We the new chosen people, are Jews no longer chosen people?

[pittsburghjoe]

“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭16:18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.”
‭‭John‬ ‭10:14, 16‬ ‭KJV‬‬


“Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world (Old Testament )

But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

And came and preached peace to you which were afar off,( Gentiles ) and to them that were nigh. (Israel)

For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭2:11-22‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:28‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jew first and then gentile but the church is any disciple of Jesus Christ jew or gentile who come to him and shed the flesh identity ofnfentike of Jew and become disciples of the Lord.

The church is anyone baptized into the body of Christ jew gentile male female young old black white or on between , healthy handicapped nothing matters that was before Christ but we see in him the body , the church

“Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead;

that in all things he might have the preeminence. ( one shepherd over all )

For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1:13-23‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jew and gentile make up one church the church are the people of the kingdom jew or gentile

If JESUS is "the firstborn from the dead", does Alpha and Omega have something to do with the First and Last into His Kingdom?

If there isn't a distinction between Jew or Gentile anymore ...why do people think there suddenly will be one in the future?

 

[cdan2]

So now you wish to cancel the Church. That's a quick way to end the discussion. If what we call the Church is not the Church, then exactly what is the Church?

I just told you, "the faithful in both (Hebrews and Gentiles) make up God's ekklesia; his congregation, a.k.a. "the church."

I spoke of those who in the OT looked forward in faith to their Messiah, and those after who look back in faith believing Jesus is that Messiah. I also have spoken quite a bit about how Gentiles were always allowed into the faith of the Hebrews (some ended up in the lineage of the Messiah, Jesus), and how Paul spoke of us now as well being grafted onto the Hebrew rootstalk. Many have rightly pointed out that there is no difference now in God's eyes in a Jew or Greek- I am telling you there never was. Gentiles then and now could/can join Israel (spiritually, not join the modern nation). That is the ekklesia, called the church in the NT. I am not doing away with the church, just challenging your idea of it. It did not start at Pentecost. It has always been those who trust and believe in God. Adam and Eve were the first two "church members."

 

[Pilgrimshope]

If JESUS is "the firstborn from the dead", does Alpha and Omega have something to do with the First and Last into His Kingdom?

If there isn't a distinction between Jew or Gentile anymore ...why do people think there suddenly will be one in the future?

In the beginning there was no such thing as Jew and gentile but after the floods God then divided the nations because of Babel and what they did.

hundreds of years later israel was chosen through the promise to his ( jacobs) grandfather Abram. At that point God had only one chosen nation and all the other nations not chosen of God were called gentile.


The Bible always has a principle what was in the beginning will be in the end just as God divided the nations in the beginning he’s bringing them back together and making mankind one people like in the beginning

the middle is the only part where God has a single nation he’s called and Thy at was because of mankind’s transgression even Israel’s which came later under the law of Moses to prove even abrams children sinners so then all mankind was deemed sinners and sentenced to death

Christ died for that sin of all man and abolished the singular nations law of transgression offering gods calling to all nations through the gospel fulfilling abrahams promise not Abram , but the one according to abrahams meaning

“As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.

Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭17:4-5‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Israel’s law never touched on that it was exclusively for israel and thier converts but this is abrahams promise

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24:14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

God is gathering people of all nations into one again through the calling don The gospel of the one kingdom

man isn’t what we’re meant to be we fell into this and he’s redeeming us back to the beginning where we dwell with him apart from sin As his people born of the gospel but the people are being called by the gospel into the kingdom out of every nation on earth being made into Gods nation of promise through father Abraham

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭3:27-29‬ ‭KJV‬‬

mankind began as one was seperate and one nation was chosen , now through thier transgression all nations are invited into Gods family and kingdom of glory

Jew and gentile are earthly fleshly identities that have to go away in order for us to be born again into the kingdom of God who’s gathering his people from all nations who believe in Jesus and the gospel to fill his new creation on Christ the new heavens and earth our promised land

“Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”
‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:13‬ ‭KJV‬‬

he’s gathering his elect for that place from this place forming a new people through Christ independent from the worldly identities that originated from sin and division of the people

 

[Blik]

If JESUS is "the firstborn from the dead", does Alpha and Omega have something to do with the First and Last into His Kingdom?

If there isn't a distinction between Jew or Gentile anymore ...why do people think there suddenly will be one in the future?

God has made gentiles and Jews one, but that does not mean that God will not honor the inheritance of blessings the race God created earned because of the special mission God gave that race.

We have the net, now, so we can learn of the worldly blessings that race has through the culture God gave them. As they turn away from that culture they will loose the blessings of the race. As an example, training a baby to memorize scripture as soon as it can talk.

This minority race leads the world in worldly accomplishments. We cannot measure spiritual blessings.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

God has made gentiles and Jews one, but that does not mean that God will not honor the inheritance of blessings the race God created earned because of the special mission God gave that race.

