This is my eighty-ninth monthly teaching letter and continues my eighth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll continue our defense of the apostle Paul, which I initiated in lesson #88, where recorded history reveals its origin, showing Paul-bashing is nothing new. Most, if not all, of the condemnation of the apostle Paul is based on faulty research establishing flawed premises, and therefore, in the end, fostering spurious conclusions.
Before we get started in our defense of Paul, I would like to demonstrate a case in point where such “spurious conclusions” are misconceived. One such architect of misconceptions is the late Joseph Jeffers, whose perverted theology-factory has been taken over by one Dr. (ha!) Philip B. Evens. Jeffers and company are Paul-bashers extraordinaire. One of Jeffers’ twisted premises is that the Christ of our Bible was a fake and that the true Messiah was “the teacher of righteousness” of Dead Sea Scroll fame. To enforce such a spurious position, he attempts to show that his “teacher of righteousness” lived contemporaneously with Caesar Augustus some 50 years earlier. In Jeffers’ publication, Yahweh Yesterday, Today And Forever, on page 24 he makes the statement:
“Another revelation from Yahweh concerning the Messiah was that he was not born on December 25 in the year 1 or 4 B.C. First, let us take the year of his birth. Luke 2:1 is the scripture that is the basis for this falsity: ‘And it came to pass in those days, there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed...And Joseph also went up from Galilee...to be taxed with Mary, his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.’
“Here let us do some more reasoning. If you look up Caesar Augustus in the Encyclopedia, you will find that Caesar Augustus was born 63 B.C. Now, if the scripture in Luke is anywhere near correct, then the Messiah was born approximately the same time when Caesar Augustus was in power, or 45 B.C.”
It is true in some cases if one will look up Caesar Augustus, that in a few encyclopedias only a trifling amount of information can be found, but if one will check under Roman history, it will be confirmed that Luke was absolutely correct in his account. The World Book Encyclopedia under the “Roman Empire”, volume 16, page 392 has Augustus’ reign as emperor from 27 B.C. to 14 A.D; ditto Collier’s Encyclopedia (1970) under “Augustus”, volume 3, page 226; ditto the 1951 World Scope Encyclopedia, volume 1 under “Augustus”; ditto the 1910 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, volume 2, page 911, under “Augustus”; ditto the 1998 Encarta Encyclopedia under “Augustus” stating: “Augustus (63 BC-AD 14), first emperor of Rome (27 BC-AD 14) ...”
It is apparent from this that Joseph Jeffers did not research his subject sufficiently, and his so-called “reasoning” is severely flawed. It should be crystal clear that our Yahshua Christ was indeed born during the reign of Caesar Augustus, and that Luke was accurate in his account of His Advent. This, then, should give us great confidence in the accuracy of Luke’s writings. Once one starts on the road of Paul-bashing, Luke-bashing is not far behind.
The object of pointing out Joseph Jeffers’ error here is to make the reader aware of how dangerous a flawed premise can become. The story of Jeffers is long and convoluted, based on sundry errors. In short, Jeffers is bad news and his diatribe to be avoided!
