Fulfilled Theology - Preterist

Discussion All Areas Of Systematic Theology

This might be one of the most controversial topics in the Bible. I want to let you know that I do not support or hold the Christian Identity or the British Israel’s view about Adam as the "white race" and only true Israel today. However, the Bible is silent about where all "races" came from. I do not think Adam was the first man on earth but he was the first created in the Garden of Eden within the Promised Land. I would like to show you about Jesus Christ and Israelites were the chosen people (1 Peter 2:9). Since the parousia of Christ in AD 70, these people are no longer existed because all of their genealogies were destroyed along with the temple by the Romans and the saints were raised and “raptured” to be with their Messiah, Jesus (1 Cor. 15:51-56; 1 Thess. 4:13-18).


1. In Gen. 1, God created everything “after its kind” (Gen. 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25). See Lev. 19:19 and Deut. 22:9. To mix them were forbidden.


2. In Gen. 1-3, Adam was not the first man created but I think he was the first covenant man because in Hosea 6:7 says "But like Adam they (Israelites) have transgressed the covenant ; There they have dealt treacherously against Me." It seems to me that the covenants were ONLY for God's "servants" (Adam and his posterity).


3. Cain was cursed and banished from the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. He took a wife, non-Adamite (Gen. 4:16-17) before Adam and Eve had sons and daughters (Gen. 5:1-4). His descendants mentioned in Gen. 4:17-24.


4. The sons of God (the descendants from Seth to Lamech, Gen. 4:25 to Gen. 5:32; not the “fallen angels”) saw the daughters of men (Hebrew: “Adam”, the descendants of Cain from Adam, Gen. 4:16-24) and they took wives for themselves (Gen. 6:2-4). God was displeased with them because the Cainites were cursed (Gen. 4:11). The Nephilim were living in THAT TIME and EVEN AFTER the flood which it was local within the Promised Land, not global (Gen. 6:4; Num. 13:32-33).


5. According to Genesis 6:9, Noah was "perfect" in his generations. This is not a reference to his moral perseverance but to his heredity and ancestry. The Hebrew word toledoth ("generations") is defined as family history, and the word tamim ("perfect") means without blemish, just as a sacrificially pure animal is described as being without blemish. Noah was unique at a time when the lines of Seth and Cain were engaged in miscegenation that led to the destruction of the land, not the planet Earth.


6. Ham’s son Canaan was cursed from Noah because Ham and his mother committed incest (Gen. 9:21-27; Lev. 18:7; 20:11). Canaan’s descendants were Sidon, his firstborn son, and Heth and the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgashite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Sinite, the Arvadite, the Zemarite and the Hamathite. Afterward the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad within the Promised Land (Gen. 10:15-19). Later on God commanded Israel to destroy the Canaanites and make no covenant with them (Deut. 7:1-3). 


7. Abraham married his half-sister Sarah, the daughter of his father, Terah (Gen. 20:12). God made a covenant with Abraham and his son, Isaac, not Ishmael and his mother Hagar the Egyptian (Gen. 17:4-9, 19).


8. Lot and his daughters committed an incestuous act and their descendants were the Moabites and the Ammonites. They were not allowed to be in assembly of the LORD (Deut. 23:3; 1 Kings 11:1; Neh. 13:1). Many assumed that King David’s great-grandmother Ruth was a Moabitess but she was an Israelite who lived in the land of Moab (Ruth 4:14). According to Lev. 25:47-55, a redeemer must be a kinsman. Therefore, the theory that Ruth was an ethnic Moabitess is contradicted by Scripture (Deut. 23:2-6). Read this link: http://www.israelofgod.org/ruth.htm


9. Isaac married Rebecca, one of Abraham’s relatives (Gen. 24:2-4, 15). Rebecca was the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean (or “Syrian”) of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean, to be his wife (Gen. 25:20). Aram was one of Abraham’s ancestors through Shem (Gen. 10:22-23). Isaac was specifically forbidden from marrying a Canaanite (Gen. 24:3).