We have the net, now, so we can learn of the worldly blessings that race has through the culture God gave them. As they turn away from that culture they will loose the blessings of the race. As an example, training a baby to memorize scripture as soon as it can talk.

This minority race leads the world in worldly accomplishments. We cannot measure spiritual blessings.

K, so point out these people you claim have the right blood ...and how are they Blessed without a High Priest or Atonement? There isn't a classification for "Jew" anymore.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

God has made gentiles and Jews one, but that does not mean that God will not honor the inheritance of blessings the race God created earned because of the special mission God gave that race.

We have the net, now, so we can learn of the worldly blessings that race has through the culture God gave them. As they turn away from that culture they will loose the blessings of the race. As an example, training a baby to memorize scripture as soon as it can talk.

This minority race leads the world in worldly accomplishments. We cannot measure spiritual blessings.

“that does not mean that God will not honor the inheritance of blessings the race God created earned because of the special mission God gave that race.”

they would have had to honor the covenant he made with them but instead they fulfilled the curse and he’s not lying about that either it could have been a blessing or a curse this is what they chose

Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.”

‭‭Daniel‬ ‭9:11‬ ‭KJV‬

again the blessing was if they obeyed the curse was if they didn’t

“Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭11:26-28‬ ‭KJV‬‬

you seem to always look at the law as if it’s a promise of faith and does t actually mean what it says it was going to be either a blessing or a curse they fulfilled it as a curse the blessing isn’t coming they broke the covenant and crucified Jesus

they lost the chance they were given when they condemned thier savior

“But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. When the Lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭21:37-43‬ ‭KJV‬‬

there is no blessing upon the earthly Jew havent you noticed they are the most oppressed people in the history of earth ?

that’s because they chose rhe cirse in the covenant and God fuflilled those hindreds of terrible curses and destroyed Jerusalem and it’s temple that’s also why a Muslim mosque sits on the temple mound in Jerusalem even today it’s desolate

now upon the Muslim mosque sitting on the temple moind in Jerusalem there’s a giant inscription stating “ God has no son “

isreal was promised a curse that would be perpetual and he would use them as a warning to the earth and the remnant who believed carried The gospel blessing to the world

every ear to my race including Thy Jew is cursed unless they repent and turn to the gospel but the Jew was made to be a warning and byword and then we’re scattered into all nations

This is just one cirse from breaking thier law there are hindreds and they are perpetual

“And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭28:37‬ ‭

“Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed;

because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee:

And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever.”
‭‭Deuteronomy‬ ‭28:45-46‬ ‭KJV‬‬

It’s like you trust in the law but won’t acknowledge what it says

 

[crossnote]

I see many have a confused view of the Covenants.
The Abrahamic covenant, unlike the Mosaic Covenant, was UNCONDITIONAL.
If God cast off Abraham's descendants (under an unconditional) , what assurance do you have He won't cast you off under the New Covenant?

 

[pittsburghjoe]

There are unsaved historians that call themselves "Jews". Do you really think they have anything to do with eschatology? Making your own definition of what a Jew is ...is what eating from the tree of knowledge is about. it's called the synagogue of satan for a reason.

 

[TMS]

I just told you, "the faithful in both (Hebrews and Gentiles) make up God's ekklesia; his congregation, a.k.a. "the church."

I spoke of those who in the OT looked forward in faith to their Messiah, and those after who look back in faith believing Jesus is that Messiah. I also have spoken quite a bit about how Gentiles were always allowed into the faith of the Hebrews (some ended up in the lineage of the Messiah, Jesus), and how Paul spoke of us now as well being grafted onto the Hebrew rootstalk. Many have rightly pointed out that there is no difference now in God's eyes in a Jew or Greek- I am telling you there never was. Gentiles then and now could/can join Israel (spiritually, not join the modern nation). That is the ekklesia, called the church in the NT. I am not doing away with the church, just challenging your idea of it. It did not start at Pentecost. It has always been those who trust and believe in God. Adam and Eve were the first two "church members."

I agree the church is not made of people from a blood line, God loves everyone and died for everyone. The church is made up of those that love Jesus, both Jews and Gentiles.
The Jewish nation was meant to be a means to witness to all nations and preserve the truth.
As spiritual Jews today we are to witness to those around us and uphold the truth.

 

[Jocund]

You took my statement out of context and applied it to a completely different argument.

It is interesting that the claims being made to the land and the promise are being made in the name of a bloodright. Bloodright is purely by being a descendant of someone. If you believe that despite being a descendant of biblical Israel, that you are not eligible to an alleged bloodright that is due to all of Israel's descendants, there is something off kilter with your understanding of what a bloodright is.

