Refuting Basic Logic's "Judeo-Christian" Myth: A Biblical Defense of Israel, Dispensationalism, and Romans 11:29
Tyler McLaughlin:
I saw this video recommended to me, "Are You Truly Christian or Judeo-Christian?", symptoms ranked. So, I had to watch. I'm a King James Bible-only Christian who goes by the Bible. So, the reason I'm doing this response...
His intro is basically that Judeo-Christianity is a person replacing Paul’s teaching with elements of Rabbinic Judaism.
Tyler McLaughlin:
"Judeo-Christian" was originally used as a term for a Jew who converted to Christianity. Modern usage comes from George Orwell. Watch my Ian Carroll video for more on that. And on the answer regarding the origins of dispensationalism, which was not made by Jews, watch my Candace Owens video.
He is a Kingdom Builder, who believes that for Christ to return, the world in its entirety must be converted entirely to Christianity. For this to be done, he believes that Christians (anyone who calls Jesus Lord) have to amass power and influence among all the arts, which will then be used to make a self-replicating theocracy.
Hatred For Other Christians, Love for Judaism
Symptom:
A double-standard, where they treat other Christians with contempt due to theological differences, but don't apply the same logic to Judaism.
Speaker (Original Video / Basic Logic):
It's a common experience for a non-Catholic Christian to be very critical of Catholicism, and that, by itself, is not proof of Judeo-Christianity.
Talmud - Gittin 57a:3-4
Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12). Onkelos said to him: What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement.
Speaker (Original Video / Basic Logic):
However, if a so-called Christian makes a habit of attacking Catholicism or any Christian denomination as pagan idol worship, but then turns around and calls Judaism their brothers in the faith, that is a dead giveaway of Judeo-Christianity. Catholicism, for all the disagreements I may have with it, is still a faith that preaches Christ as Lord, whereas Judaism preaches Christ as, quote, "burning in his own excrement" as a damned blasphemer. If you have more kinship with a faith that damns Christ rather one that exalts him as Lord, then it's obvious you are no Christian. S tier.
Response to Symptom 1: Catholicism & Judaism
Tyler McLaughlin:
So the first symptom is "Hates Catholicism, Loves Judaism". He means Judaism as in Jews, not the religion. To quote him, "a double standard where they treat other Christians with contempt due to theological differences, but don't apply the same logic to Judaism." In theory, any Christian should love an unsaved soul, including unsaved Catholics, or any other works-based salvation religion. My aunt is an unsaved Catholic; I love her, but hate Roman Catholicism. You can hate the works-based Catholicism and still love a Catholic individually. Basic logic.
YouTube Comment
@melvinscheng1674: If you hate Israel, your gonna have to come up with a reason why Israel is not God's chosen anymore, and i doubt you can.
@basiclogic2: The Old Testament prophesied Christ... Israel rejects Christ.
@melvinscheng1674: Revelation 3:9
Tyler McLaughlin:
Does not mean Judaism as in religion. In the comment section, he calls modern Jews "the synagogue of Satan".
More on why they are not the synagogue of Satan
Tyler McLaughlin:
You can look at my YouTube Short for more on that if you want. Go to Dr. Ruckman's Revelation vinyls on Don Nesbitt's YouTube and watch his Part 2 of... the second part of his Revelation vinyls, because at 5 minutes and 18 seconds, he goes into who is the synagogue of Satan, and it's not ethnic Jews, it's replacement theologians. So this guy is the synagogue of Satan, because if you think you replace the Jews...
Revelation 3:9 “Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee”
It’s not unsaved Jews. Romans 3:1-4 talks about unsaved Jews, and still calls them Jews. Paul in Philippians 3:4-5 mentions his time as an unsaved Jew, and still calls his former self Jewish.
Can’t be Ashkenazis. They are Jewish. Watch my youtube short on them.
So, which group pretends to be Jews? Supersessionists.
Tyler McLaughlin:
To quote Christ, "which say they are Jews, but are not and do lie." The people who say they replace the Jews, and are not, and do lie.
When Basic Logic says that he hates Catholicism and loves Judaism, when he says this, he means a Christian doesn't like the church which murdered and persecuted his brethren, and he loves Jews like Paul tells him to. Catholics murdered Christians for beyond centuries to the point they had to flee to another continent—a new continent—for Catholics to stop murdering them.
I know “officially” he was charged on the “crime” of Lutheran heresy, and that Jacobus Latomus (his inquisitor) only asked him about his theological views, but…
Henry Phillips betrayed William Tyndale, and he was paid by the English Catholic Clergy who was extensively against Tyndale’s Bible translations.
Even, if it wasn’t officially on the charges, it was still a reason. See description for citation.
