Are Christians/Gentile believers “spiritual Jews” or “Israelites?” – Part I
Question:
“My congregation’s leader teaches that Gentiles who believe are all “spiritual Jews and Israelites.” Is that true?“
Answer:
In order to determine if Gentile believers are “spiritual Jews” or “spiritual Israelites,” let’s first examine some terminology. We need to know what makes a person a Jew so that we can understand what a “spiritual Jew” is.
Here are several definitions:
- “Hebrew – a name applied to the Israelites in Scripture only by one who is a foreigner (Gen. 39:14, 17; 41:12, etc.), or by the Israelites when they speak of themselves to foreigners (40:15; Ex. 1:19), or when spoken of an contrasted with other peoples (Gen. 43:32; Ex. 1:3, 7, 15; Deut. 15:12). In the New Testament there is the same contrast between Hebrews and foreigners (Acts 6:1; Phil. 3:5).”
- “Israel – the name conferred on Jacob after the great prayer-struggle at Peniel (Gen. 32:28), because “as a prince he had power with G-d and prevailed.” (See JACOB .) This is the common name given to Jacob’s descendants. The whole people of the twelve tribes are called “Israelites,” the “children of Israel”(Josh. 3:17; 7:25; Judg. 8:27; Jer. 3:21), and the “house of Israel” (Ex. 16:31; 40:38).This name Israel is sometimes used emphatically for the true Israel (Ps. 73:1: Isa. 45:17; 49:3; John 1:47; Rom. 9:6; 11:26).After the death of Saul the ten tribes arrogated to themselves this name, as if they were the whole nation (2 Sam. 2:9, 10, 17, 28; 3:10, 17; 19:40-43), and the kings of the ten tribes were called “kings of Israel,” while the kings of the two tribes were called “kings of Judah.”After the Exile the name Israel was assumed as designating the entire nation.
- “Jew – the name derived from the patriarch Judah, at first given to one belonging to the tribe of Judah or to the separate kingdom of Judah (2 Kings 16:6; 25:25; Jer. 32:12; 38:19; 40:11; 41:3), in contradistinction from those belonging to the kingdom of the ten tribes, who were called Israelites. During the Captivity, and after the Restoration, the name, however, was extended to all the Hebrew nation without distinction (Esther 3:6, 10; Dan. 3:8, 12; Ezra 4:12; 5:1, 5).Originally this people were called Hebrews (Gen. 39:14; 40:15; Ex. 2:7; 3:18; 5:3; 1 Sam. 4:6, 9, etc.), but after the Exile this name fell into disuse. But Shaul was styled a Hebrew (2 Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:5).
- There are three names used in the New Testament to designate this people,
(1.) Jews, as regards their nationality, to distinguish them from Gentiles.
(2.) Hebrews, with regard to their language and education, to distinguish them from Hellenists, i.e., Jews who spoke the Greek language.
(3.) Israelites, as respects their sacred privileges as the chosen people of G-d.”
According to the above definitions, the people of the 12 tribes (i.e. the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob), are collectively referred to in the New Testament as “Jews,” “Hebrews,” and “Israelites.”
Now let’s take a look at a short family history of the Jewish people. Recall that Abraham had several sons, including Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis 16:16, 17:18-21, 25:1-6). Isaac had two sons named Esau and Jacob (Genesis 25:21-26). Jacob was renamed “Israel” by G-d (Genesis 32:28). Jacob/Israel had 12 sons (Genesis 35:22-26), who were the 12 patriarchs of Israel (Acts 7:8). One of these patriarchs was Judah (Genesis 35:22-23), from whom the word “Jew” is derived (see the definition for “Jew” above). Eventually the word “Jew” referred to all of the Israelites (i.e. the 12 tribes who were descended from Jacob – see the definitions above).
So a “Jew” is a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is why G-d is sometimes referred to as “the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (see Matthew 22:32, Luke 13:28, 20:37, Acts 3:13, 7:32, for example). Jewish-ness is based on a person’s physical ancestry, and therefore a Jew can never become a non-Jew.
A “Gentile” is a person who is not a Jew. Gentile-ness is based on a person’s physical ancestry, and therefore a Gentile can never become a Jew in a physical sense. They can, however, become “Jews” in a religious and covenantal sense, meaning that according to the Jewish Halacha (interpretations and applications of Written Torah) it was established by Jewish authorities that Gentiles can be adopted into the Jewish family through an authorized conversion by a Jewish beit din, or religious court. At the same time it is interesting to note that Gentiles who converted to Judaism are never called “Jews” in the Bible, but instead they are called “converts” or “proselytes” (for New Testament examples see Matthew 23:15, Acts 2:10-11, 6:5, 13:43).
In the New Testament, the word “Israel” most often refers to the land or the people of Israel as a whole (made up of Jews, and whether they believed in Yeshua or not makes no difference on validity of Israel or Jews), but we will see that it sometimes refers specifically to Jewish followers of Messiah. We will also see that the word “Israel” never refers to the Gentiles believers.
Now, notice that a spiritual person is under the control of the Spirit:
“This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of G-d, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man’s judgment: “For who has known the mind of the L-rd that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Messiah. Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly–mere infants in Messiah.” (1 Corinthians 2:13-3:1)
“Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.” (Galatians 6:1)
In the first passage above, Shaul (Paul) said that a person who does not have the Spirit (i.e. person who doesn’t know G-d intimately) cannot understand the spiritual truths found in the scriptures. A spiritual person can understand these truths. But then Shaul said that the Corinthians were worldly and were mere infants in Messiah, and he could not address them as “spiritual.” In other words, they were followers of Messiah, but they were not yet under the control of the Spirit to any great degree. In the second passage above, Shaul spoke of restoring believers who have sinned. Shaul said, “you who are spiritual” should restore a believer (who is not yet as spiritual) who has sinned. The implication is that being “spiritual” essentially means that we are mature enough in Messiah that we are being led by and controlled by the Spirit.
If a Jewish person is led by the Spirit, then he is a spiritual Jew. If a Gentile person is led by the Spirit, then he is a spiritual Gentile.
Part of the confusion about Gentiles becoming “spiritual Jews” comes from several passages in the Bible which refer to Gentile believers as “children of Abraham”:
“Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring –not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.” (Romans 4:16)
“Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. The Scripture foresaw that G-d would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.” (Galatians 3:7-9)
“If you belong to Messiah, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:29)
These passages tell us that whether we are Jews or Gentiles by birth, if we have faith in Yeshua then we are considered to be children of Abraham and heirs according to the promise. But recall that Abraham’s first child was Ishmael, and according to various scholars as well as both Jewish and Arab tradition, Ishmael was the ancestor of much of the Arab world (Jewish Virtual Library). Notice that Ishmael was a child of Abraham, yet Ishmael was not a Jew. In fact, the Ishmaelites were enemies of the Jews (e.g. Psalms 83:1-6). Similarly, Isaac’s first child was Esau, and Esau was the father of the Edomites who were enemies of the Jews (Genesis 25:21-26, 29-30, 36:1, 36:43, Numbers 20:14-21, 1 Samuel 14:47, 1 Kings 11:15-16, 2 Kings 8:21-22, Psalms 83:1-6, etc.). So being a child of Abraham does not make a person Jewish, but instead it is being a child of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that makes a person Jewish or an Israelite (as we saw above).
If the Bible said that Gentile Christians are considered to be children of Jacob then they would have reason to be called “spiritual Jews” or “Israelites”, because only the descendants of Jacob/Israel are Jews/Israelites. But the Bible never calls Gentiles “children of Jacob,” and the Bible never says that anyone is a “spiritual Jew,” and in fact we will see that the Bible specifically says that Gentiles/Christians share in (not “take over”) the Jews’ spiritual blessings. The Gentile believers have inherited the spiritual promises of Abraham by faith, but they have not inherited the physical, material, or national promises that G-d made to Abraham and his physical descendants through Isaac and Jacob (i.e. the Jews).