Getting started now with our defense of Paul the apostle, we will go to William Finck in a letter he wrote to a friend which is presented here and in lessons to come as an open letter to H. Graber:
OPEN LETTER RESPONDING TO H. GRABER by William Finck
In the Autumn of 2003, a dear friend of mine sent me a copy of the December 1985, vol. II, #12, Kingdom Courier by one H. Graber, 5393 Carleton Rd., Mariposa, Ca. 95338. This document is a reflection of most of the trash being printed nowadays – and even in Israel Identity circles – to discredit Paul of Tarsus. My friend is, unfortunately, deceived by people such as H. Graber, Scott Nelson, and others, into rejecting the excellent and legitimate writings of Paul, for none other than a want of understanding. In November of 2003 I wrote a lengthy response to Graber’s document, and both are reproduced below in their entirety, except that my response, originally in the form of a personal letter, has been edited somewhat for general consumption and for the format here. In my letter dated 19th Nov. 03, I stated:
Dear Friend, Hello! Today I am writing you to respond to some of the statements in the December, 1985 Kingdom Courier you sent me, the article being entitled “The Gospel Of Jesus Christ! Versus The Doctrine Of The Apostle Paul!” And I must say, if the so-called ‘Dr.’ H. Graber truly wanted to “seek the truth and insure [his] eternal destiny” as he so boldly states, I’m sure he has found a destiny other than he hoped to attain: for his work is weighed in the balance, and found wanting. This letter will demonstrate that Mr. Graber is a liar, and a fraud. I am not going to address every aspect of Graber’s eight page document, though I will discuss many of his statements, and certainly more of it than would be sufficient to support my claims concerning his character and scholarship. So that you may more easily follow my answers to Graber’s statements, I will include a marked copy of his document with my letter, and the marks will correspond to those which will precede my several responses, i.e. <A>, <B> etc.
[So the reader will not become confused, all of Graber’s remarks will be in italics, and a reference system will be used for first Graber’s presentation followed by my (William Finck’s) response which is slightly different than my original response to my friend]:
<Reference A> H. Graber states: “Indeed I am aware of the controversy this message will percipitate [sic.], but if there is one iota of TRUTH in this exposition, then I propose that the professed Christian must establish justification for the discrepencies [sic.] between the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine of the apostle Paul! It is not my purpose to generate controversy, but, rather to seek the truth and insure my eternal destiny. If we manufacture any justification for the doctrine of the apostle Paul, then we must concede that Jesus Christ erred in the presentation of His Gospel, while He walked this earth. Or we must acknowledge that Jesus Christ changed His Divine Plan after His resurrection and ascention [sic.], and this premise must then acknowledge that Paul was spiritually inspired of God, to document his divergent doctrine.
“I shall be eternally greatfull [sic.] to Dr. W. G. Finlay of South Africa, for his expose [sic. exposé] of this matter, which inspired me to verify his presentation in both scriptures and secular history. It will be impossible for me to present all the details of this picture of betrayal in this short treatise, but I shall endeavor to present the fundamental basis for this message, to serve as a rational guide for any sincere Christian to expand upon by their own research and study.”
William Finck answers <A>: To begin, I will quote a statement of Graber’s from the end of his original document, page 8, prg. 9: “... we are all indavidually [sic], the captains of our own destiny!” This statement alone exposes Graber as a humanist, and not a Christian, and also as a hypocrite, for in the following paragraph Graber claims: “I shall glean my spiritual sustenance from Matthew, John, Peter and James ...” yet who does Peter say is the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls, but Yahshua Christ (1 Peter 2:25)? We are not the “captains” of our own destiny, we are purchased by Yahweh, and our lives are not our own! Paul teaches this (Eph. 1:14, 1 Cor. 6:20, 7:23) as does Peter (2 Peter 2:1), which is the meaning of redemption in the first place (i.e. Isa. 43:1)! So who is a liar, but H. Graber? Pretending to be a teacher in Israel, he “doeth the work of Yahweh deceitfully” (Jer. 48:10) and conceives and utters “from the heart words of falsehood” (Isa. 59:13). But there is much more!
<Reference B> H. Graber states: “The book, ‘The Great Lion of God’ by Taylor Caldwell, gives one a preview of Saul of Tarsus as a Pharisee, depicting a totally perverse and reprobate Jew, steeped in the traditions of Judaism. Further, he is depicted as a [sic.] short, stocky, and of strong stature, with a very unpleasant countenance. This is the character that admits his zealousness in killing Christians, (Gal. 1:13-14, Acts 22:4). Here I would like to ask you to read the words of Jesus Christ in His ‘Sermon on the Mount’, in Matt. 7:1-29, and then read Paul’s (Sermon on the Mount?), in Rom. 12:1-21. Certainly the divergent doctrine of Paul is evident in this comparison.”