Tyler McLaughlin:
William Tyndale had the audacity to translate the Bible into English so poor people could understand it, and they wanted him murdered. We have an entire book about how many were murdered called Foxe's Book of Martyrs.
What does God say about the Roman Catholic Church?
Revelation 18:6 “Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
God says this about the Catholic Church in the tribulation, Revelation 18:6: "Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double."
What does God say about Jews?
Romans 11:28
“As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
What does God say about Jews? Romans 11:28: "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes." It's pretty logical why Christians would hate Jews—and not even hate Roman Catholics specifically, but hate the Roman Catholic Church.
Remember, he's a Kingdom Builder, and Catholics are the biggest kingdom builders around. Watch my "Christ is King" video because you aren't supposed to build the kingdom. If you don't know what that is, basically they believe that you have to convert the entire planet to Christianity, and then will Jesus come back and reign.
He also says that then they call Jews their "brothers in faith". I don't know many Christian Zionists who call Jews their brother in faith. But I don't really think it matters; that's an ecumenical issue. But holding hands with Catholics also is an ecumenical issue.
He ends his section saying that he may disagree with Catholics, but they still preach Christ is Lord, while Jews say Christ burns in hell, and then he quotes a Talmud verse. I'll address the Talmud verse first. There are two Talmuds: the Jerusalem Talmud and Babylonian Talmud. Those Talmuds comprise 50 volumes of books. Take you seven years to read them all. It's just a bunch of Jews arguing with each other. It's not really a holy book. Sure, in rabbinic Judaism, yeah, it's viewed as authority, but they don't agree with the entire thing. It's a bunch of Jews arguing against each other, and they think some of those Jews that argued against each other were right. They don't think the book is divinely inspired. You can find devil-possessed people who want to hate Jews, so they pull quotes from it. Like I said, it's more of a legal book.
Technically, it says Yeshu not Yeshua. I was wrong on that. Still, it’s obscure whether it is about Christ. And, I’d say the argument that it isn’t about Christ is stronger. Look at my description for a citation.
Tyler McLaughlin:
And anything specifically is debated as to whether it is or isn't about Christ; it's not really clear. Yeshua is Joshua in Hebrew. I don't really think it matters if it is or isn't about Christ. You can find translations online that say it's Jesus, but in the Hebrew itself, it's not really clear. I just want to let it be known, I'm a King James Bible-only Christian, and I'm talking about the Hebrew. What have you made me done?
Romans 11:28 “As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
So why doesn't it matter whether it does or doesn't? Because God specifically said: "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes"—i.e., clashing concerning faith in Christ—"but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes." What difference does it make whether Jews do or don't like Christ? They're beloved regardless. Why does he bring up the Talmud quote even, though? Why does he even bring up the Talmud quote? Why? Why does he do that?
If God is through with his promises to the Jews, it means that the promises to the Jews of a physical Kingdom belong to the Christian
Tyler McLaughlin:
Because he wants to make you hate Jews. It doesn't really matter what Yeshua is or isn't. You know what God already thinks about Jews. And if God has already told you what he thinks about Jews and you reject that, then are you really doing this because you love God when he told you, "No"? Or are you doing this because your flesh feels good when you hate some Jews, and you want to feel better about yourself, right?
2 Timothy 2:15 - 2:18
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
Tyler McLaughlin:
His entire point about singing "Kumbaya" with anyone who calls Jesus Lord is also unbiblical. 2 Timothy 2:15 to 18: "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some." Hymenaeus and Philetus still believed in Jesus Christ's deity, but they believed the resurrection was past. And Paul, for this, hated them. What about people who teach different ways of salvation, like other "Christian" quote-unquote denominations do? And what good is calling Jesus God when they believe they have to work their way to heaven? A person believing Jesus is God does not mean you have to maintain... does not mean you have to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya".
Romans 16:17 “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
Romans 16:17: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them." If someone tells you—which Roman Catholics, Catholicism teaches—that there's other intercessors other than, to God, and you can pray to some dead saint in the Balkans, that's contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them. Paul doesn't say you should build the kingdom so Jesus can return finally and you should hold hands with anyone who calls Jesus Lord. No.
"Yeshua"
Symptom:
Obsessive use of Hebrew terminology, despite not speaking in Hebrew. Prefers to use the name "Yeshua" instead of Jesus, despite the Apostles being the ones to transliterate His name.
General pattern of trying to follow Hebrew customs, despite not being Hebrew, seeing them as spiritually superior.
Tyler McLaughlin:
"Yeshua"—that's another symptom. I don't like saying Yeshua either. I personally find Gentiles saying it cringe, although I do not like him condemning Jews for cringe Gentiles who want to be Jewish. I don't like that.