In other words, Gentile Christians have inherited the spiritual promises made to Abraham, but they have not inherited the physical and national promises that G-d made to Abraham’s physical descendants. Despite what some well-meaning people believe, the Church has not “replaced” Israel, and the Church is not the “new Israel,” and the Church is not a “continuation” of Israel, and Gentile Christians are not “spiritual Jews.”
Here’s another passage which has confused some people:
“A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.” (Romans 2:28-29)
In order to properly understand any passage of Scripture, it is important to look at the context and determine to whom the passage is addressed. If we go back eleven verses and look at Romans 2:17, we can see exactly to whom Shaul was speaking:
“Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the Torah and brag about your relationship to G-d” (Romans 2:17)
From Romans 2:17 down into Romans chapter 3, Shaul was speaking to Jews. He was not speaking to Gentiles or about Gentiles in any way. Shaul was specifically speaking to Jews when he said, “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, … a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly.” In other words, Shaul was saying that a true Jew is one who is not only Jewish outwardly (by birth), but one who is Jewish outwardly and has the inner circumcision of the heart. Shaul was speaking specifically to Jews, and he was distinguishing between “spiritual” Jews and the so called “unspiritual” Jews (that is Jews who do not acknowledge G-d, do not repents from their ways and do not live by His Torah). None of this has any bearing on Gentiles.
Another source of confusion is when the New Testament seems to say that there is “no difference” between Jews and Gentiles:
“That if you confess with your mouth, “Yeshua is L-rd,” and believe in your heart that G-d raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile–the same L-rd is L-rd of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the L-rd will be saved.”" (Romans 10:9-13)
“The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Messiah. For we were all immersed by one Spirit into one body–whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free–and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.” (1 Corinthians 12:12-13)
“You are all sons of God through faith in Yeshua the Messiah, for all of you who were immersed into Messiah have clothed yourselves with Messiah. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Yeshua the Messiah.” (Galatians 3:24-28)
“Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator. Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Messiah is all, and is in all.” (Colossians 3:9-11)
People sometimes interpret these passages to mean that all distinctions between Jews and Gentiles have been erased. But notice that in Romans 10:9-13 (above), Shaul was saying that Jews and Gentiles are all saved and justified in exactly the same way. There is no difference in the way that Jews and Gentiles are saved. In 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 (above), Shaul was saying that Jews and Gentiles (or “Greeks”) all enter the body of Messiah in exactly the same way. In Galatians 3:24-28 (above), Shaul was saying that Jews and Gentiles all receive justification in exactly the same way. In Colossians 3:9-11 (above), Shaul was saying that Jews and Gentiles grow in spiritual maturity in exactly the same way. In other words, Shaul was saying that the principles of faith apply to every believer, whether we are Jews or Gentiles. However, notice that there are still differences between Jews and Gentiles, even in the body of Messiah. For example, if Shaul was teaching that all distinctions between Jews and Gentiles have been erased, then he was also teaching that all distinctions between male and female have been erased as well (see Galatians 3:24-28, above). Yet Shaul himself taught that there are distinctions between male and female believers (see 1 Corinthians 11:3-15, 14:34-35, Ephesians 5:22-33, Colossians 3:18-19, 1 Timothy 2:11-15, Titus 2:1-5).
Furthermore, in most of the above passages Shaul mentioned those who are slaves and those who are free. Notice that if Shaul was teaching that all distinctions between Jews and Gentiles have been erased, then he was also teaching that all distinctions between slave and free have been erased. Yet in other passages Shaul specifically taught that the distinctions between slave and free within the body of Messiah continue to exist (see Ephesians 6:5-9, Colossians 3:22-4:1, 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Titus 2:9-10). Since there are definite distinctions between male and female and between slave and free within the body of Messiah, this shows that in the above passages Shaul was not trying to teach that all distinctions between Jews and Gentiles have been erased within the body of Messiah.
Again, the Bible does not teach that Gentile believers (Christians) are “spiritual Jews”, “spiritual Israelites” or “Israel”, and it also does not teach that the Ekklesia (the Body of Messiah composed of both Jews and Gentiles) is Israel or has replaced Israel (even though Israel is part of it). Of the 83 times that the word “Israel” appears in the New Testament, only 3 of those passages (Romans 9:6, Romans 11:26, and Galatians 6:16) tend to be used by some people to prove that the “Church is the new Israel.”
Follow this link for Part II of this series.
Some scripture quotes used are from NIV. Some content is based on works of D. Root. Some definitions from Easton Bible Dictionary.
Just a few comments:
At the same time it is interesting to note that Gentiles who converted to Judaism are never called “Jews” in the Bible, but instead they are called “converts” or “proselytes” (for New Testament examples see Matthew 23:15, Acts 2:10-11, 6:5, 13:43).
I do want to stress however, that the native-born Israelites are not to oppress converts but to treat them as if they were native-born (Exodus 23:9, Leviticus 19:34), however even with that said, sometimes there are problems.
In other words, Shaul was saying that a true Jew is one who is not only Jewish outwardly (by birth), but one who is Jewish outwardly and has the inner circumcision of the heart. Shaul was speaking specifically to Jews, and he was distinguishing between “spiritual” Jews and the so called “unspiritual” Jews (that is Jews who do not acknowledge G-d, do repents from their ways and do not live by His Torah). None of this has any bearing on Gentiles.
I made this exact point in the comments section of a recent blog post I wrote. As I recall, it wasn’t received warmly by everyone.
Notice that if Shaul was teaching that all distinctions between Jews and Gentiles have been erased, then he was also teaching that all distinctions between slave and free have been erased.
The example that I use is that there are still distinctions between men and women, despite the fact that Paul said in Galatians that there were no “male and female”. Most people seem to realize that we haven’t morphed into one, andogynous, genderless people.
So if the non-Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah aren’t “spiritual Jews”, can we consider them (me) “spiritual” if we have received the Spirit? Further, what is our relationship (if any) to the Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah. What are we “co-heirs” to (if anything)? That’s one of the reasons I’ve chosen to back off from “Messianic Judaism” (though I didn’t sharply illuminate this to my congregation when I announced my resignation recently).
Non-Jews generically (whether they’re religious or not) are considered “Sons of Noah” by Judaism and must adhere to the Noahide laws in order to have any standing before God and to merit a place in the World to Come. If, by coming to faith in the Jewish Messiah and agreeing to be disciples under the Master’s teachings, we are adopted as “Children of Abraham”, what does it mean for us to “inherit” the “spiritual” promises of Abraham? What does that make a believing Gentile to a believing Jew (I say “believing Jew” or “Messianic Jew” here because non-Messianic Jews would not consider a Christian as having any sort of relationship to Jewish people)?
I don’t disagree with your points and believe you state your case very well, but from this general perspective, how you and I are supposed to consider each other still remains rather “fuzzy” in my vision.
“So if the non-Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah aren’t “spiritual Jews”, can we consider them (me) “spiritual” if we have received the Spirit? ”
Naturally, the term for them would be “spiritual Gentiles” (or, if some prefer to go beyond a genericized moniker for non-Jews, “spiritual Brits, Germans, Greeks”).
“Further, what is our relationship (if any) to the Jewish disciples of the Jewish Messiah?”
I would say that it would make us brothers and sisters inasmuch as we are both now children of Abraham. Of course, Abraham has birthed many children and is the father of many children (both physically and spiritually).
“What are we “co-heirs” to (if anything)? ” What are we “co-heirs” to (if anything)? what does it mean for us to “inherit” the “spiritual” promises of Abraham?”
