Where can I find a list of Popes & Cardinals who are ethnically Jewish or converted from Judaism? I got a list, but maybe someone already made one? I'll put my list in an answer. - ( Preview of next questions: Orthodox - ecumenical patriarchs of Constantinople besides St. Andrew? Anglicanism - Archbishop of Canterbury besides Justin Welby, if e even counts? Then Lutheran. Oriental Orthodox. Idk. ) - Update https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/105402/list-of-jewish-ecumenical-patriarchs-of-constantinople

In the Gospel of John, the term "Jews" appears significantly more often than in the Synoptic Gospels — 66 times in John compared to 5 in Matthew, 6 in Mark, and 4 in Luke. In the Gospel of John, there are about 31 verses in which Jews are portrayed in a negative light, such as in John 8:42-56: > 42 Jesus said unto them, **If God were your Father**, ye would love > me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, > but he sent me. > > 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my > word. > > 44 **Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye > will do.** He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the > truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he > speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. > > 45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. > > 46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do > ye not believe me? > > 47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, > because **ye are not of God**. > > 48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that > thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? > > 49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and > **ye do dishonour me**. > > 50 And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and > judgeth. > > 51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall > never see death. > > 52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. > Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my > saying, he shall never taste of death. > > 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the > prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? > > 54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my > Father that honoureth me; **of whom ye say, that he is your God: 55 > Yet ye have not known him;** but I know him: and if I should say, I > know him not, I shall be a **liar like unto you**: but I know him, and > keep his saying. > > 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was > glad. The occurrences are detailed below: Note: If you edit the question, please keep the numbered list Matthew 1) Matthew 2:2 2) Matthew 27:11 3) Matthew 27:29 4) Matthew 27:37 5) Matthew 28:15 Mark 1) Mark 7:3 2) Mark 15:2 3) Mark 15:9 4) Mark 15:12 5) Mark 15:18 6) Mark 15:26 Luke 1) Luke 7:3 2) Luke 23:3 3) Luke 23:37 4) Luke 23:38 John Note: Negative verses are reproduced 1) John 1:19 2) John 2:6 3) John 2:13 4) John 2:18 5) John 2:20 6) John 3:1 7) John 3:25 8) John 4:9 9) John 4:22 10) John 5:1 11) John 5:10 12) John 5:15 13-n1) John 5:16 "And therefore did **the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him**, because he had done these things on the sabbath day" 14-n2) John 5:18 "Therefore **the Jews sought the more to kill him**, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." 15) John 6:4 16-n3) John 6:41 "**The Jews then murmured at him**, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven." 17) John 6:52 18-n4) John 7:1 "After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because **the Jews sought to kill him**." 19) John 7:2 20) John 7:11 21-n5) John 7:13 "Howbeit **no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.**" 22) John 7:15 23) John 7:35 24) John 8:22 25) John 8:31 26-n6-n11) John 8:42-48 "Jesus said unto them, **If God were your Father**, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. **Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.** He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, **ye believe me not**. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, **why do ye not believe me?** He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because **ye are not of God**. Then **answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?**" 27-n12) John 8:52 "**Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil.** Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death." 28-n13) John 8:57-59 "Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. **Then took they up stones to cast at him**: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by." 29-n14) John 9:18 "**But the Jews did not believe concerning him**, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight." 30-n15) John 9:22 " These words spake his parents, **because they feared the Jew: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue**." 31) John 10:19 32) John 10:24 33-n16) John 10:31 "Then **the Jews took up stones again to stone him**." 34-n17) John 10:33 " **The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy**; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God." 35-n18) John 11:8 "His disciples say unto him, Master, **the Jews of late sought to stone thee**; and goest thou thither again?" 36) John 11:19 37) John 11:31 38) John 11:33 39) John 11:36 40) John 11:45 41-n19) John 11:53-54 " **Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death. Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews**; but went thence unto a country near to the wilderness, into a city called Ephraim, and there continued with his disciples." 42) John 11:55 43) John 12:9 44) John 12:11 45) John 13:33 46-n20) John 18:12 "**Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him**," 47-n21) John 18:14 "Now Caiaphas was he, **which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people**." 48) John 18:20 49-n22) John 18:31 "Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. **The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death**:" 50) John 18:33 51-n23) John 18:35 "Pilate answered, **Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me**: what hast thou done?" 52-n24) John 18:36 "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, **then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews**: but now is my kingdom not from hence." 53-54-n25) John 18:38-40 "Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, **he went out again unto the Jews**, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. But ye have a custom, that **I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?** **Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas**. Now Barabbas was a robber." 55) John 19:3 56-n26) John 19:7 "**The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die**, because he made himself the Son of God." 57-n27) John 19:12 "And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: **but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend**: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar." 58) John 19:14 59) John 19:19 60) John 19:20 61-n28) John 19:21 "**Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews**." 62-n29) John 19:31 "**The Jews therefore**, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) **besought Pilate that their legs might be broken**, and that they might be taken away." 63-n30) John 19:38 "**And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews**, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus." 64) John 19:40 65) John 19:42 66-n31) John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when **the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews**, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