Daddy Wishlist Prayers
ATM / Daddy Wishlist Prayers
Daddy Wishlist Prayers
Symptom:
A lack of reverence and respect for God's role as a Father. Prayers that treat God as a celestial butler, lacking genuine reflection. Prayers that are redundant and unnecessarily long as a means of virtue-signaling.
Speaker (Original Video / Basic Logic):
The Bible tells us we are to see God as our Father. So it's not surprising that Satan attacked fatherhood. As a result, the modern view of fatherhood is weak. The father is probably seen as just a friendly ATM. He doesn't lead the household, and you don't owe him much respect. This is completely different from the cultural context of Christ's time. Fathers were powerful, authoritative, and respected. As such, when modern audiences hear that we are to treat God as they would their father, they fail to include the reverence and respect that title is associated with. If you ever had the misfortune of a group prayer of such an individual, you've probably heard the phrase, "Daddy God," followed by a long wish list of things they desired, filled with redundancies to artificially increase prayer time, and yet no space for genuine reflection. While this is consistent with Judeo-Christianity, which undermines Christ's authority, it's not exclusive because the diminishment of fatherhood is a universal issue.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Daddy Wishlist Prayers.
Another symptom. He's taken that from
Matthew 6:7–8
And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.
The Bible tells us we are to see God as our father. So it's not surprising that Satan attacked fatherhood. As a result, the modern view of fatherhood is weak. Your father is probably seen as just a friendly ATM. He doesn't lead the household and you don't owe him much respect. This is completely different from the cultural context of Christ's time. Fathers were powerful, authoritative, and respected. As such, when modern audiences hear that we are to treat God as they would their father,
Matthew 6:5
“And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.”
Matthew 6:7
“But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
...even logic. I do not get the logic that's Jewish to not treat God as a Father, or to treat God as a celestial butler. First of all, this dude's a hypocrite, as he's clasping the Trinity to be anti-Jewish. Premise is also flawed.
Questions & Answers > G-d and Us
Do we see G-d as our "Father"?
By Chaya Sarah Silberberg
Question:
In our tradition, do we see G-d as our "Father" who loves and cares for us individually? In prayer, would we ever address G-d as "Father"? I have a friend who insists we do not, that our G-d is far removed from us. Can you help?
Answer:
The Torah is replete with instances where G-d calls us His "children," from the first time G-d sent Moses to Pharaoh: "And you shall say to Pharaoh, thus says G-d, Israel is My son, My firstborn..." to the statement "You are children of the L-rd your G-d," to the second Psalm, where King David states "He (G-d) told me 'You are My son, I have begotten you this day,'" and many more such instances.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Jews do see God as a Father. It's not emphasized as in Christianity. It's not until Jesus Christ's death, burial, and resurrection that we were able to be adopted, and thus have Him be individually to us a Father. Jews do see God as a Father. Look at this article I'm putting up. Not endorsing rabbinic Judaism, but, you know, I have to let the other side speak. I love Jews. I don't endorse rabbinic Judaism; Jewish friends know this.
Matthew 6:7
“But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”
Notice, God does not anywhere say the vain repetitions are specifically to appear as righteous.
Tyler McLaughlin:
I find the other parts to be hypocritical, too. If you notice what he says, he used the part where Christ said, and I quote:
“When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”
He changes this just to, you know, saying a lot of words to come off as self-righteous or virtue signaling. And the reason he does change that is so someone couldn't judge his buddies, the Catholics, on that metric and say, "Well, they say a lot of words, and they say a lot of vain repetitions." So that's why he changed that.
I personally think that's hypocritical of him, that he doesn't judge the Catholics on that metric, or he doesn't say that Catholics is Judeo-Christianity. He does this in the video: he doesn't judge the Catholics for some symptom that he's judging others. And to quote Romans 2:1:
“Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”
So if he's an Anglican who judges other Christians for doing whatever, and he's not condemning Catholics for doing whatever, then that man is condemned by the logic of Romans 2:1.
He takes away—Christ didn't say Matthew 6:7 was solely for people who were praying to come off as morally superior, it's to any vain repetition. Like Marian prayers, or any other ones, certainly have vain repetitions of...
“Hail Mary, Full of Grace, The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, Pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death. Amen.”
Matthew 6:7
“But when ye pray, use not vain REPETITIONS, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
..."Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of death. Amen." That's vain repetitions.
If only we knew what Christ thought about them :)
Matthew 23:29-31
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
I don't know: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets."
Aren't they all like—I don't know—the Roman Catholics who make saints out of the Christian martyrs murdered by the Romans? Or the Cologne Catholics in European countries making martyrs out of some Christian missionary their pagan ancestors killed? I don't know, kind of seems like the Bible got them on that, but he's not mentioning that.
(Clip from Basic Logic video)
Legalism OR Anti-Legalism
Basic Logic Voiceover:
Radical legalism, or radical anti-legalism.