Co-heirs to the intimate relationship with G-d (as Abraham had) and the salvation promised through the Redeemer, co-heirs to inheriting the Kingdom of G-d and eternal life.
“non-Messianic Jews would not consider a Christian as having any sort of relationship to Jewish people”
Well, there’s such a thing as a brotherhood of men and Jews do view themselves as priests unto all nations (so, there’s that sort of relationship). Certainly, through the work of Messiah there’s finally a possibility of a far more intimate relationship between Jews and specifically those Gentiles who did not go through a conversion to Judaism but do believe in a Jewish G-d.
“The Gentile believers have inherited the spiritual promises of Abraham by faith, but they have not inherited the physical, material, or national promises that G-d made to Abraham and his physical descendants through Isaac and Jacob (i.e. the Jews).”
I suppose you’ll have to specify the differences between the spiritual promises and the national promises of Abraham since they seem to be distinct of one another. If what you say is true then the gentiles can’t or won’t take part in the resurrection of Israel (being “saved” and resurrected commonly mentioned in the new covenant). Paul quotes Isaiah “all Israel will be saved”. Yet that doesn’t seem to be the case in NT when the dead in Messiah rise (Paul and Revelations). All Israel being saved is a national promise (since it predates the Messiah anyways). As you’ve thoroughly demonstrated that “Israel” doesn’t include gentiles we still run in to some problems.
This runs into many problems, such as Ezekiel 46 when the Messiah cannot take away the inheritance of the people, yet the land that the Prince gives to his slaves (who will his faithful servants be? reference to Isaiah 56:6-7?) is taken back in Jubilee years. Nations will bring sacrifices to Jerusalem so that the rain falls in their countries as well.
As I was mentioning about Isaiah and Ezekiel, apparently there are gentiles who will be included in some fashion with the promises of Israel:
“Also the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to the LORD, to serve Him, And to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants—Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And holds fast My covenant—Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.” Isaiah 56: 6-7
I think it’s important to realize the differences between the Day of the Lrd and Judgement Day, as they’re different. Being saved is, from what I can tell, always a reference to the Millennial Kingdom.
This is interesting to note in concordance with the debate in the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 99):
“R. Hiyya b. Abba said in R. Johanan’s name: All the prophets prophesied [all the good things] only in respect of the Messianic era; but as for the world to come ‘the eye hath not seen, O Lord, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.’18 Now, he disagrees with Samuel, who said: This world differs from [that of] the days of the Messiah only in respect of servitude to [foreign] powers. ”
In 92a-b it was consistently brought up that those who did not believe in the Resurrection could not take part in it. This was Sanhedrin as well, not referring to the gentiles, but to Jews.
Revelation 7:9 and 14:6 talks about a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. Revelation 22:1-3 says The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. That would seem to indicate that it’s not just the 12 tribes who will be saved and serve God and the Lamb, but representatives of all of the people groups of the Earth. I don’t feel as if my faith is in vain, benicho.
benicho, the fate of nations and Israel is inseparably tied together. The physical promises to Israel is inheritance of the Land of Israel and other diverse blessings and promises related to being Jewish (Romans 3:2). Other nations are blessed in their own unique ways, and in many of those ways they are blessed to a greater degree than Israel herself is blessed. G-d has certainly not short-changed the nations but blessed them richly, often in spite of themselves.
@James
I was actually referring to this passage in regards to the servants of the Prince, which are distinct from the Jewish people. Who are they? Seems to be the same reference as mentioned in Isaiah 56:6-7. The whole plan is to return the Jewish people to their respected lands in Israel, however, it does appear that there will be people (gentiles) who bind themselves to the covenant, keep the sabbath, etc, who become servants (Isaiah 56: 6-7).
‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “If the prince gives a gift of some of his inheritance to any of his sons, it shall belong to his sons; it is their possession by inheritance. 17 But if he gives a gift of some of his inheritance to one of his servants, it shall be his until the year of liberty, after which it shall return to the prince. But his inheritance shall belong to his sons; it shall become theirs. 18 Moreover the prince shall not take any of the people’s inheritance by evicting them from their property; he shall provide an inheritance for his sons from his own property, so that none of My people may be scattered from his property.” Ezekiel 46: 16-18
I don’t feel as if gentile faith is in vain, either.
@Gene
The resurrection was a promise to Israel, that’s really all I’m trying to make a point of. If you say that gentiles aren’t Israel and gentiles are not included in the national promises then we’d be excluded from resurrection (whether or not we believe it to be true). The promise of salvation of “all Israel” was a national promise. As we know the Messiah/resurrection debate was settled by Yeshua 2000 years ago (a resurrection happened when Messiah ascended, will happen twice more—Messianic era and presumably Judgement Day). We have the benefit of hindsight to say “well of course the Messiah and resurrection are true”, but teachers of the law before the time of Yeshua did not have that benefit. There are two solutions to this–either the promise of resurrection was not limited to Israel as a national promise (although it explicitly says so repeatedly) or the NT was wrong and gentile believers won’t be resurrected. Obviously we three don’t hold the latter to be true.
I’m certainly not trying to say that gentiles are the new Israel or that gentiles are included in the inheritance of the tribes. As you know I’m not here to debate for one-law, but things just don’t add up..
I understand that the nations were credited righteousness by faith, hence the blessings many nations have received. I was making a point of the early discussions in Talmud of resurrection because, as you can see, there were debates that even Jewish people who did not believe in resurrection would not be included in it. This is a separate debate from Judgement Day, where all men will be judged for their works. This, theoretically, could be salvation for men who believed in Gd but not in the resurrection or Messiah.
Gene,
this is an excellent article. I look forward to part II.
Tim
“If you say that gentiles aren’t Israel and gentiles are not included in the national promises then we’d be excluded from resurrection ”
benicho, not at all. This is because it was promised to Abraham that all nations will be blessed through him and that he would be the father of many nations. Furthermore, Israel the nation has later been given other promises, not limited to just those revealed to Abraham.
I would definitely include resurrection among spiritual blessings. This is because the resurrection of the righteous (specifically), while physical to a great degree because the righteous will be given new bodies, is essentially a spiritual act – we will be given new spiritual holy bodies which will not corrupt. It is also important to keep in mind the following – the wicked will be resurrected too, but their sort of resurrection will lack the all important spiritual component in as much as while they too will be given new bodies, those bodies will not be “blessed” but are only granted to them for judgement and destruction, since they will lack the spiritual connection to G-d .
Also, while Gentiles will not inherit the specific physical national promises given to Israel, it doesn’t mean Gentile nations and lands will not be likewise blessed. They will be – the whole earth will be blessed when the blessing will go out of Jerusalem and spread to all the nations. The entire planet will be the Kingdom of G-d.
“This is because it was promised to Abraham that all nations will be blessed through him and that he would be the father of many nations. Furthermore, Israel the nation has later been given other promises, not limited to just those revealed to Abraham. ”
Many more promises were made to Israel throughout Tanakh. Resurrection is prophesied in Torah, although it’s always in the context of the children of Israel. Specifically however we see that the promises of resurrection pertain to Israel. It raises questions as to why some of the Sanhedrin believed that non-believers (Jews included) wouldn’t be part of the resurrection just because they didn’t believe. It’s actually questioned by one of the Rabbis “will I not take part in the resurrection just because I don’t believe?” (paraphrased). This obviously isn’t the belief in mainstream Judaism (as far as I know) today. Most religious Jews believe all the Jewish people will be redeemed for the Messianic era regardless of their faith. When did all that change?
“I would definitely include resurrection among spiritual blessings.’
All I can see, even in Torah, is that resurrection pertained to Israel all the way through the Tanakh, then suddenly we see references to all of the believers in the Messiah being resurrected in Brit Chadashah. Yes, there will be an inheritance to the Jewish people—I’m certainly not saying gentiles will be any sort of replacement. The closest reference I can see to resurrection of gentiles is Isaiah 56:6-7 (I’m sure you could pull more out), as mentioned in the other posts.