William Finck answers <B>: Last year  I wrote to the original recipient of this letter, in response to an anti-Paul document he had sent to me, which discussed the alleged description of Paul echoed here by Graber above, and quoted from a book by Taylor Caldwell. For those interested, they will find that this alleged physical description of Paul is derived from the writings of a second century forger of scripture, one who contrived the so-called Acts of Paul and Thecla in order to pollute Christianity with his false doctrines. Now all of this was evident in an encyclopedia article which this same person had sent to me, and which information is readily available (see, for instance, Word Pictures in the New Testament by A. Robertson at 2 Cor. 10:10-11). This spurious description of Paul was repeated in another forgery using the name of Lucian in the fourth century. Because such a description of Paul is used by multiple forgers, and enemies of the truth and of Christianity, I would safely confer that the truth concerning Paul’s appearance is quite the opposite of what the forgers would have us believe! The authors of these alleged physical descriptions of Paul are discredited as frauds and forgers. Any historian is only as good as his sources. If H. Graber and T. Caldwell want to promote the works of a liar, then they themselves are become liars in doing so! I asked this person to also please refer to my discussion of this topic from our past correspondence, if he still had it, and which I regret not having available as I write this.
In this paragraph Graber also condemns Paul’s words at Romans 12, in comparison with Matthew 7. He makes no specific statements, however, (what a wonderful ‘scholar’) and I’m not going to stab at shadows, except to say that I find no fault at all in Paul’s discourse here, in comparison with the entire Sermon on the Mount of our Redeemer, which begins at Matthew 5, and includes Matthew 6! By comparing apples and oranges, and removing words from their contexts, Graber exposes himself as an underminer and dissembler.
<Reference C> H. Graber states: “Now let us consider the purported Divine commission of apostleship bestowed upon Saul/Paul, as documented by the professed apostle Luke, in Acts chapter 9. There is NO evidence in scriptures or secular history of this miraculous event, except THE CLAIM OF PAUL HIMSELF! as documented by his companion Luke, in the book of Acts. Here let us consider the authors of the New Testement [sic.] books. We know that Jesus Christ commissioned His Disciples to perform His commands, and Jesus personally selected Matthew, Peter, John, James, Phillip [sic.], Bartholomew, Simon, Thaddaeus, Andrew, Thomas and Judas Iscariot, a devil, and Jesus knew it. Of these twelve, only four wrote books that we have in the New Testement [sic.], Matthew, John, Peter, and James, a total of (9) books, all authored between AD 63 and AD 96, except Matthew, which is dated AD 37. These are the works of the Disciples of Jesus Christ. NOW, let us consider the books written by professed apostles in the New Testement [sic.], ALL authored between AD 54 and AD 69. These books (17) total, were all authored by Mark, Luke, and Paul, with Paul being the author of (14) of them. Here we note what seems an enigma to me. If Paul was this great man of God, that he is expounded to be by all professed Christianity (except a few) today, Why was his name mentioned only (1) time (by Peter) in all the works of the Disciples, who wrote during the time, and much later than Paul? <Reference C-2> Conversly [sic.], why did Paul not mention Matthew even ONE TIME in his works, considering that he was the author of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Paul mentions John (1) time, Peter (5) times, and James (4) times in all of his prolific writings. HOWEVER, when we consider the three professed apostles, Mark, Luke, and Paul, we find that Mark did not mention Paul even one time, but Luke, Paul’s companion, mentioned Paul’s name (133) times, and Paul mentions his own name (30) times. By way of observation, it appears like Luke is the Publicity Agent (Hollywood style) for Paul. I believe here we have two professed apostles that seem to be working hand in glove, to promote a new star on the horizon of Christianity. I believe that the following exposition will support this contention.”