If on the other hand, this isn't really about descendants of Israel and instead is about tribalism pretending to be a bloodright, we see that the ultimate ramification is that this false exclusive entitlement can lead to animosity against other groups that would have the same bloodright but are not part of that tribe.

Besides discrimination against Black Hebrews, those that have taken to a messianic Jewish faith have also been rejected as "true Jews" by virtue of not following the 'authorized' leadership. If the promise to Israel was made to each and every descendant, then by what authority is this tribal identity rejecting descendants outside of their tribe that would equally share that alleged birthright?

Who gave that organisation the authority over anyone? Who gave them the right to say who is Jewish and who is not? Who gave them the right to say who is spiritual Israel? There is a logical contradiction here that is not being addressed.

As for the Ethopian Hebrews, the state of Israel ...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...opian-jews-without-their-consent-8468800.html

There has not been a Judaic priesthood since the Temple fell.

That has not stopped the observation and worship of the illegitimate priesthood while waiting for a new temple to be built.

"According to Talmud tractate Yoma, in the absence of a Temple, Jews are obligated to study the High Priest’s ritual on Yom Kippur, and this study helps achieve atonement for those who are unable to benefit from its actual performance. In Orthodox Judaism, accordingly, studying the Temple ritual on Yom Kippur represents a positive rabbinically ordained obligation which Jews seeking atonement are required to fulfill." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur

the "Christian with Biblical Jewish heritage" would have to be a Levite to qualify.

Why? That isn't a Christian concept. Speaking as a Christian on a Christian forum, we accept the truth of the Bible here.

"And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. 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; Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy." - 1 Peter 2:8-10 KJV

Moot point. I do not claim the heritage because my genetic makeup is overwhelmingly Gentile. Also saying one is Jewish is heard by the listener as "Oh, he'll know everything about Judaism." I don't, and the more I study the more I know I don't.

You can self-identify however you like. The question is whether you choose to apply that interpretation onto others. Your usage of the word "Judaism" is not universal and some others will use the word differently.

I learned as a good Southern Baptist: the Jews were and are the chosen people of God; a people He created for Himself.

When we pay close attention to books of the Bible like Job we notice that Job was born naturally, but was also created by God. He created all of us for Himself. And those that He intends to save are all chosen.

Abraham was given a promise, and Israel after him. And the inheritor of the promise is Christ. We are co-inheritors of the promise with Christ. The only bloodline that was of any particular importance or significance was the one leading up to Christ.

There were also some so different they could be called different Judaisms, like the Samaritans.

Samaritans aren't usually considered Jewish in the modern geopolitical state of Israel. Does your definition differ in this case? If so, who has the ultimate authority in your mind regarding which groups count as Jewish or not?

I said nothing against any race.

Well... you did actually, but OK.

The analogy was that living with someone of a different background makes one more aware of who they are and the challenges they face.

No, you were going for a deeper cut there. Any time two people marry, they likely have different backgrounds. You basically said that the dividing mark that separates compatibility and incompatibility between parents and children is the colour of their skin. The implied context is that a child will never feel like they are truly bonded to the parent if the child is "of colour" and the parent is "white". That's hateful rhetoric. I'm not mad at you, but your language and approach is nothing to be proud of.

There are implicit contexts associated with some language. My criticism is aimed at the ideas that you have presented and the use of language that is tied to implicit concepts. An implied concept isn't necessarily always intentional, but words and concepts can do a lot to encourage violence and dehumanization. Mainstream culture has conditioned people to create word associations. An example in recent history is the association of "peaceful protest" with "riot" and the attempt to conflate the concept of what an appropriate responses to either looks like.

We see this kind of dangerous rhetoric take its seed in the form of generalizations where something that happens in one instance is exaggerated to be true in all cases. Even when I mentioned that discrimination exists against Black Hebrews, your first response was to react as though I was claiming something to be the case for an entire group of people rather than individually accountable bad actors. Your first reaction was to defend "the state of Israel" as a whole instead of acknowledging that individual instances of discrimination and hatred are perpetuated by some people that identify as Jewish within that country.

It's the same kind of rhetoric we see when people say that "No Christians count as descendants of Israel," presented for no reason other than a desperate grab to retain some unique quality or status that is not justified by their texts and not justified by Christian scripture.

In that twisted perspective, there is a specific requirement to actively reject Christ in order to count as part of "Israel" or Jewry. And thereby accepting Christ one would apparently give up their alleged bloodright within that worldview.

 

[Jocund]

Where in the Talmud do you see that?

You either haven't read the Talmud or you are being insincere.

And frankly I find a lot more prejudice in Christianity than in Judaism.

Oh. Interesting. I don't.

Possibly that's because I am aound Christians much more than Jews, so it's likely I would.