“Also, while Gentiles will not inherit the specific physical national promises given to Israel, it doesn’t mean Gentile nations and lands will not be likewise blessed.”
As I pointed out apparently there will be gentile servants in the land of Israel as it says in Ezekiel 46 (compare with Leviticus about gentile slaves/servants in the land). Who are the servants of the Prince that must give back the Prince’s land on the year of Jubilee? I agree with you about the blessings, we know nations will be blessed through Jerusalem and even through sacrifices at the temple.
nice post Shlomovich!
Just a question..Isn’t the Jewish people today mainly from from the tribe of Judah? I would have thought the other lost tribes are here somewhere today and would be of a great nation(s) (Remember G_d’s promise to Abraham, Issac and Jacob!) To have the country of Israel today alone does fulfill that promise to me that is…what do you think ?
“Just a question..Isn’t the Jewish people today mainly from from the tribe of Judah?”
No, Jews today and always represented all twelve tribes of Israel. It’s interesting that whenever there was found a so called “lost tribe” of Jews (really a misnomer – these pockets of Jews were just unknown to European Jews or to non-Jews looking for “lost tribes”, but usually they were known to other Jews and Gentiles living closer to them) it always turned out to be an established Jewish community (in that area), and not individual Gentiles Christians who were part of the local Gentile community but who all of a sudden “discovered” through some “divine revelation” they were Israelites after all. Always.
“To have the country of Israel today alone does fulfill that promise to me that is…what do you think ?”
Israel’s greatness is not in numbers and never has been. Its greatness lies in G-d, the promises He made to the Jewish forefathers, and what G-d accomplishes through Israel, thought it is small and insignificant looking in comparison to most other nations.
To be sure, there are still a lot of Jews living comfortably in the Diaspora yet be gathered back into the Land.
I have a question for you all–why do you cut out the ‘o’ in G-d’s name? (I am doing it, too, because I don’t want to offend anyone in writing it out). I am really curious about this, as I have never seen it before!!
P.S. The article was wonderful. I took pages of notes! This stuff fascinates me.
J-Rush…. thanks for visiting and I am glad you enjoyed this post!
As for your question on why do Jews leave out “o” from G-d”…
The custom of substituting the word “God” with G-d in English is based on the traditional practice in Jewish law of giving G-d’s Hebrew name a high degree of respect and reverence. When written or printed, G-d’s Hebrew name (and many of the stand in names used to refer to G-d) cannot be erased or destroyed.
There is actually no prohibition in Jewish law against writing out or erasing the word “God” in English. However, many Jews have afforded the word “God” with the same level of respect as the Hebrew equivalents. Because of this, many Jews substitute “God with G-d so that they can erase or dispose of the writing without showing disrespect to G-d. Some Jews also use G!d in the same way, utilizing the exclamation point to convey their enthusiasm for Judaism and G-d.
We who are not of Jewish blood are considered the “foreigner” in Father Yahweh’s plan for eternal life, so we praise Him for considering beyond just the lineage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the makeup of His righteous Kingdom.
Yes, the Jew IS His chosen nation, and the only nation He has been guiding along the path toward His eternal reign here on earth. It will be the righteous Jew, and believing foreigner, who will occupy Jerusalem and worship Yahweh at Mount Zion forever.
If one would stop with truth and not read or even consider the writings of the new testament and its focus on someone other than the Heavenly Father, one would find that Wisdom from the Heavenly Father still focuses on two distinct human beings when it comes to the makeup of His final righteous Kingdom on earth:
1. Those who SERVE Him are the righteous
2. Those who do not SERVE Him are the wicked
Those who serve Him will see Him…..those who do not won’t.
He has never changed, man has changed Him – sadly.
Serving Him includes keeping all the commandments, decrees and instructions for living life He sent forth through Moses, and just because He had the Temple destroyed in 70 C.E., that “pause” (now 1941 years ago), only prevents the rites carried out by His Levite priests in the Temple itself, but does not “pause” obedience to His directives for our personal lives.
He never created religion (which shuns obedience). He created life, and He laid down some rules to live it by. Live by them serves Him. Don’t live by them, doesn’t serve Him, it’s as simple as that.
Gene,
Game on:
You desperately want to define Jewishness in two, conflicting ways:
(1) your first definition is that Jewishness is based only on “physical descen[t]“;
(2) your second definition is that gentiles can become a dubious form of “Jew” which you illustrate by throwing quotation marks around the word “Jew” and you explain that this is religiously defined.
You were closer to the traditional definition when you alluded to the religious definition. Mishneh Torah states that:
“Israel entered the covenant by three means: Circumcision, immersion, and sacrifice.”
Here’s the problem with an exclusively genealogical definition: as Wychogrod explains, by this criteria even an apostate would be considered Jewish!
CONCLUSION: Would you care to revise your definition of Jewishness to conform to traditional Judaism or are you gonna stick with what you’ve got?
Sincerely,
Peter
Peter, I really don’t know where you are getting your information. You must be new to this Jewish thing (understandably).
For example, you said “Here’s the problem with an exclusively genealogical definition: as Wychogrod explains, by this criteria even an apostate would be considered Jewish!”
Well, news flash – an apostate Jew IS Jewish, he/she is still Israel. This fact is well accepted by even the ultra-most Orthodox authorities. It’s supported by both scripture and Talmud:
R. Abba b. Zabda said: Even though [the people] have sinned, they are still [called] ‘Israel’ (Sanhedrin 44).
However, I can see how you want to use this mistaken idea to further the Replacement Theology. According to this thinking, Jews who reject Messiah, they are “apostates” (again, according to your definition). Being apostates, according to your belief system, they are not “Jewish” any longer (Jews out as Israelites – check). However, you, although Gentile, become “Israelite” through believing in Yeshua. Therefore, although Jews are no longer Israel because they are apostates, you Peter, a Gentile, become “Jewish” because of your belief (Gentiles in as Israelites – check). Replacement accomplished.
Very sleek, Peter, very sleek indeed!
Gene,
Explain to me how Torah would allow an uncircumcised Jew to be a part of the edah–when ALL OF THE EDAH IS COMMANDED TO OBSERVE PASSOVER (which requires circumcision). Exodus 12:47, etc. The “edah” is the congregation of Israel composed of all the citizens (ezrach). Thus, you can’t be an Israelite while being in a state of karet from uncircumcision. THEREFORE, IT MUST BE A RELIGIOUS DEFINITION AND NOT MERELY GENEALOGICAL (I.E. CIRCUMCISION IS NECESSARY).
What else you got?
Cheers,
Peter
And to be clear:
The command was given to all Israelites (the edah of Israel) to observe Passover—this command was NOT given to those who had been “cut off” (karet) by uncircumcision (otherwise, Torah would be contradicting itself, commanding the uncircumcised to observe Passover when there’s a circumcision restriction in place for Passover). Therefore, the uncircumcised were not included in the definition of Israel and it must be a religious definition then to explain who belongs to Israel.
Cheers,
Peter
“you can’t be an Israelite while being in a state of karet from uncircumcision”
Oh, Peter, but you couldn’t be more wrong! Here’s why:
“So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites at Gibeath Haaraloth.” (Joshua 5:3)
Did you catch that, Peter – who did Joshua circumcise? That’s right – it says it right there in the Torah that he circumcised…. Israelites. Were they Israelites before or after the circumcision? As you can clearly see, they were considered Israelites before they were circumcised, i.e. simply by virtue of having been born Jewish.
My friend, just the above blows your whole elaborate theory out of the water, doesn’t it?
Gene,
You are incorrect. The uncircumcised people (they were descendants of the native-born and of the mixed multitudes) were part of Israel (the covenant community at the time) before they were circumcised by Joshua, were they not?