Radical Legalism or Anti-Legalism
Symptom:
A disdain for Christ's teachings and seeking to replace them with ancient Hebrew traditions.
OR
A disdain for Christ's teachings and seeking to replace them with a novel tradition.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
This one's tricky. Both extremes can be a symptom of Judeo-Christianity, because both are an example of rejecting Christ's teachings and replacing it with their own. The radical legalist seeks to replace Christ's teachings with ancient Hebrew customs, implicitly seeing Christ's interpretation of the law as too soft. He is the archetypal Pharisee.
Radical Legalism or Anti-Legalism
Legalist Judeo-Christians: Demand you observe Hebrew Customs and the Law with the least charitable interpretation or grace.
Anti-Legalist Judeo-Christians: Demand you observe contemporary values (e.g: LGBT, Feminism, Female Pastors, etc...) at the sacrifice of the Law.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
However, the anti-legalist is just as guilty. He abuses Christ's grace to be an almost abolishment of the law or standards. But the anti-legalist doesn't just create a vacuum; he then replaces God's laws with his own standards, which reflect his contemporary values. Both errors replace Christ's authority with human preference. A tier.
Galatians 2
11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, 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?
15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Another symptom: radical legalism or anti-legalism. Back in the day—I mean, when Paul was still on this earth—there were Jewish converts to Christianity who attempted to push the Old Laws, who were known as Judaizers. Basically, they would tell Gentiles they needed to do good works to get to heaven. Those good works were keeping the law. Paul wrote Galatians due to this.
“Catholicism doesn’t teach good works.”
Catholicism teaches that you must live in a constant state of grace to get to Heaven.
“Condition of a person who is free from mortal sin and pleasing to God. It is the state of being in God’s friendship and the necessary condition of the soul at death in order to attain Heaven.” - Father John Hardon Modern Catholic Dictionary
Tyler McLaughlin:
Now, I can't think of any modern group that tells their followers they must do good works to get to heaven...
Abstaining from mortal sins means that you either don't do them, or confess them when you do, which is unbiblical. 1 John 1:9 is to God, James 5:16 is in a book which is written to Jews. And pleasing is without question in reference to personal behavior.
Ephesians 2:8
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that NOT OF YOURSELVES: it is the gift of God:”
It is of yourself to abstain from certain sins, and attempt to please God through your personal conduct.
It is in fact a mortal sin to not eat certain meats on certain days, despite yanno Romans 14:1-6.
Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
Tyler McLaughlin:
...or abstaining from eating certain meats on certain days in Catholicism, whose leader wears a kippah.
(Photo on screen: Pope Francis meeting Rabbi Skorka; captions: "Real Jew" over the Rabbi, "Judaizer" over Pope Francis)
Tyler McLaughlin:
I don't get the logic of the radical anti-legalism, though. His entire argument is that keeping the law is Jewish. How does not keeping it also result in Jewishness? He says, "disdain for Christ's teaching and seeking to replace them with novel tradition."
*Paul clarifies Jesus’s teachings.
Also, I’m including the comment going against Christ for honesty.
Tyler McLaughlin:
But most church doctrine was made by Paul, and most progressive Christians ignore—have to ignore Paul. When a person says that Jesus was a leftist, they never quote Paul. When a leftist says, "What would Jesus do?", they never say what would Paul do, because Paul hammers them down.
(Screenshot on screen of Reddit thread from r/TrueChristian titled "Paul sucks")
Tyler McLaughlin:
Look at the screen. People love Jesus, but they don't love Paul, because Paul clarified what you had to actually do. Paul clarified Jesus's teachings.
(Slide from Basic Logic video reappears on screen)
Tyler McLaughlin:
How's this one, which says "demand you observe contemporary values at the sacrifice of the law"? To quote Paul...
Galatians 5:14
“For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
Romans 6:14
“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.”
Also, the verse against women pastors comes from the Apostle Paul, not the Lord Christ Jesus.
Tyler McLaughlin:
...Galatians 5:14: "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." As Paul said in Romans 6:14: "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace."
(Clip from Basic Logic video)
666
End-Times Obsession
End-Times Obsession
Symptom:
Unable to accept that we are not meant to know the hour. Obsess over end-times prophecies, tries to guess who the Anti-Christ is every 5 seconds. Probably has elaborate models and graphs to predict the end-times. Thinks (or desperately hopes) the End will come before he dies.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
The Bible repeatedly tells us that it is not for us to know the hour, and that we won't be able to predict it. The Christian accepts this. The Judeo-Christian thinks it's a challenge. There have been more failed end-time predictions than I can count, and yet more keep popping up every day, each more ridiculous than the last.