As I understand it, a key part of dispensationalist theology is a separation between Jews (Israel) and the Church as two separate entities with distinct purposes in God's plan. In discussions with them, I find that they often assert that some passages of the Bible are for Israel while others are for the Church; the process of distinguishing them is sometimes called "rightly dividing the Word of God." However, I often fail to see how they can tell which is which. In a discussion with a dispensationalist pastor I had recently, he seemed to believe that every other paragraph in Galatians is directed at Israel or directed at the Church, and I found myself totally at a loss to be able to follow. I am wondering, **what methodology do Dispensationalists use to determine which passages are directed at which group**?

When Jesus was born, he was a Jew. So he stayed this his whole life. Only later in life, he spoke on behalf of his Father. His Father, the almighty JHWH (another name instead of the name God), was Jewish too. And so was the holy Mother Maria. Obviously, he couldn't be a Christian yet, and *if* he was, wouldn't that mean he was involved in a personality cult in which he was his own admirer? So, during his life did he consider himself a Jew or a Christian? **How did others consider him?** I'm *not* asking if he belonged to a religion, like Judaism, or Islam, or Christianity, or even Hinduism. I'm asking if he was born as a Jew. As can be expected if your father and mother are both Jewish. Or is this a modern notion? **I'm asking if he was considered a Christ (Messiah) *already* in his time**. Note: I don't see why this is a duplicate, I don't ask if He was a time traveler! I ask if **others** (*but not Himself*) **consider Him Jewish**.

Previously for Catholicism : https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/105244/list-of-jewish-popes-cardinals/105245#105245 Now for Orthodoxy ... **Question 1:** Where can I list of Jewish Ecumenical Patriarchs of Constantinople besides St. Andrew? **Question 2:** Also, what are the 'synonyms' for this? Based on Wikipedia ...searching 1. 'ecumenical patriarchs of Constantinople' - Nothing 2. 'Bishops of Byzantium' - Just St Andrew

I'm writing an essay about Christian Zionism, and I'm a bit unclear on the end-times beliefs of pre-millennialism and post-millennialism. I understand the basic timelines of both, but where does Jewish emigration to Israel fit in? At what point (and in which belief system) are Jews either supposed to convert to Christianity or be ruled by a tyrant?

The Protestant Dispensational Churches of America use the passage of "*I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you*" in regards to a literal nation of Israel, interpreting it to mean that the current Jewish people must be supported at all costs in their quest to regain their ancestral homeland in Palestine, which naturally implies the ethnic cleansing of the local Arab people who have lived in the region for the last over 1,500 years, many of whom are actually Christian themselves. How should any of the various sects of Christianity respond to this situation today, both morally and from Scripture?

What is the definition of "Jewish origin" according to the [Association of Hebrew Catholics](https://www.hebrewcatholic.net/) ? - Would children of a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother be considered to have "Jewish origin" by the Association of Hebrew Catholics? What about children of a Jewish mother? - When a Catholic has only one Jewish ancestor (say in cases where it is matrilineal or patrilineal) and *was a convert to Judaism*, conversions to which movement of Rabbinic Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative or Reform) or non-Rabbinic (Messianic, Haymanot or Karaite) would constitute "Jewish origin" in the case of this Catholic?

It looks as if salvation was originally meant for the Jews, at least that is what I can infer from the parable of the wedding banquet, that God sent Jesus to the Jews first and if they accepted him as the promised Messiah then , salvation and sonship would be theirs and theirs alone, but if they refused then God would spread the good news to the gentiles and this can be seen where God sends invitations to houses beyond the house of Israel. *Mathew 22:1-14* >Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3 He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.4 “Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet.’ 5 “But they paid no attention and went off—one to his field, another to his business. 6 The rest seized his servants, mistreated them and killed them. 7 The king was enraged. He sent his army and destroyed those murderers and burned their city. 8 “Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding banquet is ready, but those I invited did not deserve to come. 9 So go to the street corners and invite to the banquet anyone you find.’ 10 So the servants went out into the streets and gathered all the people they could find, the bad as well as the good, and the wedding hall was filled with guests. 11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. 12 He asked, ‘How did you get in here without wedding clothes, friend?’ The man was speechless.13 “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ Could this in addition to Jesus' response to the gentile woman, that you cannot take food belonging to a child and give it to a dog, mean that salvation was originally meant for the House of Israel and that the world received an invitation because the Jews rejected him.