10. Jacob was an Aramean (Deut. 26:5) who married to Rachel and Leah, his cousins. Both were Isaac’s relatives (Gen. 28:1-7). Isaac told Jacob not to take the daughters of Canaan (Gen. 28:6). Jacob’s father in law, Laben, was also an Aramean (Gen. 28:5). God made a covenant with Jacob, not Esau (Gen. 28).


11. Isaac was displeased with Esau when he took the daughters of Canaan/Hittite/Hivite (Gen. 26:34-35; 28:8; 36:1-2) and the daughters of Ishmael (Gen. 28:9; 36:3). In fact God told Israel they shall make no covenant with these people (Deut. 7:1-3).


12. Judah did marry a Canaanite, but his daughter-in-law Tamar was not (Gen. 38). He had three mixed sons, and in the providence of God, their lines did not continue. When Tamar had lost two husbands (Judah’s sons), both of whom were brothers, and was refused the remaining youngest brother, she still had the courage to demand her rights to motherhood by law. It was the duty of Judah, her father-in-law, to fulfill the Levirate (kinsman redeemer) law of marriage, just as Boaz would do later for Ruth. In both cases, the royal tribe of Judah was spared, and both women are given prominent mention in the genealogy of Christ. Tamar's subversive action was righteous, though she disguised herself as a prostitute, and her son Perez was legitimate. Judah acknowledges Tamar as "more righteous than I" for claiming her right to bear the child, and he acknowledges his own guilt in fearfully withholding his son from her. Tamar is never heard of again in scripture and it is assumed she probably went back to Aram and Shem, her Grandfather. Here is what the "Legend of the Jews" has to say about her:


“The first-born son of Judah from this marriage was named Er, "the childless," a suitable name for him that died without begetting any issue.[78] At Judah's desire, Er married Tamar, a daughter of Aram, the son of Shem, but because she was not a Canaanitish woman, his mother used artifices against her, and he did not know her, and an angel of the Lord killed him on the third day after his wedding. Then Judah gave Tamar to his second son Onan, the marriage taking place before the week of the wedding festivities for Er had elapsed. A whole year Onan lived with Tamar without knowing her, and when, finally, Judah uttered threats against him on that account, he did, indeed, have intercourse with her, but, giving heed to the injunctions of his mother, he took care not to beget any children with her.[79] He, too, died on account of his iniquity, and his name Onan "mourning," was well chosen, for very soon was his father called upon to mourn for him.[80] Now Judah conceived the plan of marrying Tamar to his youngest son Shelah, but his wife would not permit it. She hated Tamar because she was not of the daughters of Canaan like herself, and while Judah was away from home, Bath-shua chose a wife for her son Shelah from the daughters of Canaan. Judah was very angry at Bath-shua for what she had done, and also God poured out His wrath upon her, for on account of her wickedness she had to die,[81] and her death happened a year after that of her two sons” (http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/loj/loj203.htm). Tamar was an Aramaean by ancestry. Two apocryphal books, the Testament of Judah (2:10) and the Book of Jubilees (41:1), suggest that she was the daughter of Aram who was the son of Kemuel who was the son of Nahor, the brother of Abraham (Genesis 22:21).


13. Joseph married to Asenath (Gen. 41:45). The Scripture seems doesn’t say much about Asenath’s ancestors but there are some theories where she came from. She might be a Hebrew/Semite/one of the Shepherds with Egyptian name, like her husband Joseph and his family (Gen. 43:32; 46:31-34). Her ancestors may be from Ham’s one of sons, Mizraim. The land of Egypt used to be called the land of Ham (Psalm 78:51-52; 105:23 & 27; 106:21-23). Others think the Egyptian rulers of that time were Semitic Hyksos in northern Egypt. Some believe Asenath was the daughter of Shechem the Hivite and Dinah, the daughter of Jacob according to Gen. 46:5-27. Poti-Pherah was the step father of Asenath. Read this link: http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2000/puzzle_ans.html.