Mark 13:32
“But concerning that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”
Acts 1:7
“He said to them: 'It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority'”
Basic Logic Voiceover:
The reason a Christian can accept not knowing the hour is because our Messiah has come, and we have the full revelation. We know how this is going to play out. But the Judeo-Christian, who rejects who Christ is while embracing his aesthetic, doesn't. He's still eagerly waiting for his Messiah, like those who practice Judaism are. Only in his mind, his Messiah will look like Jesus, and vindicate all the Judeo-Christian's opinions and notions. A tier.
Titus 2:13 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;”
Philippians 3:20
“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:”
2 Timothy 4:8 “Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
And this is another symptom: End-Times obsession. This section is pretty silly when you read your Bible. Titus 2:13: "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;" Philippians 3:20: "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:" 2 Timothy 4:8: "Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." I can read more verses.
Matthew 24:36 “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
And as for not knowing the hour, Matthew 24:36: "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."
Tyler McLaughlin:
I don't predict the Rapture. As always, Christ will come back when He does. Nothing against brothers and sisters who do, though. But first of all, someone who does predict it would say that the Father specifically put it in the text in the verses saying that no one but the Father would know the hour, but the Father is the source. If you do figure out the hour, you can't find out the truth without it going back to Him. He's the source. Not a date setter, but that's what they would argue.
Matthew 24:42 to 43 “Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
You better not forget this verse which Christ later says, because Basic Logic says...
(Basic Logic clip plays: "doesn't. He's still eagerly waiting for his Messiah, like those who practice Judaism are.")
Matthew 24:42 to 43: "Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh." Doesn't the Apostle Paul specifically taught us the conditions of the end days?
2 Timothy 3:1 - 3:5
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Look around. 2 Timothy 3:1–5... to 2 Timothy 3:1 to verse 5:
"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves..."
Huh, like taking selfies of yourself and putting on Instagram?
"...covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents..."
You ever been to a school and you ask a teacher? Kids nowadays keep rebelling, and they just—they don't even know what to do because they're just so disobedient to their parents. Boy, I wonder why.
"...unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."
2 Timothy 4:3 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;”
Tyler McLaughlin:
2 Timothy 4:3: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;"
2 Peter 3:3 - 3:4
Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
Tyler McLaughlin:
This is what Peter said about the matter: 2 Peter 3:3 to verse 4:
"Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."
The entire point of all of that is because they look forward to Christ, and them attempting to figure out prophecy or who is who is just one way of them looking forward to Christ. And you have a lot of audacity to say, and I quote:
(Basic Logic clip plays: "He's still eagerly waiting for his Messiah, like those who practice Judaism are.")
(Clip from Basic Logic video)
Modern Dispensationalism
Basic Logic Voiceover:
Modern Dispensationalism.
Modern Dispensationalism
Symptom:
Obsession with the modern state of Israel. Believes they, not the Church, are the true Israel. Gives unconditional support to the state of Israel, believes by doing so, they're speeding up the End-Times.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
This is a novel theological position originating in the 1800s, which argues that rather than God having one continuous expanding covenant of salvation throughout history, where He gradually introduces more people, God instead has a series of mini-covenants or dispensations—most notably, a distinct, ongoing covenant with the Jewish people, which would mean the modern-day geopolitical state of Israel is actually part of God's promise. This is a horrifying distortion of Scripture and an implicit rejection of God's expanded covenant.
Galatians 3:29: “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise”
Romans 2:28–29: “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly... but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit”.
Romans 9:6–8: “...they are not all Israel who are of Israel... That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed”.
1 Peter 2:9–10: “But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people... who once were not a people but are now the people of God”.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
Because indeed, the Christian church is the true Israel and God's chosen, not the geopolitical nation. This has led to an interesting situation where so-called Christians offer unconditional support for Israel, and think that by doing so, they're forwarding end-times prophecies. This can have disastrous consequences. We shouldn't give blank checks to anyone, especially a non-Christian nation that explicitly rejects our values. A tier.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Let's address this in parts. I'll do the verses he goes over at the end. I already answered obsession with the state of Israel. Let's go to Romans 11:28 to 29.
Romans 11:28 to 29.
As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
Tyler McLaughlin:
"As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes"—i.e. they clash concerning the faith to Christ—"but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes. For the gifts and callings of God are without repentance." The gifts are God's promises to Jews, and callings are God calling Jews to be His chosen people.
I am not saying John Wesley taught Dispensationalism, what I am saying is that a tenet of Dispensationalism is that God’s promises in the Old Testament to the Jews are not over; and John Wesley taught that in his commentary for this verse.
(Scan shown on screen from John Wesley's 1755 Notes on Romans 11:29)
Tyler McLaughlin:
This is John Wesley's 1755 Romans commentary to show you that this existed before Scofield. 11:29: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance." God does not repent of His gifts to the Jews, or His calling of the Gentiles. Wesley doesn't exactly agree with who the calling is for, but he agrees with the gifts.