There are good-hearted people that are born into Talmudic Jewish families, there are good-hearted people that are born into Christian families. There are bad people that are born into either.

Good people will find excuses to be good even when given the opportunity to be evil. Why judge someone by how they were raised? Rather, we should be conscious of how people are acting. It's bad to stack stereotypes such as "Jew good, Christian bad" but that is exactly where your descriptions and way of speaking are aligning the way you are approaching the subject.

But trust me, Christians can be cruel, even to their own.

I don't think anyone ever disagreed with the idea that humans are human. Even Saul was cruel to his own before he became Paul. No one is perfect, save one.

Anyone can be cruel, but don't assume that because some people in a group have a tendency to be cruel that all parties in that group have a tendency to cruelty.

"Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those that trespass against us"

And Ever hear the saying "Christianity is the only army that kills its own wounded?"

I have never heard that one, but it sounds very antiChristian.

(That is a Christian saying, by the way).

And here we go again, applying one instance to all cases. A quick websearch shows that this was a quote from Dwight L. Carlson. He's entitled to his opinions, but that doesn't make it a Christian saying just because he happened to be Christian.

The commentary is also specifically about common Western versions of Christianity such as Roman Catholicism which focuses on concepts like original sin and not versions of Christianity like Greek Orthodox that don't.

One reason I strayed a bit is when lining up with others to do battle with the enemy I got more wounds in the back than in front. Going alone at least I can know who is shooting at me.

What you said here made me think of "Footprints"

We're splitting hairs here. But here's one: if yu are a practicing pagan, no matter who or what your parents are, then you are not part of Israel

Your claim is not Biblically founded. Even just looking at 1 Kings 9, there is clearly a precedence that if Israel becomes pagan and does pagan things that they don't stop being Israel. Otherwise "Israel" would have ended a long time ago.

But when Paul gave that analogy there was no Talmud.

The Talmud is not considered inspired text from a Christian perspective, so I can't say one way or another when exactly it was written or how many times it was modified or edited over time to suit its message. The purported story behind the Talmud is that it existed as an oral tradition for a long time before it had become written (some parts are clearly from after the beginning of Christianity because they discuss Christianity).

Some parts of the Talmud line up interestingly with things that are discussed in the New Testament. In the Talmud, it is an instruction not to save a goy (animal / gentile) from a pit (don't save a gentile from life-threatening danger that they happened to get themselves into). If this was written/spoken during Jesus' time, this suddenly gives a deeper context when Jesus spoke of pulling an ass from a well on the Sabbath. The imagery is suddenly about more than just performing physical labour on a Saturday, it is about going out of your way to do good deeds for those that are outside of your tribe (against the teachings of the Talmud). The parable of the good Samaritan lines up well with that context. Be a 'good neighbour', and 'here is what a neighbour does.'

There wasn't even a Mishna- only an Oral Tradition.

You're splitting hairs here about how things were codified after the fact.

And nothing in that addressed Christians or Christianity as there was no such thing at the time.

Seemingly in your interpretation so far, all Christians are goyim, therefore yes. The Talmud says many things about goyim and by your definition it therefore talks about Christians.

The Talmud much later did have some negative things to say about Christianity. Understandable since

Oh. I see. Hatred and evil is an understandable reaction in your opinion.

Christians were raping, beating, and killing Jews; burning their synagogues and homes while plundering their possessions.

I'm going to ask for a fact check on that one. 70 AD? Not Christians.

Your statements, not mine. You accuse me of prejudice yet rail against Judaism.

I criticized the antiChrist nature of content in the Talmud and the hateful practices that some modern Talmudic Judaism has toward other Jewish faiths. You are continuing to confuse "orthodox" Judaism with Judaism as a whole.

You started with ethos by claiming 'orthodox' Judaism was the authoritative voice on the topic, and when that failed you moved to pathos by trying to paint your opponent as something that is emotionally objectionable. I haven't seen any logical arguments yet. You've placed logos last where you should have placed Logos on the forefront. Where is the scripture to demonstrate your position?

I merely suggest that we can learn much from the actual people who God chose to write the Bible.

Christians! (For the New Testament anyway).

But I always said they need what, and Who we have as well: that being salvation through the Jewish Messiah who they reject.

To become Christian! There we go.

You need to do some studying. You throw out terms like "Talmudic Judaism" when I suspect you have no idea what Talmud actually is. I don't study it, but I am familiar with it.

Not all forms of Judaism are Talmudic. You need to clearly differentiate types of Judaism instead of adding to the hateful practice of dismissing ones that you do not deem "worthy" or "official."

No longer can they just throw out long accepted false teachings, ideas, or slurs and not be called on it.

There sure are a lot of antiChristian slurs and false teachings I would like to see go away.

ask

Bringing this back to a Biblical discussion would add value.

