Compiled by Pastor Eli James
Allogenos. Malachi 4:1.
KJV: For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the ***proud***, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
Greek Septuagint: For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the ***alien***, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the YHWH of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
“” “allogenos” “allos”….OTHER…..”genos”….NATION, RACE
“One of ANOTHER RACE, NATION, a FOREIGNER, a STRANGER”.
The Greek words “xenos”, “allotrios” also mean the same, as do the Greek words “allotrios, paroikos, heteros, parepidemos”, which have various meanings, from foreigner, stranger, another of a different kind, pilgrim, or sojourner.”
SYNONYMS for “allogenos” are “allophulos” one of ANOTHER RACE, NATION, “xenos”….stranger, foreigner, another of a different kind”.
The ANTONYM for “allogenos” is ..(oikeios), which means “RELATIVE”, and the word “” “sumpolites” means fellow-citizen.
The Hebrew word from which “proud” was translated is “zed”, Strong’s #2086, which appears 13 times in Scripture, 12 times as “proud” and once as “presumptious”. The Greek phrase from which “alien” was translated is “allo genos”, an entirely different concept than “proud”. If the Greek Septuagint was translated from the original Hebrew language, then whatever word was there could not possibly have been “zed”, or it could not possibly have meant “proud”.
H2086
ze^d
zade’
From H2102; arrogant: – presumptuous, proud.
How is such a major difference to be explained? Since the Septuagint (250 BC) is far older than the Masoretic Text (1000 AD), and since the Masoretic Text is a rabbinical redaction of the Hebrew OT, the most likely explanation is that the rabbis deliberately changed the word when copying and redacting from their source text. The KJV is based on the MT.
Since NONE of the original Hebrew text survives, we will never know what Hebrew phrase or word or concept the ISRAELITES considered to be “allo genos” in Greek. The sense of this phrase is “other race”, making “alien” the most likely translation. Only fragments of the first three chapters of Malachi have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
One thing we know for sure, Jesus and the authors of the New Testament quoted from the Greek Septuagint. Since the rabbis of Judaism could not win arguments against the Christians using the Septuagint, the Jews resorted to the tactic of creating their own, deceptive version of the Old Testament, the MT.
Appolumi
In every case, including the lost sheep, the Greek word is apollumi. It is Strong’s word #622, and, as your preachers who have studied Greek know, it means apo, put away, and llumi, in punishment or chastisement. So, Jesus Christ said he came not but unto the “put away in punishment sheep of the House of Israel.” That phrase has a national significance not a personal salvation understanding. That is very different than supposing that the word means an “unsaved” individual. When you read your Bible and come upon the word lost, you are to substitute the phrase, put away in punishment. Suddenly, the whole Scripture will take on a startling new meaning. The Greek word lost never means unsaved in the meaning that it is most commonly used today. Are the lights going on for you?
So what is the modern word for someone who has been expelled from his own country? EXILED.
Matt. 10:6, “Go rather to the exiled sheep of the House of Israel,” it means “exiled”. Matt. 15:24: “I am not sent but unto the EXILED sheep of the house of Israel.”
James 1:1: “To the Twelve Tribes scattered abroad, greetings.” These are the exiled tribes of the Dispersion.
Gentile
The word ‘Gentile’ is deceptively used by the rabbis as an antonym of ‘Israelite.” Thus, for them, ‘Gentile’ means “non-Jew.” But this is not at all what this word means. It doesn’t belong in the Bible at all. It is actually a Latin word that means “kinsman.” The Hebrew ‘goy’ and the Greek ‘ethnos’ both mean “nation.” And the identity of the nation must always be determined from the context of the passage. Consequently, the definition that the Jews employ, namely “non-Jewish,” is a complete fabrication that has no origin in either the Hebrew or the Greek. It is a self-serving definition, which suits the rabbinical deception that the Bible is about the Jewish people.
Thus, the rabbis have established a false dichotomy, between Jews and non-Jews; but the Bible is about the Israelites, not about the Jews. So, the true dichotomy is between the Israelites and the non-Israelite heathen. It is also easily demonstrated that the vast majority of the instances of ‘gentile’ actually refer to the Israelites of the Dispersion, which means the KINSMEN of the Judean Israelites; and this is in accord with the actual definition of the Latin word, ‘gentilis.’
Consider carefully this analysis by a Latin expert:
William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D.:
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John Murray, London, 1875.
GENS. This word contains the same element as the Latin genus, and gigno, and as the Greek γένος, γίγνομαι, &c., and it primarily signifies kin. But the word has numerous significations, which have either a very remote connection with this its primary notion, or perhaps none at all.