14. Joseph and Asenath’s son, Manasseh and his Aramean concubine bore their son, Machir (1 Chron. 7:14). Here’s another one from the Arameans.


15. Deut. 23:2 is inaccurately translated as: "One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the assembly of the LORD; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the LORD." According to Strong's Concordance, the Hebrew word mamzer (Strong’s # 4464) means not what we would call a bastard but a person of mixed lineage, or "mongrel." God commands that a mongrel must not enter the congregation of Israel. Jephthah was the son of a harlot (Judges 11:1-2) and a bastard, but he was not a mamzer, or mongrel, since he was allowed to enter the assembly of the Lord.


16. It seems that the “Edomite” in Deut. 23:7-8, the sons may enter the assembly of the Lord in the third generation is the problem for pure bloodline according to Deut. 23:2 as well in 1 Kings 11:1-3; Ezra 9:1-2, 11-12; 10:1-3, 10-12; Neh. 13:1-3, 25-27. What I have discovered that it may be mistranslated and it should be “Aramean” because this was Israel’s brother (or relative, see Deut. 26:5) through Shem’s son, Aram. Please check in above number 7, 8, 9, and 12 in regard with the “Aramean”. Also in 2 Kings 16:6, same Hebrew word for “Edomite” but some Bible translations used “Aramean” (or “Syrian”). I noticed not only this, some used “Edom” or “Aram” in 2 Chron. 20:2. Keep in mind that God hated Esau and the Edomites were one of Israelites’ enemies (Mal. 1:1-4; Rom. 9:10-14).


If this is speaking of the “Edomites”, they were closely related to the Israelites through Jacob’s brother Esau. This passage is speaking to the men of Edom/Egypt, not women and it might be an exceptional. An Edomite father and an Israelite mother would not create Israelite children and their progeny could not enter the congregation of Israel until the third generation. The same would apply to an Egyptian father and an Israelite mother like Sheshan's daughter is given to Jarha the Egyptian (1 Chron. 2:34-35) and the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father who were put to death (Lev. 24:10-23).


However, some think we must interpret Deut. 23:8 in the context of Deut. 23:1-7 which forbids anyone of “mongrel” birth to be part of Israel (Deut. 23:2) and uses the term "brother" to clarify that those particular "Edomites" and the "Egyptians" were fellow Israelites of foreign residence in this context (Deut. 23:7). We can compare with other passages about those nations were forbidden, including Edomites and Egyptians (1 Kings 11:1-3; Ezra 9:1-2). I haven't settled this one yet.


17. Moses married to Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro, the priest of Midian (Ex. 18:1-2). Jethro’s ancestors were from Midian, the son of Abraham and another wife, Keturah (Gen. 25:1-4). In Num. 12:1, Miriam and Aaron spoke against their brother Moses because he married to a Cushite/Ethiopian woman. We don’t know if this Cushite/Ethiopian woman was Zipporah or another wife of Moses. If this was another wife of Moses, the Bible doesn’t mention they had any child. The Book of Jasher gives an alternate account (33:31-34):


“…they [the Cushites] gave him [Moses] for a wife Adoniah the Cushite queen, wife [widow] of Kikianus [deceased king of the Cushites]. And Moses feared the Lord God of his fathers, so that he came not to her, nor did he turn eyes to her. For Moses remembered how Abraham had made his servant Eliezer swear, saying unto him, ‘Thou shalt not take a woman from the daughters of Canaan [brother of Cush] for my son Isaac.’ Also what Isaac did when Jacob had fled from his brother, when he commanded him, saying, ‘Thou shalt not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan’…” (Though not inspired, the Book of Jasher is mentioned twice in the Bible, and is therefore difficult to dismiss).