Just like the slaves and strangers in Abraham’s household (the covenant community of the time) were members before the were circumcised, were they not?
Peter said:
” Therefore, the uncircumcised were not included in the definition of Israel and it must be a religious definition then to explain who belongs to Israel.”
This is also incorrect. See my comment to Gene.
Gene,
Do you think Ruth was a Moabite because the Torah refers to her only as “Ruth the Moabite”? Or do you think that she was a convert to Judaism? What is definitive, the reference or the substance?
Onto the rebuttal:
Joshua proves my point! These Israelites had been “cut off” from Israel as Torah says:
This is My covenant that you shall keep…circumcise all of your males. The male that does not circumcise his flesh, that soul shall be cut off from its nation… (B’resheet 17:10,14).
Go ahead and admit Gene that Torah is correct and their uncircumcision cut them off from their nation.
And so what did they do to rejoin Israel? TWO THINGS: (1) STEP ONE WAS CIRCUMCISION; (2) STEP TWO WAS PASSOVER.
What did they have to do as soon as they were circumcised? What does it say in Joshua 5:11?
**********PASSOVER*************
By the way, this is the Orthodox view (and mine as well). Do you need me to verify this obvious fact by citing all of the Orthodox scholars who hold to this view? I’ll submit that evidence to you if you require it.
Stop trying to get around Jewish tradition. Your definition of “Jewish” must take into account the religious aspect of Jewishness.
Sincerely,
Peter
“The uncircumcised people (they were descendants of the native-born and of the mixed multitudes) were part of Israel (the covenant community at the time) before they were circumcised by Joshua, were they not?”
Dan, I agree – didn’t I just say the exact same thing when I quoted Joshua 5:3? (although I am not including the mixed multitude or pre-Israel Abraham servants in that number – they couldn’t have been considered Israelites – I don’t want to debate this in this thread).
Dan,
Check out my 2:35 PM comment and see if it says anything you’d disagree with. I think (think) I’ve addressed your concerns adequately.
-Peter
Peter, before we can go on in this discussion, I must ask you concede the point where I’ve shown you to be clearly in the wrong:
You said:
“you can’t be an Israelite while being in a state of karet from uncircumcision”
I quoted to you Joshua that clearly shows that born Israelites are Israelites regardless of circumcision and regardless of some future afterlife-cutting-off-your-soul-from-your-people (which speaks of what happens to the soul after one dies and actually covers many other sins, which might as well result in most Jews being cut off if not atoned for or rectified):
“So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites at Gibeath Haaraloth.” (Joshua 5:3)
If you are able to do that, Peter, we can proceed with our debate.
Gene,
I’ll make you a deal: if you can explain to me how they could be a part of Israel while still being unable to fellowship with Israel (i.e. being prohibited from Pesach and the Edah due to uncircumcision AND being in a state of karet) then I will happily concede to your point. I mean that.
Peter
Peter, no deal because we are just going to go in circles. I already explained it to you that by calling them “Israelites” even before they were circumcised is quite enough to show that they were considered part of Israel even in their uncircumcised state WHILE in the midst of the rest of Israel (their parents and grandparents).
OK, how about that concession? (Peter, I will not think less of you if you are able to concede something this obvious. Just do it so that we can move on to some other topic.)
Gene,
To say that your view is correct is to say that Torah is wrong when it says in Ruth 1 that Ruth is a convert and in Ruth 2 (and other instances) that she is once again “Ruth the Moabite” when she is halachically not considered any longer to be a Moabite (a race that, unless converted, could not enter into the congregation of Israel to even the tenth generation–a prohibition which would affect King David if it were not accounted for). This is no more a contradiction than it is for Paul to say in several instances that gentiles are “formerly gentiles” and “were gentiles” and then in other instances say things like “I’m speaking to you gentiles.” These are ambiguities certainly but they do not constitute proof that the Bible is being contradictory.
This proves that your evidence is insufficient by itself and that it must take the whole of Scripture into account.
Sincerely,
Peter
Peter,
Like Gene said, you are new to this. Where does it say in Ruth 1 that she was converted? And where is conversion mandated in Scriptures?
Peter, I didn’t ask you about Ruth, Paul or anything else.
You claimed that a person born Jewish/Israelite is not really considered Jewish/Israelite until he gets circumcised. I showed to you that per Joshua 5:3 this is clearly not the case. Nor is it the case in Judaism today as there are whole organizations devoted to nothing more but circumcising Jews and ONLY Jews who have not had the opportunity to do so, e.g. Soviet Jews or secular Jews. These orgs. all make sure you can show solid documented proof of your Jewishness before they do anything.
Peter, I don’t see how we can continue our debates if you are unable to acknowledge that you were wrong on at least this one point. It will never move on pass the spitting match and will be just a waste of both of our times.
Dan,
If Ruth continued to be a Moabite even after her conversion then that would mean King David, her great grandson, would have to be excluded on the basis of the Torah provision that says offspring of a Moabite may not enter the congregation of Israel until even the tenth generation. Further, she converts in verses 16-17 of Chapter 1.
-Peter
Peter, not to deviate from the topic, but in Hebrew, the word for Moabite is Moavi, meaning it is in the male form, which the Talmud says means only Moabite men. Moreover, women usually had no say in the strategic matters of that society (i.e. whether or not to assist Israel), so they were no punished alongside Moabite men (we have another example of separate punishments based on gender: Eve – females – was punished differently from Adam – males).
OK, can we stick to the topic, please, Peter!
Gene,
You might be correct but, logically, there is a possibility that you are completely wrong and that Torah’s conception of what constitutes “Israel” is highly nuanced (i.e. not obvious).
But here’s a question to illustrate my overall point which is that Jewishness has a highly spiritual component:
Do you consider a convert to be a Jew?
If the answer is an unqualified “yes” then you’d have to admit to a broader definition than merely genealogical; If the answer is “no” then you’d HAVE to admit that you are in disagreement with Exodus 12:48 and the traditional Jewish understanding of a convert’s status (i.e. Orthodox Jews consider a convert to be a Jew).
-Peter
Peter,
I will not debate ruth since gene said it is off subject, only to ask, just because Ruth said what she said wre we to classify this as a conversion? Or maybe you just want to read your agenda into Scriptures?
Dan,
Yeah, we’ll be respectful of Gene and disregard Ruth for now. Maybe some other time.
Shalom,
Peter
“Gene, You might be correct but…”
Peter, friend, you are almost there…. you can do this, there’s no shame in this.
Gene,
If you want to reach me, then reach me through logic. I can’t get around the fact that converts are considered fully Jewish–even Derek Leman would agree with this point. That means the definition of Jewishness must be broader than a purely genealogical definition. Help me with the logic of an exclusively genealogical definition of Jewishness.
-Peter
Peter…. I’ll indulge you, but you are still not off the hook…
“Help me with the logic of an exclusively genealogical definition of Jewishness. ”
First of all, I don’t claim that. Yes, there are physical (genealogical), spiritual and religious dimensions to Jewishness. Yes, it’s possible to become adopted into Israel as into any family (NOTE: one can’t willy nilly adopt himself into a family – that family must accept him or her first on their own terms!), but it’s also true that Jews are a physical flesh and blood family of Jacob by descent. That’s a fact as evidenced by countless genealogies in our Bible. Paul makes this clear as well (Romans 9:3-4).
Yes, one could indeed become a Jew (or, in New Testament / first century terms, a “proselyte”) in a religious sense as understood in Judaism. On the other hand, as evidenced by both Tanakh and NT, one usually started out as foreigner sojourner/G-d fearer who at first simply lived among the children of Israel, and then (sometimes, but definitely not always – and mostly even rarely) took the extra step to willingly take on himself/herself some or all of the obligations of the covenant (with certain limitations).