Gens sometimes signifies a whole political community, as Gens Latinorum, Gens Campanorum, &c. (Juv. Sat. VIII.239, and Heinrich’s note); though it is probable that in this application of the term, the notion of a distinction of race or stock is implied, or at least the notion of a totality of persons distinguished from other totalities by sameness of language, community of law, and increase of their numbers among themselves only. Cicero (pro Balbo, c13) speaks of “Gentes universae in civitatem receptae, ut Sabinorum, Volscorum, Hernicorum.” It is a consequence of such meaning of Gens, rather than an independent meaning, that the word is sometimes used to express a people simply with reference to their territorial limits.
The words Gens and Gentiles have a special meaning in the system of the Roman law and in the Roman constitution. Cicero has preserved a definition of Gentiles which was given by Scaevola, the pontifex, and which, with reference to the time, must be considered complete. Those were Gentiles, according to Scaevola, (1) who bore the same name, (2) who were born of freemen (ingenui), (3) none of whose ancestors had been a slave, and (4) who had suffered no capitis diminutio. This definition contains nothing which shows a common bond of union among gentiles, such the possession of a common name; but those who had a common name were not gentiles, if the three other conditions, contained in this definition, were not applicable to them. There is also a definition of gentilis by Festus:— “That is called Gens Aelia which is composed (conficitur) of many familiae. Gentilis is both one who is of the same stock (genus), and one who is called by the same name (simili nomine),1 as Cincius says, those are my gentiles who are called by my name.”
The Greek ethnos means “race, or nation.” The Hebrew goy means “nation.” So whence the definition of ‘Gentile’ as a “non-Jewish nation”? It is fraudulent. It is just another rabbinical invention which the non-Jews of the world have been programmed to use, via Jewish money, power and influence in the world of Christian theology.
The Pharisees even knew that the Gentiles were Israelites.
John 7:33-35. Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come. Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?
Goy
Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: 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.
Now, Abraham had many children of three different wives: Hagar, Sarah and Keturah. Hagar was the mother of Ishamel, who had twelve sons, which are today’s Arab nations. If Abraham was Jew, why aren’t the Arabs considered Jews as well? After all, they are Abrahams’a children.
Sarah had only one son, Isaac, who is the father of the Anglo-Saxons. (Gen. 21:12)
Keturah
Evangelist FF Bosworth:
Abraham had eight sons. One son was Ishmael whose mother was Hagar. One son was Isaac, whose mother was Sarah. After Sarah’s death, Abraham married Keturah, and she bore unto him six sons. Abraham, being a Hebrew, or descendant of Heber, his descendants would of course be Hebrews, and their descendants would also be Hebrews, but their descendants are not Jews. If they are, then Ishmael, that would make the Arabs Jews. The descendants of Keturah’s six sons became the Brahmins of India. It would be foolish to declare that they are Jews, although as the descendants of Abraham, they are of the stock of Heber, and therefore Hebrews. The same reasoning applies to Isaac. Isaac was a Hebrew, the son of Abraham. Now Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob. If Isaac was a Jew, then both Esau and Jacob would be Jews. This would make the descendants of Esau also Jews, but the descendants of Esau became the Edomites, later the Turks; also the Pharoahs of the oppression were of the Esau line, but none of these people are Jews.”
[Here, Bosworth is technically correct, but we know that these Edomites settled in Idumea and became known to the world as Idumeans in the days of Christ. This nation of Idumeans became a part of Judea, by virtue of the decree of King John Hyrcanus of Judah in 125 BC. But these people had always been the ENEMIES of Israel and Judah, as they are still our enemies today. By this decree, Hyrcanus opened the door to the subversion and usurpation of Judah by these Idumeans, under Herod. Thus, these Edomites became Ioudaios (citizens of Judea) by virtue of naturalization, but they never were racial Isaraelites. Hence, these Edomites are known as Jews today. This explains why the Pharisees could call themselves descendants of Abraham who had never been in bondage (John 8:32-44). It also explains the true meaning of Rev. 2:9, 3:9 and 12:9. These people became “Jews” by citizenship but they could not become Judahites by race. Hence, the Sephardic Jews of today are of Edomite, not Judahite, stock. – Eli]
To call Abraham a Jew would make him a descendant of Isaac’s yet unborn grandson Judah. The Tribe of Judah had no existence on earth during the time of Abraham and Isaac. If Isaac was a Jew, then surely his twin sons, Jacob and Esau would be Jews. We all know that Esau, Jacob’s twin brother, became the progenitor of the Turks, as they are known today. If Jacob was a Jew, how could it be that his twin brother would not be, since they were both born of the same father and mother?
[Bosworth is here pointing out, very correctly, the sloppy thinking that goes into defining the word ‘Jew.’ A grandfather cannot be named for a grandson. The Jews rely on this type of sloppy thinking and false definitions to parley their impersonation of Israel into Judeo-Christian theology. – Eli]