William Finck answers <C>: In response to this paragraph I will make only a general statement in support of both Luke and Paul. The mark of an inspired writer of the words of Yahweh is the revelation of prophecy later fulfilled. Luke’s gospel contains prophecy that, although the same general sketch of the forthcoming destruction of Jerusalem was also painted by Matthew (24) and Mark (13), Luke (here I speak of Luke 21:5 to 21:24) states some things in a different way than his colleagues. One may walk through Josephus’ Wars, the history of the destruction of Jerusalem, and see that Luke’s version, which states some things more specifically than the other two (i.e. 21:20) was fulfilled exactly as Luke wrote it. There are many other writings in Luke (and in Acts) which only a man inspired of Yahweh could possibly write. However, men like Graber, who are of false and deceitful hearts, do not have the capacity to recognize such things. There are also many prophetic statements made by Paul, among them Romans 16:20, of which a proper study would reveal that Paul also was inspired by Yahweh!
Now here, and at <Reference C-2>, Graber makes some very insidious statements and questions. For instance, he demands to know why Matthew never mentioned Paul. It doesn’t seem to matter to Graber that Matthew’s gospel ends its account before the first Pentecost, mentioned at Acts 2, long before Paul’s involvement in Christianity. Is Graber a fool, or a purposeful deceiver? His question is the equivalent of asking why Matthew didn’t mention the birth of Constantine or the founding of these United States! Then Graber admits that Paul was mentioned by Peter, and then regardless of Peter’s testimony of Paul, Graber claims to “... glean his spiritual sustenance from ... Peter ...”! H. Graber: liar and hypocrite! Graber states “we find that Mark did not mention Paul even one time”, yet again, Mark’s gospel ends long before Paul’s involvement! My friend and correspondent, you and I met in 1998. Would you mention me in a narrative of your life, if your narrative closed with 1995? Of course not! A child should notice Graber’s duplicity here! Now Graber raises a lot of smoke, claiming that Luke “mentioned Paul’s name (133) times” yet he fails to state (or rather admit) that not one of these mentions are in the gospel of Luke! Here it should be evident, H. Graber is a deceiver and a liar!
In the one short letter we have of his, James does not mention Paul, but James does not mention any of his other contemporaries either! Who is a liar, but H. Graber? In two letters, the only other apostle Peter mentions is Paul! Here Graber’s own arguments proved just the opposite of what Graber intends! And proved that Graber is a liar! John mentions none of his colleagues in his three epistles, and of course he wouldn’t mention Paul by name in his gospel, for the same reason given above. Jude mentions only James, his brother, surely to prevent us from confusing him with the other New Testament men with the name [email protected]*"l (there were three). So who is a liar, but H. Graber? And a fool!
We have 14 of Paul’s epistles. Of these, four are very long, and the other ten are nearly all as long or longer than any of the seven epistles we have written by other apostles. For sake of comparison, Paul’s epistles consume 179 pages in the NA27, where the other seven epistles consume but 44 pages. Paul mentions his own name 30 times in letters written on a personal basis (Graber’s count) from Paul to various assemblies, approximately once per six pages of text. James mentions his own name once, Peter his own name twice, and Jude mentions his own name once, for a total of about one per 10 pages, but only because the humble John does not mention his own name! Hopefully you see how inane this argument is. It adds up to one thing: Graber is an idiot!
The Book of Acts is basically an account of those deeds of Peter and Paul written by Luke. Peter’s name occurs 58 times in Acts, Paul’s 133 (as Graber states) to which I must add 23 mentions as “Saul.” This should not be considered excessive, since Luke spent much more time with Paul than he did with Peter. Now to be fair, the gospel of Matthew is basically an account of the deeds of Yahshua Christ, and His name (Yahshua) appears in Matthew approximately 152 times, and in John 240 times (according to the Moulton-Geden concordance). Now Matthew contains 87 pages of Greek text in the NA27, and John 74, but Acts 89. So Paul’s name is certainly not mentioned excessively. Therefore, let no man attempt to fool you with such deceptions. Paul mentions His name (Yahshua) approximately 230 times! H. Graber is a liar!