Proselytes were to be treated “like natives”, adopted, but they were still foreigner proselytes who were never referred to in the scripture as Jews or Israelites (see Acts 13:43 for a great example of scriptural differentiation being made between Jews and Gentile proselytes to Judaism). A Gentile man had to undergo at least a circumcision procedure (which most likely necessitated assistance of a religious leader), most likely immerse himself to cleanse himself of ritual impurity and also had to make a required offering in the Temple (Numbers 15:14).
It is also true that Ruth still continued to be called “Ruth the Moabitess”, and Uizziah was still called “Uzziah the Hittite”, and Caleb was still called the “Kenizzite.” These people couldn’t change their ethnicity, their flesh, but by humbly coming to and officially joining themselves to the Jewish nation, by swearing allegiance to the Jewish people, by leaving behind everything they knew of their former lives, by being accepted by the Jewish people into the fold, by submitting to the authority of Jewish priests, judges, kings and leaders, the authority of Jewish laws and traditions over their lives, and almost invariably marrying into a Jewish family, they merged to become one with the Jewish people.
As Judaism evolved and as we move into early centuries BCE and CE, with Israel interacting more and more with their neighbors who were interested in the Jewish faith, the REQUIRED conversion steps began to be more codified by the religious leadership of Israel into what we have today.
OK, now, Peter – do you concede the point that the claim you made that a person born Jewish/Israelite is not really considered Jewish/Israelite until he gets circumcised is factually incorrect? This is not for my gratification. Rather, I believe that it’s important that you do so (if you so choose), because that establishes you as an honest, reasonable person with whom debates are not endless and fruitless endeavors of stubborn circular objections in the face of facts.
Gene,
You wrote: “First of all, I don’t claim that” (in regard to my question of the logic of a purely physical definition of Jewishness)
And, yet, with regard to those who are Jews by virtue of physical descent, you did argue for a purely physical definition of Jewishness:
“So a “Jew” is a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is why G-d is sometimes referred to as “the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (see Matthew 22:32, Luke 13:28, 20:37, Acts 3:13, 7:32, for example). Jewish-ness is based on a person’s physical ancestry, and therefore a Jew can never become a non-Jew.”
Can these statements resolve themselves logically?
-Peter
“Can these statements resolve themselves logically?”
Peter, in the post I also say that it’s possible to convert and become a Jew from a religious point of view. Hebrews/Israelites/Jews are a family of direct flesh and blood physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob that occasionally adopts. Which means that conversion is the exception that proves the rule. And yes, a Jew can never become a non-Jew.
OK, how about it, Peter, are we going to go round and round in circles?
Gene,
You’ve said that Jewishness for a Jew of physical descent is purely physical. And yet Paul tells Jews “he is a Jew who is one inwardly” which refers to a spiritual criteria. So how can you amend your purely physical definition to conform with Paul’s definition which indicates additional spiritual criteria? This is a logical question, yes?
Sincerely,
Peter
“Paul tells Jews “he is a Jew who is one inwardly” which refers to a spiritual criteria.”
Peter, Paul says that “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly” – which means that there are two sides to a Jew – outward and inward. It perfectly matches his similar statement that a physical circumcision, while required for a Jew, is incomplete if not matched by a spiritual one. So, a born-Jew who does not live as a Jew is still a Jew, but he still needs to exercise the spirituality of a Jew by making teshuvah (repentance). Israel that sins is still Israel.
This doesn’t have any bearing on a Gentile (Paul is not even remotely talking about Gentiles), but this verse you cited is the go-to-verse for Replacement Theologians. It is used to show that Christians then must be “true Jews” since, inexplicably, Jews can’t any longer be Jews in their twisted view – based on nothing but the warped belief that since [most] Jews don’t believe in Yeshua/Jesus, therefore, all Jews must be apostates, not true Jews, can’t have [Jewish] hearts, and are rejected by G-d as no longer Israel. Replacement Theology 101.
Gene,
You’ll notice that I didn’t employ that verse as a Replacement Theologian would. I acknowledged that Paul was speaking to Jews of physical descent when he argued for an “additional” spiritual criteria (notice in my previous comment that I said Paul was indicating “additional spiritual criteria”–I wasn’t negating the physical component). And my point (and Paul’s), of course, is that even for Jews of physical descent there must be some spiritual criteria in addition to physical ancestry.
Yet, your definition for Jews (who are Jewish by physical descent) was saying that Jewishness for physical Jews is purely physical–it did not incorporate any spiritual criteria whatsoever:
“So a “Jew” is a physical descendant…”
How do I reconcile your definition (only physical descent) with Paul’s definition (physical descent PLUS spiritual component)?
This is a logical question, yes?
Sincerely,
Peter
“How do I reconcile your definition (only physical descent) with Paul’s definition (physical descent PLUS spiritual component)? This is a logical question, yes? ”
Peter, first of all, I already said that “there are physical (genealogical), spiritual and religious dimensions to Jewishness.” Also, I said [multiple times, including in the original blog post itself] that it was possible to convert to Judaism and become a Jew in a religious sense. How many more times do you want me to answer the same “logical questions”? At the same time, I am still waiting for your “not-circumcized-can’t-be-Israelite” concession, waiting and waiting…..
I thought the topic of Gentiles is not allowed in this discussion…..
Gene,
You applied spiritual components only to converts but with regard to Jews by physical descent you excluded spiritual components and defined them as Jewish by physical descent alone.
Here’s your definition of Jews who are Jewish by physical descent:
“So a “Jew” is a physical descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is why G-d is sometimes referred to as “the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (see Matthew 22:32, Luke 13:28, 20:37, Acts 3:13, 7:32, for example). Jewish-ness is based on a person’s physical ancestry, and therefore a Jew can never become a non-Jew.” [PHYSICAL DEFINITION]
And here’s your definition of a Jew who is one through conversion:
“…it was established by Jewish authorities that Gentiles can be adopted into the Jewish family through an authorized conversion by a Jewish beit din, or religious court.” [SPIRITUAL/RELIGIOUS DEFINITION]
You never allowed spiritual criteria into your definition of the physical category of Jew. And it seems the reason why you haven’t formulated it this way is because you’re afraid of sounding contradictory. But prove me wrong and offer a reformulated definition that shows how a Jew by physical descent MUST be both (1) physically Jewish and; (2) spiritually Jewish. I doubt you can do this without sounding like a Replacement Theologian. But by all means prove me wrong.
Cheers,
Peter
“You never allowed spiritual criteria into your definition of the physical category of Jew. ”
Peter, from my blog post: “If a Jewish person is led by the Spirit, then he is a spiritual Jew. ”
From my blog comment: ““there are physical (genealogical), spiritual and religious dimensions to Jewishness.”
There, I proved you wrong.
Gene,
If you are now saying that a Jew by physical descent must be both (1) Jewish physically and (2) Jewish spiritually then, logically, you are saying that Jewish birth alone is not enough (because a further spiritual component is required). So if you are saying one IS NOT a Jew by birth alone and yet you cite Joshua 5 to show that one IS a Jew by birth alone, how is this not a contradiction?
Show us all that you are a logical human being and resolve this apparent contradiction.
Sincerely,
Peter
Peter, again from the original blog post: ““If a Jewish person is led by the Spirit, then he is a spiritual Jew.” So, as you can see, I have listed a spiritual component to Jewishness all along. Frankly, I don’t know what else you want.
You are saying that uncircumcised Israelites in Joshua were somehow not Israelites even though it says it right there that they were in fact “Israelites” or maybe even you are really saying (and this just dawned on me) that they somehow lacked “Israelite spirit” by virtue of not being circumcised (even though, again, it says it right there in Joshua that these men were “Israelites”). You have a glaring contradiction that screams for a correction, but it’s as if I am talking to a wall.