I can show you from start to finish how the promise goes from Abraham to Christ and all of those in Christ. I have not seen a compelling breakdown of scripture which demonstrates the coexistence of a separate promise to eternal life that does not involve Christ. I've seen arguments that nonChristian Jews find Christ much later (in some theories right at the first Resurrection), which is contrived yet possible... but that would still make them Christian in the end. I don't see any coherent theory that would give salvation to nonChristians.

Who count as Jews? Who is Israel (the people)? Where does this come from in scripture? How do you know who counts as those groups today?

 

[cdan2]

cdan2 said: You took my statement out of context and applied it to a completely different argument.

Jocund responded untruthfully: It is interesting that the claims being made to the land and the promise are being made in the name of a bloodright ... [/QUIT]
And you are still applying it to arguments I never made. But I suppose I should quickly deal with it. However note that this will be the last time as you are a waste: wasted mind, waste of space, and waste of my time defending things I never said, implied, or meant. And you are an emotional wreck as well.

If on the other hand, this isn't really about descendants of Israel and instead is about tribalism pretending to be a bloodright, we see that the ultimate ramification is that this false exclusive entitlement can lead to animosity against other groups that would have the same bloodright but are not part of that tribe.[/QUIT]
So I am a tribalist pretender to, what? Your accusations ring hollow.

Besides discrimination against Black Hebrews, those that have taken to a messianic Jewish faith have also been rejected as "true Jews" by virtue of not following the 'authorized' leadership. If the promise to Israel was made to each and every descendant, then by what authority is this tribal identity rejecting descendants outside of their tribe that would equally share that alleged birthright?

OK, I am going to have to shout to get through to you I guess: IN 1991 ISRAEL PROSECUTED "OPERATION SOLOMON" IN WHICH OVER 14000 ETHOPIAN JEWS- *B*L*A*C*K* JEWS, EVERY ONE- AT GREAT RISK AND EXPENSE AND TOOK THEM INTO A TINY COUNTRY ALREADY OVERCROWDED WITH PEOPLE THEY HAD TO HOUSE, FEED, AND EDUCATE.
As for their authority, they are the Israeli government. Same authority any sovereign nation has. Do I really have to explain all this to you?

Who gave that organisation the authority over anyone? Who gave them the right to say who is Jewish and who is not? Who gave them the right to say who is spiritual Israel? There is a logical contradiction here that is not being addressed.

Now I'm not even sure what authority you are referring to; and I suspect you don't either.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...opian-jews-without-their-consent-8468800.html

A lot of ads and a demand to register, but no content.

That has not stopped the observation and worship of the illegitimate priesthood while waiting for a new temple to be built.

"According to Talmud tractate Yoma, in the absence of a Temple, Jews are obligated to study the High Priest’s ritual on Yom Kippur, and this study helps achieve atonement for those who are unable to benefit from its actual performance. In Orthodox Judaism, accordingly, studying the Temple ritual on Yom Kippur represents a positive rabbinically ordained obligation which Jews seeking atonement are required to fulfill." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur

There is a huge difference in reading about the High Priests ritual and worshiping the High Priest/Priesthood. Furthermore the reference there is to Orthodox Jews, who are different from all other Jews (and a lot more radical).

cdan2 said: the "Christian with Biblical Jewish heritage" would have to be a Levite to qualify.

Jocund said: Why? That isn't a Christian concept. Speaking as a Christian on a Christian forum, we accept the truth of the Bible here.

So? You can't talk about Jews then throw it at me "That isn't a Christian concept." No, it is a BIBLICAL concept. Only a Levite can be a priest. It's in that other part of your Bible you keep ignoring.

You can self-identify however you like.

Thanks. I will.

I gave my reasons for identifying as I do. Don't care if you like 'em or not.

When we pay close attention to books of the Bible like Job we notice that Job was born naturally, but was also created by God. He created all of us for Himself. And those that He intends to save are all chosen.

We were all created by God. What's your point?

Abraham was given a promise, and Israel after him. And the inheritor of the promise is Christ. We are co-inheritors of the promise with Christ. The only bloodline that was of any particular importance or significance was the one leading up to Christ.

I was so excited! Thought I could finally agree with SOMETHING you said. Imagine then my disappointment ...
As I already pointed out and as has been discussed, the Levitical bloodline was also important. Also you've been raking me over the coals for not agreeing with you that small traces of DNA do not make one Jewish, then you throw out this. Not only that, but you continue:

Samaritans aren't usually considered Jewish in the modern geopolitical state of Israel. Does your definition differ in this case? If so, who has the ultimate authority in your mind regarding which groups count as Jewish or not?

So bloodlines matter then they don't and now goepolitics either is or isn't important with regards to bloodlines ...