“Oh, it’s the gift of salvation.”
Wrong, the gift of salvation is always singular.
Romans 5:15
Romans 5:16
Romans 5:17
Romans 5:18
Romans 6:23
2 Corinthians 9:15
Ephesians 2:8 (the 9th verse just clarifies).
Tyler McLaughlin:
I've been told, "Oh, it's the gift of salvation." That's false. Every instance of the gift of salvation in the New Testament is always a singular. Romans 5:15, Romans 5:16, Romans 5:17, Romans 5:18, Romans 6:23, 2 Corinthians 9:15, Ephesians 2:8–9.
Genesis 15:18 “In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:”
Tyler McLaughlin:
Let's look at the gifts from Scripture with 11:29 is going over. Genesis 15:18: "In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:" There's more instances of God discussing the land deal.
Psalms 105:10–11 “And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance:”
Tyler McLaughlin:
Psalm 105:10 to 11: "And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance:" Person could argue, "This was given to the church" using a passage. Therefore God explicitly said that He can't repent of His gifts or calling, and everlasting covenant specifies under either/or. God speaks about this in prophecy, too, which I know Basic Logic would hate.
Joel 3:2 “I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.”
The Roman Empire is specifically called a singular nation. Acts 24:10 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:
Tyler McLaughlin:
Joel 3:2: "I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land."
Also, I know Basic Logic would say this was fulfilled in 70 AD. The Roman Empire going to Jerusalem did not fulfill "all nations." That has not—all nations as a singular, singular nation. And after the 70 AD conquest anyway, the Jews were scattered into all nations. You can't say that was already fulfilled.
Romans 9:6 “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:”
Romans 9:7 “Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
A. They are not all Israel (Ethnic Jew)
B. which are of Israel (Spiritually Jewish)
Tyler McLaughlin:
I know people will bring up Romans 9:6, which was the passage I was talking about earlier: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:" Doing a full video on that, but let's quickly go into it. So notice the verse specifies these two factors: A, they're not all Israel (ethnic Jew); B, which are of Israel (spiritually Jewish).
Romans 9:7
“Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
Romans 11:29
“For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”
“Christians are now the true Jews”
That takes away the gifts and calling.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Romans 9:7: "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called." So they're spiritually Jewish. This isn't a good verse to teach to Jews that God is through with the Jews, because Romans 9:6 to 9:7 has to be constantly defined and explained by Romans 11:29: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance."
Romans 11:29
“For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”
A Spiritual Jew cannot take the promises of Jews away from them, without contradicting the gifts.
A Spiritual Jew cannot take the land deal away from Jews, without contradicting the gifts.
A Spiritual Jew cannot take away the Jew’s chosen status away from them, without contradicting the calling.
See? The Bible defines itself.
Tyler McLaughlin:
A Christian's state as a spiritual Jew has to: A, not take away God's gifts, being promises to Jews; B, nor take away God's calling to Jews. Which leaves Christians as spiritually Jewish, but not really much more. Think about it like this: there is no way to read this verse in isolation without the Bible contradicting itself in Romans 11. You have to either harmonize or make the word of God contradict. The harmonization is then Romans 9:6 to 7, spiritual Jewish status of a Christian being limited and defined, and not a complete replacement or a replacement at all.
*First of all, see what I previously said.
(If you cannot understand what I said).
Romans 11:25–32
“For I would not, brethren (Christian), that ye (Christian) should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye (Christian) should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel (Christian), until the fulness of the Gentiles (Christian) be come in. And so all Israel (Christian) shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Christian): For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their (Christian) sins. As concerning the gospel, they (Christian) are enemies for your (Christian) sakes: but as touching the election, they (Christian) are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as ye (Christian) in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their (Christian) unbelief: Even so have these (Christian) also now not believed, that through your (Christian) mercy they (Christian) also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them (Christian) all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. (Also Christian)”
See, how quickly it doesn’t make ANY sense?
Tyler McLaughlin:
First of all, see what I previously said. Secondly, obviously if the church is Israel and is the true Israel and has replaced Israel, then this is what the Scripture about God's restoration of Israel reads: Romans 11:25 to 32:
"For I would not, brethren [Christian], that ye [Christian] should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye [Christian] should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel [Christian], until the fulness of the Gentiles [Christian] be come in. And so all Israel [Christian] shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob [Christian]: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their [Christian] sins. As concerning the gospel, they [Christian] are enemies for your [Christian] sakes: but as touching the election, they [Christian] are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as ye [Christian] in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their [Christian] unbelief: Even so have these [Christian] also now not believed, that through your [Christian] mercy they [Christian] also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them [Christian] all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all [Christian]."