Peter, this is not working.
Gene,
“You have a glaring contradiction”
If I do then I’m in good company with you Gene.
Lehit raot,
Peter
Peter,
You need to think in terms of “covenant membership”, not “Jewish- Gentile.”
How does one become a covenant member?
Dan,
As I said in my initial comment, I agree with Maimonides as to the formal contours of covenantal entrance. Maimonides said in Mishneh Torah:
““Israel entered the covenant by three means: Circumcision, immersion, and sacrifice.””
Dan, is Maimonides wrong?
Shalom,
Peter
Yes he is.
See my comment on Feb. 22 at 2:26 PM.
Shalom Gene.
Excellent article. Looking forward to Part II. Hope it will be around soon.
i have read all comments and it’s appalling how some people love reason (whatever it is) and love disputes and arguments. Will they ever be agree or disagree? Hardly. Argument for the sake of self gratification. Keep up good work Gene. May HaShem bless you in all.
Just wanted to update everyone that part II of this post is coming very soon, most likely next week.
Thanks Gene. I’m really looking forward to Part II
A person who has Hebrew blood cannot change his DNA. He is a Hebrew. He may or may not practice the Jewish religion, he may or may be a citizen or Israel, and he may or may not practice Jewish cultural traditions (language, food, dress, holidays, etc.).
A person who is a citizen of Israel is an Israelite. He may or may not have Hebrew blood, he may or may not practice the Jewish religion, and he may or may not practice Jewish cultural traditions (language, food, dress, holidays, etc.).
A person who practices Judaism, the Jewish religion, is a Jew by virtue of his religion, which can change; he may or may not have Hebrew blood, he may or may not be a citizen of Israel, and he may or may not practice Jewish cultural traditions (language, food, dress, holidays, etc.).
A person who practices Jewish cultural traditions (language, food, dress, holidays, etc.) may consider himself a Jew, (e.g., if he was adopted into a family that practices these traditions). He may or may not have Hebrew blood, he may or may not be a citizen of Israel, and he may or may not practice the Jewish religion.
A person may or may not be any one of these without being any of the others, or he may be any combination of them.
And THEN we add the spiritual component…No wonder this is so confusing!
@dolores333
“A person who is a citizen of Israel is an Israelite.”
You mean “Israeli”?
“A person who practices Judaism, the Jewish religion… may not practice Jewish cultural traditions (language, food, dress, holidays)”
That would be pretty hard to practice any form Judaism without any Hebrew, without kosher food, without wearing kippah or tallit (for a man), or without observing any Jewish holy days.
But you are correct, in TODAY’s pluralistic world of secularism, intermarriage, interest in “Hebrew Roots’ (among Christians), with the founding of the state of Israel (with its own standards of who may or may not immigrate), with the rise of liberal Judaisms (with different standards of Jewish identity) and much increased popularity of conversions to Judaism (again, with conflicting standards) there’s indeed much confusion about Jewish identity in many circles. That wasn’t quite the case merely 100 years ago.
I would like to know if Gentile Christians have to learn how to write and speak Hebrew (I don’t thnk so!) I, for one, really don’t want to. And since there are so many different variations on how to spell God’s name, YHVH (or YHWH), and Jesus’ Hebrew name, it really gets frustrating, not to mention confusing. C’mon, people, let’s just agree to refer to God by His name, YHVH (pronounce it however you thnk is right), and leave it at that. We all know that Jesus is the Greek version of Y’shua/Yeshua/Yehoshua/YAHushuwah (or whatever other supposedly correct Hebrew spelling you can come up with).
dolores333… Jews do not ever say the name of G-d. New Testament itself never refers to G-d by tetragramation nor did any person recorded in it. Jesus (Yeshua) never used the name of G-d. None of the apostles ever used the name of G-d. Apostle Paul never used the name of G-d in any of his letters. They all simply said “L-rd”, “G-d”, “Almighty” and nothing beyond that. Why? Because it is prohibited to do so in Judaism in order to safeguard the awesome sanctity of G-d’s name. Having inherited their faith from the Jewish people, Christians should also learn to safeguard G-d’s name.
Then why does anyone EVER use the name Jehovah (or any variation of Jehovah), which is just another spelling of YHVH? The English OT translators used the euphemism LORD in place of over SIX THOUSAND OCCURRENCES of YHVH in the Hebrew scriptures, and the NT translators merely used the word Lord. The new edition of the NIV also uses Lord in place of LORD in the OT, which further conceals God’s name. I think God wants us to know His name!
PS. How do you pronounce “L-rd” and/or “G-d”?
The truth of the Covenant to the reconnection between God & Man is mentioned by Prophet Jeremiah in the Book of the Maccabees to the revelation of the Arc of the Covenant in the gathering which comes about individually in the Spirit for the Israel of old made from the Physical is but for His name sake come into the Spiritual which is to be in the fulness, for God is Spirit The Covenant is only one from Abraham come through Christ extended unto the Gentiles to the Israel(inheritance of God). This revelation of the Covenant has been taking place between the first coming of Christ in the weakness of the flesh to the Final coming in the Full Glory. This inbetween coming in the Spirit & Power is stated by St. Bernard which is but to the revelation of the Covenant to some, in the (Spiritual) gathering prophesied. To the words of Jesus of the manner “You know not the Father neither the Son but them unto whom the Son pleases to reveal” & Them in Christ are the Children of Abraham, which children are the children of faith, but first the revelation. To also know that if the present gathering of the Jews were to the prophecy then why is not the Cloudy of Glory that which is to the revelation not yet revealed unto such even after 60 years ?
Abey, to understand what exactly you are trying to convey, can you summarize what you just said above in one short sentence?
Hello Gene : Pl. read 2 Maccabees 2 the beginning part, relating to the Arc placed in a cave in a mountain where Moses saw what is called “The Inheritance of God” & to be not confused read also Jer. 3:16. which relates to the Physical Arc made by Moses that is to say “Cut by hand” Also note Jer:3;16 contradicts the Talmud which says the Physical Arc may be found. Divine revelations do not speculate. As to the last part of my comment is also to do with the Prophecy of Jeremiah in Maccabees to seeing the Cloud of Glory which is to the “Inheritance” mentioned above.
“Divine revelations do not speculate.”
Abey, you seem to completely misunderstand the nature, purpose and composition of Talmud. The many books of Talmud record a dialog between Jewish scholars through the ages, and as such, they record natural disagreements and opposing opinions. This is why on almost every page we find words such as “Rabbi A said this. But Rabbi B said this, while Rabbi C said this and that”. It’s not a substitute for the Bible (or like the Catechism of the Catholic Church), nor has it ever been viewed as such by Jews, although it has been painted as such as by Judaism’s detractors. Instead, Talmud is a multigenerational study of the Bible, a conversation about its contents and how they pertain to the daily lives of the Jewish nation.
“To also know that if the present gathering of the Jews were to the prophecy then why is not the Cloudy of Glory that which is to the revelation not yet revealed unto such even after 60 years?”
You’d have to ask G-d that question, either about His exact timing or how He wants to accomplish His purposes and through what means. In the Book of Esther, G-d is not so much as mentioned nor are any supernatural events recorded, but His hand is certainly as apparent as ever. In the same vein, through Israel’s rising up as a nation out of the ashes of the Holocaust and defeating the onslaught of collective armies of its enemies in one war after another, through Jews gathering in the Land from the countries of their oppressors, G-d’s hand is as obvious to me as when I read the Book of Esther.
One thing is for sure when it comes to Israel:
“‘So do not fear, O Jacob my servant; do not be dismayed, O Israel,’ declares the L-RD. ‘I will surely save you out of a distant place, your descendants from the land of their exile. Jacob will again have peace and security, and no one will make him afraid. I am with you and will save you,’ declares the L-RD. ‘Though I completely destroy all the nations among which I scatter you, I will not completely destroy you.” ( Jeremiah 30:10-11).
