Many of the Judeo-Christian clergy claim that God committed fraud: This is a very serious charge to make against anyone, let alone the Almighty. We believe, though, once the evidence is weighed, there will be no alternative but to bring this very grave charge against Him, and penalize Him accordingly. After all,if He has committed such an appalling crime, why should He be treated differently from anyone else? The charge for this crime of fraud has already been alleged by a multitude of people, so it’s abut time that charges are written up, and a summons be given Him to appear in court to face these allegations.
Before this charge of fraud is laid, let’s see just what the term “fraud” actually means. For this, we will use “The World Book Encyclopedia,” 1971, volume 7, page 421:
“Fraud is an intentional untruth or a dishonest scheme used to take deliberate and unfair advantage of another person or group of persons. Actual fraud includes cases of misrepresentation designed specifically to cheat others...Actual fraud includes something said, done, or omitted by a person with the design of continuing what he knows to be a cheat or a deception. Constructive fraud includes acts or words that tend to mislead others...Ordinarily, a person wronged by anothers fraud may sue the wrongdoer and recover the amount of damages caused by the fraud or deceit. But the person wronged must be able to prove damages...”
In order to grasp how, when, where and why the Almighty allegedly committed fraud, it will be necessary to comprehend the various legal contracts in which He engaged Himself with Adam-Man. These include (1) Edenic; (2) Adamic; (3) Nohic; (4) Abrahamic; (5) Mosaic; (6) Palestinian; (7) Davidic; (8) Solomonic; and, (9) The New Covenant. The New Covenant is the binding legal agreement for which the Almighty is alleged to have committed fraud.
Many today call themselves “New Testament Christians.” The single Greek word for both “testament” and “covenant” in the Strong’s Concordance is #1242. In other words, when one claims one is a “New Testament Christian,” one is, in effect, saying one is a “New Covenant Christian.”
This Greek word #1242 is used 17 times as “cotenant” and 11 times as “testament.” The word for “testament” or “covenant” in the Old Testament is #1285, beriyth, in the Hebrew, and means essentially the same thing as “testament” in the Greek. Whether you want to call them contracts, covenants or testaments, they all have some of the same elements and are binding legal instruments. The word “testament” or “covenant” in the New Testament is treated much like a man’s Last Will and Testament. In order for a Last Will and Testament to be effective, the testator must die. Therefore, when Messiah died, He made provisions for His named beneficiaries in His Last Will and Testament. Unless the beneficiaries are named, any Testament is useless. In all legal binding agreements, contracts, compacts, covenants, testaments, treaties, trusts, or whatever, the parties thereto must be named.
Now, let’s take a look to see who Messiah named as beneficiaries in His Last Will and Testament. In the Old Testament, this can be found in Jeremiah 31:31, and at Hebrews 8:8 in the New Testament.
Jeremiah 31:31: “Behold the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the HOUSE OF ISRAEL, and with the HOUSE OF JUDAH.”
Hebrews 8:8: “...Behold the days come saith Yahweh, when I will make a new covenant with the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and with the HOUSE OF JUDAH.”
Are we going to contest His Last Will and Testament, claiming the Redeemer must have been mentally incompetent when He made it because we don’t approve of who is beneficiaries are? Do yo suppose we could rewrite the terms of His Will to meet our approval? For it would appear, if we are not of the HOUSE OF ISRAEL or the HOUSE OF JUDAH, e have no legal claim to His Will.
Now, let’s take a look at this thing from a different perspective. Say that a person of a family of several brothers and sisters found out their last surviving parent intended to leave him/her out of his Will. Say this person slipped into the parent’s house, found the Will, put it into a typewriter which could life the print of the named beneficiaries off of the paper, and placed his/her name in their place. Would not this be considered fraud? Maybe this person had a substantial moral right to be named in the Will, but the last living parent didn’t see it that way. The question again is: Would this be fraud? Maybe this person had done more for his/her parents than any of the others, but again, would this be fraud? Any way one might want to look at it, it is out-and-out fraud!
Let’s now apply this same situation to the Last Will and Testament of Yahshua, where He had named the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH as His beneficiaries. There have been hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands, and perhaps more who have tried to disenfranchise the names of The HOUSE OF ISRAEL and The HOUSE OF JUDAH, and place “Gentiles,”“church,”“whosoever will,” and “all men” in their place!
Their excuse is: They say, that “Yahweh” gave up on the “Jews” and decided that, if they didn’t want to be “saved,” He would open the door to the “Gentiles.” Poor old “Yahweh;” can’t do anything right. So, what did the Almighty do according to these various Judeo-Christian pastors? He allegedly disenfranchised the names of the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH from His Last Will and Testament and inserted ‘Gentiles,”“church,”“whosoever will,” and “all men” in their place. Can we now see why “Yahweh” must be indicted and tried for fraud/ Well, of one can’t trust ‘Yahweh” to keep His Word, who can one trust?