18. King Solomon married Naamah the Ammonitess (1 Kings 14:21, 31; 2 Chron. 12:13-14) and she can be compared to Ruth the Moabitess as seen in above. If their son Rehoboam was a mixed of lineage, this would be an illegitimate successor to the throne according to Deut. 23:2-6. There is nowhere in the Scripture that God said anything about Rehoboam was being an illegitimate king and he was one of Israelites (1 Kings 12:22-24). However, King Solomon did some very bad things by marrying many foreign women (1 Kings 11:1-13; Ezra 9:1-2; 11-12; 10:1-3, 10-12; Neh. 13:1-3, 25-25). The fact that he did some of these things is the reason why the Kingdom was divided. His brother, Nathan's bloodline was also used to bring it down through Mary's side and her father, Heli (Luke 3:23) thus giving Jesus an uncorrupted linage.


19. “Stranger”, “alien”, or “sojourner” can be confusing in English translations and many assumed that these words referring to non-Hebrews. We can look up in Strong’s Concordance with some Hebrew words. In Strong’s #1616, “ger”, always speaking to the Hebrews or their kinsmen. Another one in Strong’s #2114 referring to non-Hebrews or those who did a strange thing against the LORD. There is some more to know but you can read this link: http://www.israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/Strangers%20Pilgri...


20. The New Covenant was for the house of Judah and the house of Israel only (Jer. 31:31-34).


21. The Bible is pretty clear about the exclusiveness of Israel (Lev. 20:24; Psalm 147:19-20; Jer. 31:10-11, 31-34; Amos 3:1-2; Rom. 9:3-5). Read more in http://www.israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/The%20Exclusivenes...


22. There are some passages that God told them not intermarry with the daughters of men (other nations) for their sons (Gen. 6:2-4; Ex. 34:10-16; Deut. 7:1-8; Judges 3:5-6; Ezra 9:1-2; 10:2-3; Neh. 13:25-27).


23. “Gentile” in the Bible should not be used to mean non-Jew or non-Israelite except in rare cases where the context fits.

Views: 686

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We need to keep in mind that the Bible is speaking of the generations of Adam (Gen. 5:1), Noah (Gen. 6:9), Shem (Gen. 11:10), Terah (Gen. 11:27), Isaac (Gen. 25:10), and finally Jacob (Gen. 37:2). It says a little bit about the generations of Cain (Gen. 4:17-23), Ham and Japheth (Gen. 10:1-20), Ishmael (Gen. 25:12), and Esau (Gen. 36:1) but they were not part of God’s plan of redemption as well for non-Adamites/non-Israelites.


Would it be possible for Adam to have all the genetic information of all the races (Caucasian, Negroid, Mongoloid, and so forth) and then, by the process of “natural selection” through environmental changes which act upon the already present genetic codes, produce all the distinct races after the flood of Noah (worldwide or local)? To answer this question, we must begin with Scripture.


The Bible never said that God created Adam with all the genetic information, or that all the races came originally from him. Those who hold all mankind came from Adam or the sons of Noah do not offer any direct or indirect biblical proof that this scenario is true. It is an unbiblical assumption.


What about during the Tower of Babel, would God have left out the recording of this miraculous event of racial diversification?


The Bible is not about all people of all racial kinds and mixtures but about the Adamic race. As I said before, this is evidenced beginning with Genesis 5:1 which states: This is the book of the generations of Adam. The immediate context of this verse is the book of Genesis and the Pentateuch, it must also encompass the whole Bible (both Old and New Testaments) since it traces the account of the family line of Adam to Israel and to Jesus Christ.


The word translated “nations” (Hebrew—goy; Greek—ethnos) is first used in Genesis 10:5 to describe the descendants of Japheth, one of Noah’s sons, in their families:


"From these the coast lands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families in their nations."


These nations were made up of the families of Japheth, separated by land and language. The same term “nations” also applied to Ham (Gen. 10:20) and Shem (Gen. 10:31).


The last verse in chapter ten then sums up the true identification of the nations of the Bible (Gen. 10:32). However we don’t know much history about the descendants of Japheth and Ham.


These nations were derived from the sons of Noah and were of the Adamic race. A few generations later, Abraham’s ancestors derived from Noah’s oldest son, Shem. Abraham was the father of the Hebrews (Ex. 3:15-16, 18).


There is another description of “nations” that also applies to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel. God promised to make of Abraham and Sarah many nations:


"As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. . ." (Gen. 17:4).