And just as G-d has disciplined Israel His Firstborn, he will also discipline believers among the nations (a.k.a. the Church) who have, through Messiah, benefited from Israel’s covenant. He will purify all through fire. Those who have oppressed the Jewish people, either theologically or physically, in word or in deed, they will answer for their sins before the Messiah, their brother.
Gene: If The Rabbis whether A B or Z through the discussions & the conclusions come in the writings of the Talmud & in the case of “The Covenant” ending in speculations thus contradicting the very words of Jeremiah who is to God, believed by both, you(since you quote Jeremiah)& the Rabbis, thus the conclusion of the discussions can deemed to be incorrect.
Which brings us back to the topic by Peter to the very core of the statement “What makes a Jew(today) so as to understand what a Spiritual Jew is” to which i answered by the words of Jeremiah to the revelation of the Covenant by God in His Mercy for the Covenant was made by God to Man & not from man to God for it is He who chose Man & not Man who choose God(which incidentally is to the Abomination of desolation prophesied by Prophet Daniel repeated by Christ) to the extension of the said Covenant unto the Gentiles with the coming of Christ which is to mean that the Covenant with Abraham extended backwards unto Adam & his seed that is Mankind, even to the words of King David who through his troubles declared God to be a Righteous God. To also know that unto God there is only one Covenant which is “The Original” because he does not change to say “once said it is”, where as unto Man it has come as the Old & New Covenants again to know that the old covenant cut by hand is transformed in to the new Covenant uncut by hand that which St. John states in revelation ” The heaven opened & “The Arc of the Covenant” amidst thunder & lightening was seen in the Temple in heaven” which denotes the renting of the veil from top to bottom(heaven to earth) when Christ was crucified, for in the second temple the Arc was not present in the Holy of Holies but now seen in Heaven, from the Physical of the first Arc to the Spiritual in Heaven which is the Original one , For God is Spirit. Now back to the topic as to know not who is a Jew but who is His Inheritance called Spiritual Israel is by the revelation to the Prophecy of Jeremiah for Jeremiah foresaw it beyond Babylon to come about individually in the Spirit which is to the personal relationship with God to the salvation confirming the words of Jesus as i stated earlier “You know not the Son neither The Father but unto them unto whom the Son pleases to reveal” to which I testify for the revelation comes By Him. He is the Messiah. To also know that in the inheritance to the eternal there is no Jew or Gentile, which invalidates trying to define Israel by the code of Genetics instead of by the Faith
As to the Book of Ester(which incidentally was not found among the dead sea scrolls)where there is not the word God mentioned & to what ever prayer to god is mentioned it is known that they were later additions) which you claim that the hand of god was hidden to which Question I ask is which god do you speak of, noting that the very name Ester & her Father/Adopted father have the names of Babylonian gods & if that be true you say God worked through the names of Babylonian gods which contradict
the First commandments of God for the scriptures do say that Israel worshipped heathen gods in the Apostasy then & now until this day may i say, like wise can be said of the Song of Solomon having not the name of God & that which was rejected by Prophet Erza. The word God by itself is the seal.
Abey, so you subscribe to “Replacement Theology” as espoused by many Christians (Catholics and Protestants alike), although the proportion of those who still cling to this destructive theology has considerably thinned in the last century.
In my blog post above I have presented the facts from scriptures that demonstrate that the Replacement Theology (which teaches that Israel has failed and that Christians become “Spiritual Jews” and the Church is the “New Israel”) as utterly unscriptural and a product of a prideful imagination of mortal men. Just as much of first century Jerusalem leadership rejected Messianiship of Jesus, with disastrous consequences for themselves and for Israel, Christians – who shared in the spiritual blessings promised to Israel – likewise have rejected the Election of the Jews (Israel), with disastrous consequences to themselves and for the Jewish people. Christianity’s gross mistreatment and persecution of the Jewish people in the name of Messiah testifies to its failure to both be a witness to Israel and to provoke Israel to jealousy.
Though people fail, G-d does not. When Messiah comes, He will restore and correct all things.
Gene: Where in my words did you read “Catholic” or ‘Protestant” to come to the conclusion as replacement Theology All that i have said is to the personal attestation of the prophesies,that were referred to the Covenant. However you said it, that which provokes Israel to Jealousy is this very revelation of the Covenant , the covenant with Abraham which is to the heart & soul of a true Jew.. Did not I testify that He is the Messiah. He who is in the fulness(For in Him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily) will come in the same Fullness which is called the second coming of Christ in the Glory is what you speak of the Messiah will come.. You who celebrate the feast of the Tabernacles do in remembrance of the Rock at horeb which gave water unto the Children of Israel, the Rock (which is Spirit)that followed Israel through the wilderness, that same Rock which Joshua pointed to the Congregation to be the witness to all things of God, is the Christ – The Messiah. Cheer up.
Wow this site is off. The main issue I want to address is this one. “Gentile-ness is based on a person’s physical ancestry, and therefore a Gentile can never become a Jew in a physical sense.” Where do you ever get that intention in the Scriptures? Jewishness isn’t about DNA as much as it is with lifestyle, beliefs, education, trandition and Covenant. I study out of The Scriptures, and the HalleluYah Scriptures, and do many studies out of the Hebrew language. How can you say that The Promise is based off of one’s nationality, I.E. being a decendent of Abraham? Hebrews are first covenant people (in covenant under the Mosaic law) who came from Abraham, who came into covenant with Yahuwah (God) initally. Abraham was called out of the Chaldeans (aramaic decendents). Abraham is a Chaldean (race). So was Yitzach (Issac) and Ya’acob (Jacob). The first time the word Hebrew was mentioned is in Genesis 14:13 [...Abram the Ib'rim (Hebrew)]. This described the region where he settled, where he came from after his exile, not his DNA. Likewise, Jews (Yehudim) comes from the root word Judah (Yahudah) which means let Yah be praised. Again, not describing DNA, but belief. If you look at DNA and offspring across the Scriptures you will find that it is not perfectly Abrahamic; Rebecca was a Chaldean, Leah was a Chaldean, x2 of the whores Jacob slept with were pagan (egyption or pagan origin, not Chaldean), Ruth was a Moabite (pagan) and many of the Kings of Israel and some of Judah were pagan. In fact, the more that Israel went into exile, the more mixed they became (DNA wise). By the time of Yahushua (Jesus) there was no way to trace back the DNA to the 12 sons of Jacob, so therefore they were collectively known as “Jews”. But this elitest mentality (of being ethnicly superior) is evil to its core, for it caused division (against Samaritans, half Jews and half something else). Jesus hated this doctrine and sharply rebuked it. It is not Scripturally supported, nor is it logical. Sh’aul (Paul) the apostle said there is no more Jew or Gentile, but one new man. A gentile is one who is wicked, godless, and not bearing the testimony of Yahuwah. When gentiles (wickedness) are saved, they are grafted into the Olive tree, therefore becoming perfected through Christ. First covenant people must also do the same: come into the Salvation of Yahushua. Again, this belief is Zionist in nature, a product of Lord Jacob Rothchild, who owns 80% of the land of Israel and wants (and is) taking over the world with the Zionist racist agenda. Yahuwah bless you and I pray that this will be researched some more.
“Again, this belief is Zionist in nature, a product of Lord Jacob Rothchild, who owns 80% of the land of Israel and wants (and is) taking over the world with the Zionist racist agenda.”
Michael J., I was about to consider your comment seriously, but when I got to the bottom of it I realized that it would be of no use. Besides, I am late for my weekly world take over meeting with the local chapter of the Elders of Zion.