Sabbath breaking is still sin, and misunderstanding Paul, thinking he’s against God’s law proves nothing. Paul was never against God’s law, he was against the idea that salvation, or brownie points, can be earned by law keeping. To which I 100% agree. But does that mean I can go out and steal all that I want now? Or can I go out and cheat on my wife now? So why do most Christians assume we can go out and break the Sabbath now?

    Jesus clearly said the Sabbath was made for mankind. The Sabbath will be kept in the millennium, just read Is. 66, and the Feast of Tabernacles will be kept in the millennium, read Zech. 14.

    It’s not my intent to argue with you but from your web site it’s obvious that you don’t understand why most Sabbath keepers keep the Sabbath. Sure, some are legalistic, and many use ignorant arguments, such as those who claim to keep the Sabbath because of the fourth commandment. The Ten Commandments are the words of the Old Mt. Sinai covenant and I don’t keep the Sabbath nor the Feast days because of the Old Covenant. If I did I’d have to go to Jerusalem three times a year.

    So, my main point is that your posts here do refute many of the ignorant points made by many Sabbath keepers and almost all SDA’s, but you don’t refute all arguments about Sabbath keeping.

    Before you write about the law and covenants remember one thing:

    1Ti 1:7

    Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

    The only purpose of the law is to reveal what is sin. Can something be sin one minute and not sin the next? I don’t think so. So the question is, those who think the law is unimportant, do they really understand what they are talking about? The law doesn’t save, but if we didn’t break the law we’d have no need for a savior! There can be no grace without law!

    Kevin McMillen

    Like

    • Pete Rambo says:

      Kevin,

      Your argument here fails. While most of what you say is correct on both sides of your big fail, you shoot yourself in the foit by denigrating the ‘Sinai Covenant.’ It is the Sinai Covenant that details and convicts of sin. Hear the Word of God concerning Hus Torah:

      How blessed are those whose way is blameless, who walk in the Torah of the Lord.

      So, I will keep Your Torah continually, forever and ever and I will walk at LIBERTY for I seek Your precepts.

      Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness and Your Torah is truth.

      I long for your Yeshua, O Lord, and Your Torah is my delight.

      There are hundreds if verses thatconfirm the everlasting nature of God’s Law. It is not ‘old’ and it still applies.

      Shalom

      Like

      • Kevin McMillen says:

        Pete, Pete, Pete, you’re the one who is completely failing in understanding. God’s law and the Sinai covenant are two separate things. Therein lies your problem of understanding. A covenant is a contract, an agreement. I I contract with someone to build their house the house and the contract are two distinct entities. If they fail to live up to the contract that doesn’t mean the house doesn’t exist if I built it. All the Sinai covenant was was an agreement to obey God’s laws and he would be their God. An ending of the covenant doesn’t end God’s laws.

        Paul in Galatians is clear to those willing to hear. He calls the added Sinai covenant a schoolmaster which we are no longer under. Gal. 3:24,25. Protestants think this ends God’s law, and Hebrew Roots folks don’t understand it because it doesn’t fit tgeir elemetary understanding. Galatians is clear, we are not under the schoolmaster. We are not Hagar, not of Mt. Sinai.

        You admit yourself that you don’t understand Paul. Is it Paul’s fault or your own? Protestants don’t understand Paul because his writings don’t fit their theology. Hebrew Roots don’t understand Paul because his writings don’t fit their theology. Is the problem with Paul or with both groups theology? Obviously protestant theology is wrong and just as obvious Hebrew Roots theology is wrong.

        I got a kick out of you’re telling me that the Jer. 31 covenant means a renewal when that’s exactly what I had said in an earlier comment. Your problem is that you think it’s a renewal of the Sinai covenant when in reality it’s a renewal of the Everlasting covenant that has been in existence since creation.

        as I said in that comment the Promise covenant that God made with Abraham is a continuation/renewal of the Everlasting covenant. The New Covenant in Jesus’ blood is a contiuation/renewal of that same Everlasting covenant and the New Covenant of Jer. 31 that God will make with Israel and Judah is a continuation/renewal of the same covenant. The Mt. Sinai covenant is not a renewal it’s an additional covenant that God added because Israel was transgressing his laws. Paul is plain in Galatians 3 on that and he’s plain that it was only until the Seed should come and that we are not under that schoolmaster. Why you stubbornly refuse to understand this simple concept is beyond me. You just want to argue clear simple explanations because if I’m correct you’ll have to admit that you’ve been wrong and those who you’ve been teaching will learn that you’re a student trying to be a teacher. That’s nothing to be ashamed of, the shame is refusing to acknowledge facts when they are presented to you.

        Again, I’m not a protestant, I’m not against God’s law, I’ve kept the sabbath and feasts for over 50 years. Your stubbornness is the problem here.

        If you or anyone else wants to discuss further then email me. I’ve been accused of trying to annul God’s law, been accused of a “big fail” when I’ve done nothing but uphold God’s law on here. The only difference is that my understanding of God’s law goes beyond Sinai. The sabbath goes beyond Sinai, the feasts go beyond Sinai. Read Gal. 4, let go of Hagar, the bondwoman and cling to the free woman. Not free from obeying God’s law but free from Sinai which is death!

        Kevin McMillen

        Like

  9. Kevin McMillen says:

    Something that I wrote on this site:

    https://martinoutlook.wordpress.com/2009/08/17/dale-ratzlaff-responds-about-the-sabbath/

    Pete, if it’s too long feel free to delete.

    ************************************

    Hopefully this will make it’s way to Dale R. Dale states, correctly, that the N.T. has no written command to keep the Sabbath. Why? Because the purpose of the N.T. was not to give a systematic list of laws and commands.