There has always been hostility between Samaritans and Jews, ever since they were not allowed to help rebuild the Temple. Which means ever since the Jews returned from captivity. And before that there was the whole N/S kingdom thing and Israel's (no, not modern Israel, OT Israel- go look 'em up), but Israel's deciding to worship on Mt. Gerazim. Not a lot of good feelings there. And yet Jesus, who said He'd come for the lost sheep of Israel spoke with a Samaritan woman at a well (in Samaria, no less- so He went there on purpose); then He spoke to her whole village. So He must have thought differently. So my definition may differ from yours, but it is in alignment with Jesus. That's my authority.

cdan2 said: I said nothing against any race.

Jocund said: Well... you did actually, but OK.

No, it's not ok. My comments are there IN THE ORIGINAL CONTEXT fo all to read and make up their own minds. And I do NOT appreciate your assigning words (which you did earlier completely misquoting me) or meanings or motivations to me that simply were not there. If you think you can just play the "Oh, I am just SO offended!" card with me and get away with it, think again. I am calling you out on it. You sir are a liar.

No, you were going for a deeper cut there.

No, the above was the first deeper cut. More to follow if you persist.

Any time two people marry, they likely have different backgrounds. You basically said that the dividing mark that separates compatibility and incompatibility between parents and children is the colour of their skin. The implied context is that a child will never feel like they are truly bonded to the parent if the child is "of colour" and the parent is "white". That's hateful rhetoric. I'm not mad at you, but your language and approach is nothing to be proud of.

And your mischaracterizations, lies, reading into what I said things no reasonable person would be offended at are something you are proud of? Saya a lot about your character. And you may not be mad, but I am getting mad at the ongoing character assassination. If that's the only way you can "win" an argument ... but frankly I didn't come here to win. I was hoping for some reasonable information exchanges. Instead I have to deal with this.

There are implicit contexts associated with some language ... We see this kind of dangerous rhetoric take its seed

And on, and on ...

Even when I mentioned that discrimination exists against Black Hebrews, your first response was to react as though I was claiming something to be the case for an entire group of people rather than individually accountable bad actors. Your first reaction was to defend "the state of Israel" as a whole instead of acknowledging that individual instances of discrimination and hatred are perpetuated by some people that identify as Jewish within that country.

No, you made some specific accusations against them (in addition to those leveled at me), and I asked you for your sources. And you don't have them, do you? You claimed to quote the Talmud, but can't tell me where. The Jews and the state of Israel are far from perfect, but there are enough false claims against them. They don't need you manufacturing quotes to suit you own prejudices and arguments.

It's the same kind of rhetoric we see when people say that "No Christians count as descendants of Israel," presented for no reason other than a desperate grab to retain some unique quality or status that is not justified by their texts and not justified by Christian scripture.

Yeah, I don't think they care about our scripture. And I (unlike you) admitted to not studying Talmud but apparently you know less about it than I do. My point: neither of us are qualified as authorities to comment on it. And you sure are not competent to write parts of it!

In that twisted perspective, there is a specific requirement to actively reject Christ in order to count as part of "Israel" or Jewry. And thereby accepting Christ one would apparently give up their alleged bloodright within that worldview.

I don't know.
In what twisted perspective can you put words in the mouths of any and every one you disagree with or don't like and think you can get away with it?

 

[cdan2]

Huge time suck with so far no good results. So I am going to skip through this one fast and see if there is anything worth answering from an informational perspective.

You either haven't read the Talmud or you are being insincere.

I was asking for your references where you were telling me what the Talmud says. But you have none- as I expected.

Oh. Interesting. I don't.

We were talking about prejudice in both Judaism and Christianity. I am going to answer this one because I grew up in a church that taught about the Jews in a good light. Yet I was later shocked to see some of the many prejudices I held towards them ust because they were in the teachings of the church fathers. Most Christians I talk to will tell me they are not anti-Semitic. But when shown they too are shocked. One friend told my wife (who was raised Jewish) that we were supposed to hate the Jews. Many others treat her as their trophy Jew: "Look! We got one!" Just what everyone goes to church for, you bet.

I realize most are not aware of it. Heck, I wasn't. All I am saying is we each need to look to that mote in our own eye first.

Anyone can be cruel, but don't assume that because some people in a group have a tendency to be cruel that all parties in that group have a tendency to cruelty.

That would be you in this conversation. Read the above statement.

"Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those that trespass against us"

You don't even know that that's from a Jewish liturgical prayer, do you? The "Lord's Prayer" is a shortened prayer for when Jesus' disciples couldn't pray the entire thing- like being on the road a lot. It was common for rabbis to do this for their disciples. I mean, think about it: these were devout Jewish men walking with Jesus. Do you really think they did not know how to pray?

Some things are hidden; not told to us so that we will have to think and inquire:

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal things,
but the glory of kings is to search things out.