Regarding the Old Testament canon, Protestants follow the Jewish canon based on the assumption that this is the canon accepted by Jews before the coming of Christ. However, the historical evidence that the canon of the Hebrew Bible was decided before Christ is far from conclusive. There are some ancient claims (as can be found in Justin Martyr for example) that the Jews altered their OT in order to elide the parts that might look Christian, and I have heard some Catholics say that the deuterocanonical books were left out of the Jewish canon for the same reason. I guess I'm a little skeptical that this makes sense. **Is there anything in any of the deuterocanonical books that would be objectionable to Jews?** To be clear, I am asking specifically about the *contents* of the books. The well-established fact of their late authorship (relative to the protocanon) and the fact that many of them were not composed in Hebrew were probably also factors influencing the Jews' decision not to canonize the Apocrypha. However, I am wondering whether there are additional reasons related to what the books actually say. I don't need an example from each of the deuterocanonical books, I would be satisfied by just one or two examples of statements from them which Jews would disagree with but not Christians would not.

In **Genesis 2:2-3** we are told: > **2** And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. > **3** And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. Limiting the scope of the question — setting aside what it means that the seventh day of the week was "blessed" and "sanctified" by God — and focusing narrowly on the "longitudinal" impact of these verses, what is the biblically sound interpretation? I was able to think of three possible options here (if you can think of another, please include it in your answer): 1. the **only** day that was blessed was the actual “historical” first Sabbath (with no other Sabbaths meant to enjoy the blessing that was given to that original /first and only/ seventh day); 2. every subsequent seventh day was blessed from the original Sabbath **until** a later point in time when that blessing was **removed** or **modified** by another divine decree (e.g., transferred to another day or limited in its scope to the ethnic Jews). 3. **all** subsequent Sabbaths were blessed; What biblically based arguments do the various denominations give for their interpretation of this scripture?

The first Christians such as Justin Martyr, the Church Fathers such as Augustine, the Reformers such as Luther were all anti-Semites. Why was that so? Here are some quotes: > Luther: "Accordingly, it must and dare not be considered a trifling > matter but a most serious one to seek counsel against this and to save > our souls from the Jews, that is, from the devil and from eternal > death. My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues > be burned down, and that all who are able toss in sulfur and pitch; it > would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire. That would > demonstrate to God our serious resolve and be evidence to all the > world that it was in ignorance that we tolerated such houses, in which > the Jews have reviled God, our dear Creator and Father, and his Son > most shamefully up till now but that we have now given them their due > reward." > > > John Chrysostom: "Again the Jews, the most miserable and wretched of > all men. But today the Jews, who are more dangerous than any wolves, > are bent on surrounding my sheep; so I must spar with them and fight > with them so that no sheep of mine may fall victim to those wolves. > Isaiah called the Jews dogs and Jeremiah called them mare-mad horses. > This was not because they suddenly changed natures with those beasts > but because they were pursuing the lustful habits of those animals." > > Pope Clement VIII: "All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, > their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people > into a state of poverty, especially the farmers, working class people > and the very poor. Then, as now, Jews have to be reminded > intermittently that they were enjoying rights in any country since > they left Palestine and the Arabian desert, and subsequently their > ethical and moral doctrines as well as their deeds rightly deserve to > be exposed to criticism in whatever country they happen to live." https://www.jpost.com/blogs/the-jewish-problem---from-anti-judaism-to-anti-semitism/the-jewish-problem-adversus-judeaos-against-the-jews-376333