    Dale, could you show in the N.T. a systematic list of laws and commands? One must search through the letters/epistles to find commands as they were cassually mentioned in the writings. Not one book or chapter in the N.T. was intended to be a systematic list of laws and commands as the Books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy was.

    Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy was not the origination of these commands and laws. Gen. 26:5 proves they existed long before Sinai, they were just codified (systematically listed) at Sinai, they were commands and laws from creation, and you can’t prove otherwise.

    Next I want to state that I am not nor have I ever been a SDA. I do not believe that EW’s writings are the sop, but I am a Sabbath keeper and I find this paragraph in your book quite enlightening to your attempt at twisting truth.

    You state:

    “”Adventists fail to observe that in the writings of John, the Greek
    word, entole, and translated “commandment” in Revelation 12:17, is
    never used for the old covenant, Ten Commandment, law. Rather John
    always refers to old covenant law by the Greek word, nomos,
    translated, “law.” Thus, their claim that the Sabbath commandment is
    in view here is without warrant.””

    First, we’re not discussing the Old Covenant, we’re discussing God’s laws and commands. Why was the law added to the Promise (Thus creating the Old Mt Sinai Covenant)? Because of transgressions!!!!! Gal. 3

    Where there is no law there is no transgression. Remember that statement by Paul? So, prior to the addition of the law to the Promise, there had to be commands and laws or else there would be no trangressions.

    Are you going to tell me that the laws added to the Promise because of trangressions, had nothting to do with the commands and laws Israel was transgressing? That is insane.

    If Israel was transgressing laws prior to Sinai, then it only makes sense that the laws that God added (as a condition) to the Promise dealt with those trangressions. Including the Sabbath.

    You claim that the Greek word ‘entole’ has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments law. Let’s see if that is true.

    Mat 5:18
    For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    Mat 5:19
    Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    Dale, now notice, Jesus says “these commandments” referring to the law in the previous verse. Now Dale, what is the Greek word used here? Entole.

    Adventists believe that when the word commandment is used in the N.T. that it means the Ten Commandments, but the truth is it refers to all the written law and commands in the scriptures, unless they have explicitly been changed in the N.T. as circumcision, sacrifices, and the Priesthood.

    A point that I want to make to any SDA reading this. The changing of the sacrificial system and the Priesthood to that of Jesus in no way does away with the Feast days. Zech. 14 proves that God’s Feast days will be kept in Jesus’ Kingdom.

    SDA use Col. 2:16,17 to try to prove the Feast days are done away, saying that when the bible uses the plural Sabbaths (Greek – sabbaton) that the Annual Sabbaths are being spoken of.

    If that is true, that the plural usage of Sabbaths in the bible means the annual Sabbaths, then I want to show all SDA what God’s true “SIGN” is.

    Eze 20:12
    Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them.

    Notice that the Lord says here that his Sabbaths (plural) are the sign between God and who his people are.

    He says this again and again in Ezekiel 20

    Eze 20:16
    Because they despised my judgments, and walked not in my statutes, but polluted my sabbaths: for their heart went after their idols.

    I say that SDA have despised God’s Sabbaths (plural) and in their heart went after idols (Christmas and Easter).

    SDA can’t have it both ways, either the plural Sabbaths means the annual Sabbaths or not. Which is it? Col. 2:16,17 doesn’t do away with anything anyway. It says not to let anyone judge you.

    It doesn’t say don’t let anyone judge you for not keeping them, it just says don’t let anyone judge you.

    Tell me, who would judge the Gentile Colossians for ((((NOT!!!!!!)))) keeping the annual Sabbaths? They weren’t circumcised. Jews wouldn’t judge them for not keeping them. Gentiles wouldn’t judge them for not keeping them.

    Logically the only ones that would judge them would be Jews who judged them. Saying, you’re not circumcised, you aren’t to keep the Sabbath or the Feasts unless you are circumcised.

    They would also judge them for not keeping the days using the oral traditions of the fathers. Notice how Col. 2 mentions following traditions of men.

    As I said, Col. 2 says nothing about npot judging for not keeping them, the Colossians were being judged because they were indeed keeping the Sabbath and Feast days.

    Just as the Corinthians were keeping the Feasts.

    1Co 5:8
    Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    The Galatians were keeping the Sabbath and Feasts.

    Gal 4:10
    Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

    Gal 4:11
    I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

    Was paul afraid of them because they were observing the days or because of how they were keeping the days?

    Study the Greek word for observe. (paratereo) Study every time it’s used in the bible. It means to scrupulously observe or watch. The Galatians were legalistically observing the days. They were most likely also observing the oral traditions.

    It wasn’t the fact that they were keeping the Sabbath or the Feasts that Paul was afraid for them, it was how they were keeping them.

    How could Paul be afraid for them keeping them since he kept them himself?

    It was Jesus custom to keep the sabbath.

    Luk 4:16
    And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

    As was it Pauls:

    Act 17:2
    And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

    The same Greek word is used for custom and manner.

    Paul also kept the Feasts:

    Act 18:21
    But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus.

    Act 20:16
    For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.

    1Co 16:8
    But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.

    1Co 5:8
    Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    To all SDA, as I asked, please study Zech 14, Ellen White has the whole eschatology (end time events) wrong and completely out of order.

    Zech. 14 is talking about Jesus’ return before the 1000 years not after. There will be few people left on the earth and they will be taught God’s law and his Feasts.

    The law shall go out of Zion. The nations will go to Zion to learn of God’s law.

    God will not give rain to people to disobey him, read the last part of Zech. 14

    I challenge Dale and SDA’s to get on your knees and study what I’ve written here.

    Kevin McMillen

    ps Martin, I’d appreciate it if you could make sure this gets to Dale. Thanks.

    Like

Please Share Your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s