<Reference D> H. Graber states: “Who is the professed apostle Paul? In scriptures Paul tells us that he is an Israelite, (Rom. 11:1). Then he tells us that he IS a Pharisee, (Phil. 3:5). Luke tells us that Paul is a Jew, (Acts 21:39, & 22:3). History tells us that after the Babylonian captivity of the House of Judah, only a small remnant returned to Jerusalem, which were mostly Jews and not Israelites. Jesus warned His people concerning the LIE that even today has blinded the world. We read in Rev. 2:9, & 3:9, ‘I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews (Judeans) and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.’ So one must ask the question, Was Paul a Jew (Yehuwdaiy), or an Israelite? We know that in secular life, Paul was a rabid Jew, Pharisee, and Lawyer, and we are told that he was steeped in the principles of judaism! Also he was an avid student of the Philosophers of his days at the University, such as Plato and Socrates.”
William Finck answers <D>: Here Graber engages in deception by purposefully confusing the context in which certain terms are used. Where Paul says he is an Israelite (of the tribe of Benjamin), he lies not, identifying himself by race. Where Paul says he is a Judaean (right, in the original Greek, neither Paul nor Luke, nor any other Biblical writer, use the term ‘jew’, as Graber so idiotically alleges), or where Luke calls Paul a Judaean, they lie not, but are using the term to describe Paul’s national identity, in terms understood in the Greco-Roman world, even though Paul was born at Tarsus and therefore also a Roman citizen. In a similar manner, I may elect to call myself an American (my citizenship), a Saxon or Celto-Saxon (my race) or even a German (the land my fathers came from). Would I be lying? Of course not, and neither is Paul, or Luke! H. Graber is the only liar here!
Paul was a Pharisee. Does that make him evil, as Graber implies? Nicodemus was a Pharisee, was he evil? Joseph of Arimathea was on the council, the Sanhedrin! He was not evil! There were many good Pharisees, and many bad. Today’s equivalents are Republicans, there are many of them, too, good and bad. (Democrats are more like the Sadducees.) Graber, the liar, uses ‘Pharisee’ as a scare-word, and it surely should not be used in such a manner. It was a political party, and if you wanted any sort of voice in the community, you joined one of the parties. Was Paul a liar? Certainly not! He was a tentmaker by trade (Acts 18:3) and nowhere does it state that he was a lawyer. Pharisee, scribe and lawyer were all quite different things. Just read Matthew 23. H. Graber? He is a liar!
Was Paul learned in the learning of the Greeks? Yes! And this should be a source of pride to Identity students, since most of the Greeks were Israelites. It is also a source of refutation to the jews, who today would want you to believe that Judaea was isolated from Greco-Roman language, culture and learning, a huge lie. A separate and lengthy topic, I could surely write a twofold paper, first illustrating parallels in ancient Greek and Old Testament literature, and secondly on the New Testament parallels with ancient Greek literature. Paul quotes Aratus, Euripides, Epimenides, Menander, uses illustrations derived from Homer, Pythagoras, etc. As I said, most of the Greeks were Israelites. Of course, I suspect H. Graber may not be!
<Reference E> H. Graber states: “Now let us consider specific Pauline doctrine that is divergent from the Gospel of Jesus Christ:
“LIES: We read in Rom. 3:17, ‘For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?’ Here Paul is justifying lies, if they serve a moral purpose. This sounds like the anti-christian Plato’s philosophy from ‘The Republic’ quote, ‘Such a dangerous weapon as falsehood may not be employed by any but rulers, and then only for great and good purposes.’ Is this what Paul is saying in Rom. 3:7? The Gospel of Jesus Christ tells us in 1 John. 2:27, ‘But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is the truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.’ If Paul was indeed anointed of Jesus Christ, how could he lie?”