Then God said to Abraham, “As to Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah . . . and she shall be a mother of nations. . .” (Gen. 17:15-16).


Abraham and Sarah were to be the progenitors of many nations. This promise was a covenant that God made with Abraham and was passed on to Isaac (Gen. 26:3-4) and Jacob (Gen. 35:9-11).


The word “Jews” (Judahites/Judeans) did not exist until after the division of the kingdoms of Israel after the death of Solomon (2 Kings 16:6). The house of Israel was divorced (Jer. 3:8) and they became like the nations (Hos. 8:8) but the house of Judah were still covenanted with God until Jesus’ generation. Those who believed in Jesus, received blessing in heaven while the rest who rejected him, they died in their sin (Rom. 9:22-24). Therefore, the new covenant was for both houses of Israel (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:8-13), not for non-Israelites/”Gentiles”.


Did all races come from Adam? The answer to the question is, No. The races of today did not, and could not, have come from Adam or an original set of parents. All races, including the Adamic race, were created separately for the purpose for which God created them (Deut. 32:7-9; 1 Peter 2:9).

From Rivers':


1. There is no biblical evidence that any of God's covenants and promises were ever inteneded for anyone other than "the Israelites accoding to the flesh" (Romans 9:3-5). The term "gentiles" (nations) comes from the original covenant promise where God said that "the descendants" of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would a "multitude of gentiles" (Genesis 17:5-8; Genesis 35:10-11) and a "fullness of gentiles" (Genesis 48:19-20; Romans 11:25-26).


2. The reconciliation was limited to the Israelites for many reasons. In fact, Paul explained to the Romans in great detail that BOTH the "circumcised" and the "uncircumcised" converts were "the descendants" (Romans 4:1-18) who had "Abraham as forefather according to the flesh" (Romans 4:1). Paul even spedifically defined "the whole world" as limited to those who were "under the Law" (Romans 3:19-20) just as he limited "redemption" and "adoption" to those who were "under the Law" (Galatians 4:4-5).


Please take some time to read through Romans 4 and follow the words "father" and "descendants" and you will see that it is applied to the "uncircumcised" (faith) converts as well as the Jews (circumcised). This is because Paul understood that the uncircumcised "gentiles" were the other part of the physical descendants of Abraham who were predestined to glory (Genesis 12:1-3). Romans 4:1-18 is a commentary on Abrahamic covenant and is the key to understanding all of Pauline theology.

Hi Donald,

I read your opening comments and i would like your opinion on Christian Identity or the British Israel’s view about Adam as the "white race" and only true Israel..I do find  the history of the lost 12 tribes very interesting and i do believe that many nations came from them.. Europe,Ukraine,some say brittian,Ireland,Serbia,Gauls,Celtics,synthians etc....Would this not prove that the 12 tribes or at least mostly where white? They would have to be the scattered 12 tribes=Israel....Through logical reasoning it seems that this belief could be true and has alot of validity...The gospel did go out to the whole Roman world.....The scattered 12 tribes were mainly in Asia Minor and Europe where the gospel was preached.....Acts 2- every Jew=Israelite under heaven....Their is a whole history from Afghanistan to Indian about huge communities that consider themselves to be Aryan....Who is Israel now and is their such a thing called the church made up of Aryan people or any others? Is there a church any more? According to what i am reading it seems their is no church or anything after 70 Ad...


Thank you

Timothy Wallace

Hi Timothy,


I've read CI and BI's view about Adam as the "white race" and only true Israel but I am not convinced. However, they did great job showing who were these people and the salvation was for the descendants of Abraham/12 tribes of Israel. Yes, you are correct there is no "church" after 70 AD when the saints were raised and caught away to be with their Messiah/Kinsman (Matt. 19:28; Rom. 9:3-5; 11:25-27; 1 Thes. 4:13-18).

Reply to Discussion


This is an open forum to discuss all areas of Systematic Theology which it does not agree with the Church Traditions.

© 2022   Created by Donald.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service