The Talmud is not considered inspired text from a Christian perspective, so I can't say one way or another when exactly it was written or how many times it was modified or edited over time to suit its message. The purported story behind the Talmud is that it existed as an oral tradition for a long time before it had become written (some parts are clearly from after the beginning of Christianity because they discuss Christianity).

Some parts of the Talmud line up interestingly with things that are discussed in the New Testament. In the Talmud, it is an instruction not to save a goy (animal / gentile) from a pit (don't save a gentile from life-threatening danger that they happened to get themselves into). If this was written/spoken during Jesus' time, this suddenly gives a deeper context when Jesus spoke of pulling an ass from a well on the Sabbath. The imagery is suddenly about more than just performing physical labour on a Saturday, it is about going out of your way to do good deeds for those that are outside of your tribe (against the teachings of the Talmud). The parable of the good Samaritan lines up well with that context. Be a 'good neighbour', and 'here is what a neighbour does.'

And yet you insist on telling us what it says to suit YOUR message!

Talmud consists of 2 major parts: the Mishna and the Gemarah. The mishna is commentary, debates, and other teachings from the Oral Tradition. According to Abraham Cohen, himself a rabbinical Jew, this was supposed to be what made Torah applicable to all men in all times and places. Torah did not (could not) cover everything. But where those commandments and instructions in Torah could not be changed the Oral Tradition could. So for example the ox in the ditch scenario would be covered in the Mishna. Torah said not to be cruel to an animal, and to provide for one's family. The family ox dieing cruelly in a ditch would be a major loss of income and even ruin a family. But Torah said not to work on Shabbat. Which should they obey? Well, the Mishna answered that. To pull it out is the higher mitzvah (not commandment, just instruction).

The problem is them pesky rabbis' in the Roman diaspora again. They thought the Oral Tradition might be lost or polluted since there was no central authority. So the codified it (wrote it down). The problem now is it is no longer an oral tradition but a written code. And it could no longer be changed. So being Jews they started commenting on the commentary, which is where we get the main body of Talmud with the Gemara. That too was declared completed (don't remember the date) and now we have many studying those writings like they do scripture. Indeed, the Orthodox (a specific sect, not all Judaism) see these writings as equal to or above scripture. And yes the Gemara does have some anti-CHristian writings. Not as much as you seem to think. But if I came and ransacked your home, raped your women, then burned your church you might have some nasty things to write about me! Look at the hatchet job you did just for disagreeing with your view!

And admit it- you (the seasoned poster) wanted to put the new guy in his place. How's that working for ya'?

Seemingly in your interpretation so far, all Christians are goyim, therefore yes. The Talmud says many things about goyim and by your definition it therefore talks about Christians.

No, but biblically there are only 2 types of people- Jews and Gentiles/goyim/pagans. So when anyone denies they are grafted to Israel they are themselves saying in effect "I am a pagan." But hey, I am grafted in. You be whatever you want.

I am not even going to try to reply to that mess about what I think and mean and yes I am mean to you and you mean to make me pay by telling another lie ... but then I'd be mean about that and you are just so offended! Sorry. Don't really care.

Oh. I see. Hatred and evil is an understandable reaction in your opinion.

Considering we were talking about the true evil done to them then hatred is understandable. Yeah.

I'm going to ask for a fact check on that one. 70 AD? Not Christians.

Really? One I didn't say 70 AD. And two, are you denying Christians for 2 millinea have tortured and killed Jews? Stole from them and burned synagogues? Do you deny the Holocaust? The Russian pogroms? The Inquisition? Or do you know they did happen and that is why you threw in that "70 AD" bit to try and make it look like I was wrong instead of you? I was going to give you a history lesson here, but I suspect it would do no good. Your history apparently comes from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Like I said, waste of time telling you anything. Hopefully someone got something out of the information I shared. But I am done with this. Have a good life hating Jews. Good luck before the Great White Throne.

 

[Nehemiah6]

It did not start at Pentecost.

It was only at Pentecost that the gift of the Holy Spirit was given to believers (Acts 2). And it is only the Holy Spirit who baptizes believers into the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12). And since the Church is the Body of Christ, the Church began on the day of Pentecost.

Subsequently the "mystery" of the Church was revealed to Paul. It had been hidden from all the OT prophets as Paul tells us plainly. Thus the OT saints had to wait until Pentecost to receive the gift of the Spirit. And unless Christ had finished His redemptive work and ascended to Heaven, the Holy Spirit could not have been poured out upon earth. So you seem to have forgotten all of this in trying to justify the existence of the Church in the OT.

 

[ewq1938]

It was only at Pentecost that the gift of the Holy Spirit was given to believers (Acts 2). And it is only the Holy Spirit who baptizes believers into the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12). And since the Church is the Body of Christ, the Church began on the day of Pentecost.