Tyler McLaughlin:
Either God has replaced Israel or He hasn't. You can't in good faith, in good conscience, using the brain that God gave you, harmonize the idea that the church is the new Israel and not make Romans 11:25 to 32 incomprehensible. It is simply incompatible with supersessionism argued in good faith.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Quote: "Gives unconditional support to the state of Israel, believes by doing so they're speeding up the end times." That's said a lot, but I don't know of any Christians personally doing this. That will happen regardless of if we do or don't bless Israel. The actual reason Christians support Israel is this:
God said he can’t repent of his promises or callings.
↓
God said Genesis 12:3
“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”
↓
God through Balaam confirmed it went to Israel/Jews.
↓
Numbers 24:9
“He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee.”
↓
The Church hasn’t replaced Israel, otherwise the Bible contradicts itself and is incomprehensible.
↓
Paul says Galatians 3:8
“And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.”
↓
That’s a cross reference to Genesis 22:18, not Genesis 12:3.
↓
“And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
God said He can't repent of His promises or callings. God said in Genesis 12:3: "And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." God through Balaam confirmed that it went to Israel/Jews. Numbers 24:9: "He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee."
The church hasn't replaced Israel, otherwise the Bible contradicts itself and is incomprehensible. Paul says in Galatians 3:8: "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed." That's cross-referenced to Genesis 22:18: "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice." That's not the same verse.
“But doesn’t Paul say that Abraham’s children get the promise?”
Paul distinctly separates the promises (Jews, plural) and promise of the Holy Spirit to the gentiles (singular) in Galatians 3.
Tyler McLaughlin:
Could say, "Well, doesn't Paul say that Abraham's children get the promise?" Paul distinctly separates the promises (Jews, plural) and promise of the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles (singular) in Galatians 3.
Tyler McLaughlin:
It was also pretty hypocritical that he judges Christians because they allegedly want to support Israel to make the end days occur, when he believes that God's return is dependent on hating Jews and making a theocracy, despite prophecy saying that God has to physically claim His kingdom, and that God isn't king over the earth so far. (Coughs) Watch my "Christ is King" video.
Galatians 3:29 “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
Tyler McLaughlin:
This is answering all of his verses he cited: Galatians 3:29: "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." The verse is very easy to answer, because first, the promise is the Holy Spirit, if you read Galatians 3. And second, because Paul specifies between the seed (singular, Gentiles) and seed (plural, Jews), and promise (Holy Spirit, Gentiles), and promises (God's promises to Jews). Paul never gives the singular promise to Jews in Galatians 3; it's always to Gentiles. And if Christians have replaced Israel, we would get the promises, unless we get the promise, which means if we don't get the promises, God hasn't replaced Jews with Christians.
Romans 2:28-29
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Romans 9:6-8 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Tyler McLaughlin:
How do you address Romans 2:28 to 29, and spiritual Jewishness that must be defined? As Romans 9:6 to 8, which I already addressed.
1 Peter 2:9-10 “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:”
Whatever Peter says has to not
A. take away God’s gifts for Jews
B. take away his calling for Jews
Tyler McLaughlin:
Here's another verse he quotes: 1 Peter 2:9–10: "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:" This is also easy to answer. It's called you—you ever had cheat sheets? Romans 11:29 is the cheat sheet for Jews and God's stances with them.
1 Peter 2:9–10 is undoubtedly ascribing a calling, a position. However, if God cannot repent of His calling of Jews per Romans 11:29, then that means the calling in 1 Peter 2:9–10 is distinct from the position which God has given the Jews, which means 1 Peter 2:9–10 isn't a replacement verse. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance, then that gives us our answer: 1 Peter 2:9–10 cannot be used as a replacement verse per the Bible.
Also, he makes the argument that Israel is a modern secular nation, meaning that it cannot be the Biblical Israel.
Christ was born in the Pagan Roman occupied Israel, and the Bible many times still called it Israel.
(Screen displays New Testament search results for "Israel" occurring under Roman occupation)
If Israel being “secular” takes away the ability for Christians to support Israel, then Christ never actually fulfilled any prophecies in Pagan OCCUPIED Israel.
Which means he isn’t God in the flesh. This is what always happens when you don’t take the word of God (Romans 11) at its literal reading.
(Screen displays New Testament search results for occurrences of the word "nation")
I have purposely abstained from debunking his rapture beliefs, as I am currently sick and I cannot record myself talking.
I will do a separate video in a week, or so.
(Clip from Basic Logic video)
Petrified by Death
Basic Logic Voiceover:
Petrified by death.