In 1923 the Jews put the Almighty on trial in Russia, and found Him guilty because He would not show up in court.
"In 1923, Trotsky, and Lunatcharsky presided over a meeting in Moscow organized by the propaganda section of the Communist party to judge God. Five thousand men of the Red Army were present. The accused was found guilty of various ignominious acts and having had the audacity to fail to appear, he was condemned in default." (Ost Express, January 30, 1923. Cf. Berliner Taegeblatt May 1, 1923. See the details of the Bolshevist struggle against religion in The Assault of Heaven by A. Valentinoff (Boswell); The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, p. 144‑145)
If the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH were the true beneficiaries of His Will, it would appear they have a very sound case against the Almighty in this lawsuit of fraud for name changes in the Will after the fact. We wonder how much damages the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH might sue for in such a case? We wonder if this could be considered a class action suit? If we were to be the legal advocates for either Israel or Judah or for “Yahweh,” we believe we would choose Israel and Judah in preference to “God,” as “God,” in this case, has little to no legal standing.
This brings up another sticky situation; for if the Last Will and Testament of the New Covenant can be broken by changing the names of the assigned beneficiaries, then all the aforementioned
Covenants can also be broken, from Adam to Yahshua. If this were the case, why did the Almighty even bother making covenants in the first place? What good is the New Testament if “whosoever” can break in and claim to be a party of the second part?
If “whosoever” is the rightful heir; a New Testament wouldn’t have been necessary. How would you like it if you were named in a Will and the probate court designated “whosoever” as the beneficiary? Yet, this is exactly what the Judeo-Christian clergy in the churches are doing with the New Testament, thus making it a fraudulent document.
It is imperative we stress one more significant fact: If the New Covenant/Testament was bequeathed to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH, what right do any other entities have to that claim? It is obvious; they have no right whatsoever.
Now that we have identified the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH as the proper beneficiaries within the context of New Testament, let’s consider some of the other subjects which “surround” it. If you will look up the word “context” in the dictionary, it will tell you it means, “words surrounding a word or phrase.” In other words, the New Testament relates to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH, and all other Scripture must “surround’ or fit this concept. Let’s take a look at some of these Scriptures:
Acts 2:21: “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
Under the rule that the New Testament must fit around or “surround” this, it must apply only to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH. Anything else is CRIMINAL fraud!
Acts 17:26: “And hath MADE OF ONE BLOOD ALL NATIONS of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before anointed, and the BOUNDS OF THEIR HABITATION.”
Here again, to be in context, this must apply only to the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH. From a first reading, it may not appear to be that way, but an Old Testament passage from which this Scripture is derived must be taken into account.
Deuteronomy 32:8: When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he SEPARATED the sons of Adam, HE SET THE BOUNDS OF THE PEOPLE according to the number of THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.”
When it says in Acts 17:26: “And hath MADE OF ONE BLOOD ALL NATIONS OF MEN,” it is not talking about all the men of the earth, but the Adamic-Israelites of the HOUSE OF ISRAEL and the HOUSE OF JUDAH. If ALL MEN were descended from Adam, why would it be necessary to set BOUNDARIES to enforce the SEGREGATION of Israel and Judah from other peoples? When Acts 17:26 speaks of all NATIONS (ethnos/goy) being of one blood contextually it means the NATIONS of Israel and Judah being of the same bloodline. Here again, to apply “all men” to someone other than the HOUSE OF ISRAEL or the HOUSE OF JUDAH is criminal. Yes, criminal!
Acts 11:18: “...Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”
The term “Gentiles” is an unfortunate translation, and has become one of the greatest stumbling-blocks to our Bible understanding. Actually, the word in the Greek is “ethnos” from which we get the term “ethnic” today (check your dictionary). The LATIN terms “Gentile” is misapplied and only causes confusion as it can refer to an Israelite or non-Israelite within the context of the individual. (That “gentile” is Latin, check any English to Latin dictionary). In the Strong’s Concordance the so-called word”Gentiles (the Greek ethnos) is #1484, which can mean (1) race; (2) tribe; (3) heathen; (4) nation; and (5) people; each to be applied in its proper context.
The counterpart word in Hebrew is #1471, goy,” and is translated in Genesis 17:4, 5 as “nations” where Yahweh promised Abraham: “...thou shalt be a father of many (goy) Nations.” The proper context SHOULD then be “nations,” as most of the time (but not all) in the New Testament, when the word “Gentile” is used, it is referring to all the 12 tribes of Israel. Again, to place NON-ISRAEL “Gentile” names into His Last Will and Testament is CRIMINAL. Does your Judeo-Christian pastor imply “God” committed fraud? Why don’t you ask him.