The church did not start at Pentecost. It started way before that. Pentecost was when church EXPANDED and grew.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The church did not start at Pentecost. It started way before that. Pentecost was when church EXPANDED and grew.

You just contradicted the Lord Jesus Christ who saw the Church as a future entity: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this Rock [Christ] I will build my Church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. (Mt 16:18)

Notice the future tense, since the Church could only be built upon Christ Himself, and His one great sacrifice for sins. That would allow the Holy Spirit to be poured out upon earth. It is not Peter (Cephas the stone) upon which the Church is built but Christ the Rock (the massive Rock and foundation) upon which the Church is built. And it is the Holy Spirit who baptizes believers into the Body of Christ.

 

[ewq1938]

You just contradicted the Lord Jesus Christ who saw the Church as a future entity: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this Rock [Christ] I will build my Church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. (Mt 16:18)

Notice the future tense, since the Church could only be built upon Christ Himself, and His one great sacrifice for sins.

All buildings have a foundation. The 12 disciples are the foundation of the church based on the main rock/foundation Christ.

 

[cdan2]

It was only at Pentecost that the gift of the Holy Spirit was given to believers (Acts 2). And it is only the Holy Spirit who baptizes believers into the Body of Christ (1 Cor 12). And since the Church is the Body of Christ, the Church began on the day of Pentecost.

Subsequently the "mystery" of the Church was revealed to Paul. It had been hidden from all the OT prophets as Paul tells us plainly. Thus the OT saints had to wait until Pentecost to receive the gift of the Spirit. And unless Christ had finished His redemptive work and ascended to Heaven, the Holy Spirit could not have been poured out upon earth. So you seem to have forgotten all of this in trying to justify the existence of the Church in the OT.

Well, that would be news to a LOT of OT characters, including:

Joshua- Numbers 27:18 So the Lord said to Moses, “Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him.

Bezalel - Exodus 31:2-3a “See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, and I have filled him with the Spirit of God,

Moses- "God gave Moses his Holy. Spirit, and with him the gift of performing miracles, and leading and teaching the people.” (in Is 63.12-14)

Gideon- Judges 6:34 But the Spirit of the Lord clothed Gideon, and he sounded the trumpet, and the Abiezrites were called out to follow him.

Samson- Judges 13:25, 14:6 And the Spirit of the Lord began to stir him (Samson) in Mahaneh-dan, between Zorah and Eshtaol. … Then the Spirit of the Lord rushed upon him, and although he had nothing in his hand, he tore the lion in pieces as one tears a young goat. But he did not tell his father or his mother what he had done.

David- 2 Samuel 23:2 “The Spirit of the Lord speaks by me;
his word is on my tongue.

Ezekiel- Ezekiel 2:2a,b And as he spoke to me, the Spirit entered into me and set me on my feet,

Saul had the Spirit, but lost it- 1 Samuel 16:14 Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul,

The Spirit was with the Hebrews as Moses led them- Isaiah 63:12-14
who caused his glorious arm
to go at the right hand of Moses,
who divided the waters before them
to make for himself an everlasting name,
who led them through the depths?
Like a horse in the desert,
they did not stumble.
Like livestock that go down into the valley,
the Spirit of the Lord gave them rest.
So you led your people,
to make for yourself a glorious name.

Other scripture tells us the Spirit was at work in men in the OT as well:

Psalm 143:10 Teach me to do your will,
for you are my God!
Let your good Spirit lead me
on level ground!

Ezekiel 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my just decrees.

Judges 3:10a The Spirit of the Lord was upon him (Othniel), and he judged Israel.

Genesis 6:3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not contend with man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”

The Holy Spirit was not just a NT phenomenon. God gave His Spirit all through the OT. I know that's not what is typically taught in many denominations, but it is true. No one had to wait for the Spirit. It was always available to any who truly worshiped the God of Adam, of Abraham, and of Israel.

 

[Blik]

K, so point out these people you claim have the right blood ...and how are they Blessed without a High Priest or Atonement? There isn't a classification for "Jew" anymore.

The way I understand the Jews from the Lord's point of view, you are so caught up in the worldly way of understanding that it is impossible to reach you.

God has blinded their eyes to the current high priest/ I don't understand what God has planned for them with this condition, but God understands. God said he would never forsake them and God says he will bless them for the work he has assigned them to do. I have no idea how this will be done and I don't think any human knows, but it will be done. It is the business of the Lord, not of mine.

It could be your understanding is right, but it makes it hard for us to communicate.

 

[pittsburghjoe]

God has blinded their eyes to the current high priest

That blindness was 2,000 years ago when authentic Jews were still a thing. JESUS gave them final Judgment:


Luke 19:43-44
For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,

44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.