It seems the Bible is anti-Semitic or how else do you explain these Bible passages? God himself wanted to kill all Jews but Moses stopped him: > (Ex 32:9-11) 9 And the LORD said to Moses, I have seen this people, > and behold, they are a stubborn people; 10 and now let my anger be > kindled against them and I will destroy them, but I will make you a > great nation. 11 And Moses prayed to the LORD his God, saying, Why, O > LORD, should your anger be kindled against your people, whom you > brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty > hand? God said Israel is the worst nation of the world: > (Ezek 5:4-9) 4 Then you shall take some of them again and throw them > into the midst of the fire and burn them with fire, and a fire shall > go out from them against the whole house of Israel. 5 Thus says the > Lord GOD: I have set this Jerusalem in the midst of the nations and > the countries around it. 6 And she was rebellious against my judgments > in wickedness more than the nations, and against my statutes more than > the countries that are round about her; for they have rejected my > judgments, and they have not walked in my statutes. 7 Therefore, thus > says the Lord GOD: Because you have rebelled more than the nations > that are around you, because you have not walked in my statutes and > have not done my judgments, yes, not even according to the judgments > of the nations that are around you, 8 therefore, thus says the Lord > GOD: Behold, I also will be against you and will execute judgments in > your midst in the sight of the nations. 9 And I will do to you what I > have not done, and what I will not do again, because of all your > abominations. God said all the house of Israel have a hard forehead and a stubborn heart: > (Ezek 3:5-7) 5 For you are not sent to a people of foreign speech > and a hard language, but to the house of Israel— 6 not to many peoples > of foreign speech and a hard language, whose words you cannot > understand. Surely, if I sent you to such, they would listen to you. 7 > But the house of Israel will not be willing to listen to you, for they > are not willing to listen to me: because all the house of Israel have > a hard forehead and a stubborn heart. Apostle Paul about the Jews: > (1 Thess 2:14-16) 14 the Jews, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and > persecuted the church, and displease God and oppose all mankind 16 by > hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved—so > as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come > upon them at last!

First of all: what I mean here by “Jew” is nationality/race and not religion. The question of whether Jesus was a Jew therefore means whether Jesus was an Israeli, i.e. a descendant of Jacob/Israel. The focus here is not on whether Jesus was a Jew from a religious point of view, i.e. whether he was a follower of Judaism. Was Jesus a Jew at all? He had no Jewish father, he is not from Jewish sperm. According to the Bible, a child inherits the nationality from the father. Two examples: 1. The wife of Joseph was a Gentile (Egyptian), and with her he made two children, Ephraim and Manasseh. Although their mother was a Gentile, they are still called Israelis because their father was an Israeli. They inherited their father's nationality. 2. Moses allowed the men of Israel to take Gentile women, but he didn't allow them to take Gentile men for Israeli women. Since Jesus did not come out of Jewish sperm, he can't be a Jew by nationality. It's wrong to say that Jesus was a "half-Jew" because his mother was a Jew. In the Bible, there is no such thing like "half". You are what your father is. If your father is Italian and your mother is Spanish, then you are Italian. You are not half-italian and half-spanish. You are what your father is because out of his sperm you came. However, if someone wants to claim that the nationality goes from mother to child, then he must agree that Ephraim and Manasseh were not Israelis but Egyptians since their mother was Egyptian. He must also agree that Obed was not an Israeli but a Moabite since his mother Ruth was a Moabite. If he does not agree, then his position is hypocritical. Since Jesus has no human father, he cannot biologically belong to any nationality. What does this mean now?

The Jews (Israelites) were God's chosen people for nearly all of Biblical history. But, they reject Christ as the Messiah. If the only path to the Father is through the Son, and Jews reject the Son, how do they still reach the Father? If they never accept Christ as their savior, how are they saved? Are they "grandfathered" in because they were chosen before the arrival of Christ? Lets say from the protestant denominations. It's really just a general question and I'd be interested in reading several perspectives

> And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" > > Some of those who stood there, when they heard that, said, "This Man is calling for Elijah!" (Matthew 27:46-47, NKJV) According to a number of sites, including Wikipedia , the saying "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani" (or in Mark's version "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani") was originally Aramaic: > אלהי אלהי למא שבקתני. > > Courtesy of Wikipedia However, according to some other sites it is Hebrew. Regardless of which is right, I don't think it can be denied that the Jews mistook what he said. I used to take this to mean that he was speaking in a language they did not understand. However, as far as I know and have learned from our good friend Google, Jews at that time spoke both Hebrew and Aramaic (plus some Greek, and perhaps Latin). How, then, did the Jews mistake his meaning?