William Finck answers <E>: I must ask, how did Mr. Graber become ‘Dr.’, not having any basic reading skills? You can read Romans 3:7 from the A.V., as Graber does, yet here it is from my own translation: “Indeed if the truth of Yahweh were increased by my lie for His honor, why then am I still judged as wrongful?” Is Paul here promoting lying, as Graber claims? Certainly not! Paul is saying that to lie, even if one believes that he is helping or honoring Yahweh by lying, is still sinful! Who isans-serif class=s a liar, but Mr. Graber? Paul lies not!
The definition of διάβολος, one of the words translated “devil” in the A.V., is “accuser”, and more fully is one who throws up (διά-βολος is literally “by a throw”) false accusations, hence in my translations I write: False Accuser. This alone best describes H. Graber, for I have already shown this is his device, several times over. διάβολος is the word for ALL of the critics of Paul, whose actual goal is to undermine Christianity, while calling themselves Christians! This, reader, is their second oldest trick. They undermined Judaea by calling themselves Judah. They undermined America by calling themselves Americans. Today they divide Christian Identity, being called “One-Seedliners”! The ignorant among us, which is usually the majority, fall time and again to these devices.
With this in mind, I will yet take the time to dissect H. Graber’s false accusations, if for nothing else but that hopefully by this I may help strengthen the knowledge and awareness of a few, that they “be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked” such as Graber and Scott Nelson, his fellow liar.
<Reference F> H. Graber states: “THE MESSIAH: We read, concerning Paul in Acts 13:46-47, ‘Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was neccessary [sic.] that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: (meaning the Jews) but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.’ If the apostle Paul is to be for salvation unto the ends of the earth, that means that Jesus Christ has abdicated His Messiahship! If we are to believe these scriptures, and the apostle Paul, then Paul is our Messiah. Paul further magnifies himself in Gal. 4:14, ‘And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even Jesus Christ.’ What arrogance! Paul putting himself on the same level with Jesus Christ. We read the words of Jesus in John 4:25-26, ‘The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.’ Who do you accept as the MESSIAH, Jesus Christ or the apostle Paul?”
William Finck answers <F>: I have been thinking to write a paper for some time now concerning all of the mistranslation and misconception in and of the book of Acts. When I do, Acts 13:46-47 will certainly be one of the pericopes discussed. At Acts 13:47 Paul quotes Isaiah (see Isaiah 42:6, 49:6 and 51:4), whose prophecy is surely related to the promises found at 1 Kings 11:36 (and 2 Chron. 21:7) and which Paul surely understood – knowing the prophecy better than Mr. Graber – that he had a part in fulfilling (see Acts 26:17-18). Every message needs a messenger. If one claims to know where lost Israel was at the time of Christ, one must accept Paul as that messenger, for no one else delivered Yahshua’s message to the Nations (not the “Gentiles”), but Paul! The Gauls, Greeks, Romans and Spaniards that Paul visited, along with the Scythians and others he mentioned, were all Israelites, and Paul knew it.
We are the light of the world (Matt. 5:14-16). We are the children of Light (John 12:36, 1 John 1:5-7). Shemesh, or “sun” in Hebrew, also means “people of Shem” in Hebrew. This is not an accident. Peter also knew the prophet’s comparison of the Word to light (2 Pet. 1:19), but was not the writer that Paul evidently was. Luke (2:32) knew the source of the light, and surely Paul did too, though in the A.V. Luke 2:32 is poorly translated, for the Nations (not ‘Gentiles’) and the glory of Israel are in the Greek both one and the same. If Graber understands not the prophecy concerning the light of the gospel, it is only because there is no light in him (John 11:10)!