Petrified by Death
Symptom:
Deep rooted fear of dying. Needs the End-Times or Rapture to happen before they die. Wants to speed up the End-Times by trying to complete prophecies.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
A fear of dying is natural, but Christians face death with a degree of austerity. Painful though it is, Christ will raise them up, and as such, death lost its sting. Judeo-Christians, on the other hand, are petrified by it, and delude themselves into thinking they'll never have to face it. It's common to see self-proclaimed Christians declare the end times are near, and they won't die as a result.
The "Rapture" is Nonsense.
Unbiblical fantasy. Invented in the 1830s and spread in the US. It didn't get mainstream popularity until fiction books started promoting it. It's based on a misinterpretation of Matthew 24:40-41 (The "Left Behind" Verse), where they read the verse incorrectly to think the ones staying behind are the judged (it's the opposite).
These individuals:
- Have a selfish desire to avoid hardship rather than standing firm in the faith.
- Do not want to have to sacrifice for future generations, and so pretend history ends with them.
- Are playing both sides, "speed running" prophecy to confirm or debunk Christianity.
Basic Logic Voiceover:
Many Judeo-Christians believe in what is called the Rapture, which is also a novel 1800s invention which says Christians will be zapped off the earth before the tribulation. Therefore, as long as the Rapture happens in their lifetime, Judeo-Christians believe they'll never have to taste death, which, combined with dispensationalist thinking, explains why they have such a desperate, unconditional support for Israel. Many think that by constructing a literal third temple, they can hasten God's hand by fulfilling their interpretations of the end-times prophecies.
There's also the added bonus that if they fulfill the prophecies and nothing happens, then in their minds, they've debunked Christianity, and can switch to another religion before they die. After all, a Judeo-Christian already has an obvious backup religion.
Chart by Ryan Burge (@ryanburge / @religionsdata):
"How afraid are you of the following? – Dying"
(Data: Chapman Survey of American Fears 2015–2023)
Categories: Protestant, Catholic, Other, None (broken down by age groups and fear levels: Not at all, Slightly Afraid, Afraid, Very Afraid).
Tyler McLaughlin:
Another symptom: Petrified by death. This is a statistical record of Catholics in their fears of death. Notice Catholics fear it the most. Are you going to go and say they're Judeo-Christian?
I think Christians should be brave and look forward to the great beyond with excitement. But there's a difference between saying that you shouldn't fear death when you can never seem to die versus a Christian who's on their deathbed, not wanting to die is a natural instinct. Or do only Jews have natural instincts?
Description and Citations:
A response to Basic Logic's video, "Are You Truly Christian or ‘Judeo-Christian’? (Symptoms Ranked)"
Which side?
Joshua 24:15
“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”
I forgot to address one verse he did, that circumcision severs you from Christ. The Bible doesn't say that, however circumcision does nothing good or bad for you.
Galatians 5:1-6
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Look at the last verse, it does nothing good or bad.
"For he then appeared close to Antwerp, in Louvain, a strong centre of Roman Catholic thought, antagonistic to the Reformation. And he suddenly had money: not enough to keep him for the rest of his life, which is what he so desperately sought, but sufficient to enable him to live comfortably and execute a scheme. Someone in London paid him well to carry out a secret operation. It most certainly was not the English government. Henry Phillips detested King Henry and all his works, and was notorious for saying so frequently. English agents on the Continent, when they mentioned Phillips, did so as a traitor and a rebel. Whoever it was in London who employed him, knew his extreme poverty, his whining desperation, his hatred of Lutheranism (and possibly his treasonable hostility to the King), and saw a useful, and no doubt disposable, tool. His covert mission was to find a means to break the security of the English House at Antwerp, and arrest William Tyndale." - William Tyndale: A Biography, Page 317 David Daniell
https://archive.org/details/williamtyndalebi0000dani
Jesus In The Talmud
https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/jesus-in-the-talmud/
"Do we see G‑d as our "Father"?" - Chabad
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/661604/jewish/Do-we-see-Gd-as-our-Father.htm
John Wesley Commentary
https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_explanatory-notes-upon-t_1755/page/410/mode/2up
Catholics fear of Death
Fire Insurance for the Afterlife? How Religion Shapes the Fear of Death
by Ryan Burge
https://www.thearda.com/categories/ahead-of-the-trend/fire-insurance-for-the-afterlife-how-religion-shapes-the-fear-of-death
Basic Logic's original video - Are You Truly Christian or ‘Judeo-Christian’? (Symptoms Ranked)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9r4ZYs1kYA
#KJVOnly #Romans11 #ChristianZionism #JudeoChristian #BibleStudy #Israel #Dispensationalism #ReplacementTheology #KingJamesBible #Romans11v28 #BiblicalTruth #ChristianResponse #EndTimesProphecy #LovingIsrael #BasicLogic #BibleVerses #Theology #Christianity #JewishPeople #GodsPromises #basiclogic #christisking #kingjamesbible #kjb #kjvonly #kjv