Now to discuss Acts 13:46. Paul gives this discourse in Pisidian Antioch, which contained a colony of Romans (Strabo 12.18.4), amidst a land settled throughout history by Phrygians (who were Thracians according to Strabo and others, hence descendants of Japheth – Gen. 10:2), Pisidians (a people which Strabo relates to the Leleges and Cilicians, Strabo 12.7.3, who in turn are shown to be related to the Trojans and had Trojan kings, Strabo 13.1.7, 13.1.51, 13.3.1 et al., and in turn the Cilicians are related to the Phoenicians by Rawlinson in his edition of Herodotus, from comments Herodotus made; Israelites all!), and later the area was overrun by the Keltic-Israelite Galatians, and later colonized by Greeks as well as Romans. So enough background on the environs of Pisidian Antioch, a “multi-cultural” region, but consisting entirely of Adamic cultures. When Paul first addressed these people he states (13:16) “Men of Israel, and ye that fear God”, a device which indicates the presence of non-Israelite Adamites (compare Peter at Acts 2:14) and his entire address is for and about Israelites. See also Acts 13:26, where by no means is Paul attempting to change the original commission (Matt. 15:24).
Now at Acts 13:46, after the Judaeans (not the “jews”, which is not in the original Greek anywhere, although today we call the non-believing Judaeans, racially Canaanites and Edomites, by the name of “jew”) rejected Paul’s message, Paul says “... lo, we turn to τὰ ἔθνη” and I will discuss the Greek words τὰ ἔθνη in a moment.
First, it should be obvious that Paul’s scope here is local. This is not, as the catholics would have you think, a sudden and general rejection by Paul of Judaeans everywhere; God having changed His mind and His people. Oh the deception! By no means should Acts 13:46 be cross-referenced, as so many fools do, to Matthew 21:43. Instead, Matthew 21:43 should be cross-referenced to Micah 4:7-8 and to Daniel 2:44, which the catholics usually neglect to do, not having the Truth! Paul’s rejection of Judaeans here applies only to those Judaeans at the time and place (the synagogue at Pisidian Antioch) in which Paul makes the statement. This is obvious, since days later at Iconium, 75 miles east of Antioch Paul visits another synagogue (Acts 14:1) and “a great multitude of the Judaeans and also of the Greeks believed.” Here it is proven: anyone who follows the catholic (meaning “universalist”) theology is a fool, and anyone who parrots it is a liar! H. Graber is a fool and a liar!
Now for the words τὰ ἔθνη in this passage. Anyone who ever reads the Greek word ἔθνος, of which ἔθνη is plural, and utters the made-up catholic word “gentile”, is a moron! Let us look at the secular definition of ἔθνος as given by Liddell & Scott: “a number of people accustomed to live together, a company, a body of men ... of animals, swarms, flocks ... after Homer, a nation, people ... in the N.T. the nations ...” Now not always can this word be translated “nations.” See Acts 8:9 and Romans 10:19 in the A.V., where ἔθνος is translated “people.” Compare Mark 11:17 to its source at Isaiah 56:7, where the A.V. should have translated the word “people”, but did not. There are other examples of this, and many more in the Septuagint. Here the A.V. should have rendered this part of Acts 13:46 “lo, we turn to the people”, and left behind in the Greek would be the diversity of the synagogue audience, Thracians, Kelts, Greeks, Romans and Judaeans, but all Adamites, which Paul’s use of τὰ ἔθνη surely indicates. Other Greek words meaning “people” or “multitude” among which are λαός, δῆμος, πλῆθος, ἁλής or ὄχλος, simply would not have the same precise meaning. Graber is ignorant, and his ignorance is accomplice to his lies. (Finck’s open letter to his friend will be continued in the next several lessons.)
The reason I made an example of Joseph Jeffers at the beginning of this lesson is because there are many in Israel Identity who are swallowing down his lies. Jeffers seems to have a propensity to change everything to just opposite of what it really was or is. He seems to take great delight in contorting the truth (especially on Paul)! But Scripture will make a liar out of people like him every time!