*Let me preface my question by saying that my knowledge of the Seventh Day Adventist (SDA) position on the future of ethnic Jews is limited. Perhaps that position has been fully fleshed out and explained somewhere, and I just failed to find it. If you can post a link or resource that thus makes answering my question unnecessary, feel free to do so. Likewise, if my understanding of the SDA position on the subject (as stated below) is inaccurate, please feel free to correct it before (or even instead of) answering the question.* Based on my knowledge/understanding of the SDA position on the subject, Adventists believe that: 1. Jews will **not** be saved "as a nation" (although **individual** Jews will be saved, as the Jews irreversibly lost their position as a "people of God" when they rejected their Messiah by giving up Jesus to be crucified under Pontius Pilate and failed to repent of that rejection during the apostolic ministry of the first century, the Jewish nation was consequently rejected by God which culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 and scattering of the Jews among the nations in fulfillment of Daniel 9:26); 2. The blessing of being a "people/nation of God" was essentially "transferred" (though a different, "weaker" verb may be used here) to the Church of Jesus Christ where a person's ethnic background is no longer a factor in anything that has to do with obtaining/enjoying any special spiritual blessing or prophetic distinction. In other words, being a Jew (following national Jewish rejection that occurred nearly two millennia ago) makes no difference thenceforth (either now or in the future) as far as God's Kingdom in general and the economy of salvation in particular is concerned. While I can readily see *qualified* scriptural support for the second position (e.g., Paul's words "**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) — "qualified" because I think that most Christians who would quote this verse here would also disagree with the kind of interpretation of this and similar verses that obliterates the distinctions of "biological sex," "social-economic status," or "ethnic background" as such — I'm having a hard time reconciling the first position with the rest of the teaching of the Bible. - For one, the Ap. Paul himself seems to believe in a "reversal" of the rejection of the Jews that is to "follow" salvation of the "fullness" of the Gentiles. Important, he does so by relying on and even quoting some OT prophecies (like those in Hosea and Amos) applying them to "latter days" in the earth's history. In Romans (11:25-31) he writes: >**For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.** - Further, the book of the Revelation — which SDA is usually big on expounding (except perhaps on this point) — that relates, according to SDA own beliefs, many **future** events makes repeated references to both "Jews" and "Gentiles" which would make it at least somewhat illogical to hold that the ethnic distinctions between the two were obliterated to the point of complete obsolescence, as SDA seems to hold (at least as it pertains to matters spiritual). For example, when John records the famous scene of the 144,000, their tribal affiliation is painstakingly included — though the order and the composition of the list differ from other renditions of the list, a separate issue — and, in our view, cannot be simply disregarded as "poetical" or "allegorical" language (Revelation 7:2-8): >**And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. Of the tribe of Juda were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Aser were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nepthalim were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Simeon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Zabulon were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph were sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin were sealed twelve thousand.** Not only that, following those verses, when the "great multitude" is described, their "ethnic" (meaning "non-Jewish" in light of the previous verse) background is also explicitly noted (Revelation 7:9): >**After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;** Verses like these in Revelation are in full harmony with eschatological OT passages (like those in Isaiah) that continue to refer to Israel alongside Gentile nations while speaking of what happens in the "end." Needless to say, such references lose meaning if we "spiritualize" the terms "Israel" and "Judah" to mean "multi-ethnic Church." To summarize, it appears that: - Although we can scripturally maintain a certain loss of significance of Jewish ethnic affiliation following the rejection of Jesus Christ and Israel's failure to repent of that act "as a nation" 20 centuries ago, - It seems difficult (if not impossible) to maintain that that loss: a) is permanent and b) has resulted in complete obsolescence of spiritual/prophetic significance of Jewish ethnic background (however we may define it while accounting for the legitimate prospect of a Gentile "becoming a Jew" outlined in the OT scriptures, e.g., Ruth the Moabite) in light of verses that suggest that the rejection of ethnic Jews was to be "temporary" until "fullness of the Gentiles come in" and both "Jews" and "Gentiles" seem to feature (distinctly if not separately) in the future prophetic narrative. I realize that there is a separate issue of "fullness of Gentiles" being come in and "all Israel" being saved that will need to be addressed and reconciled with relevant points of the SDA teaching as well, but I'd leave that for another question. On the final note to this long rendition of my question, I did consult one online SDA resource that seems to acknowledge some of the OT prophecies (obviously relied on by the Ap. Paul) that predict return of the Jews to salvation in the "end days," but such references don't appear to displace the overall SDA belief that goes along with "replacement" theology that the SDA Church (along with many others) otherwise seems to espouse.

I think that the validity of the Gospel's account regarding the role of Pontius Pilate in the Crusifixion is contestable. One reason is Pilate's own account in Matthew 27:24: > So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather that a > riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the > crowd, saying, “I am innocent of this man’s blood; see to it > yourselves.” According to the biblical accounts, Jews are condemned for promoting the execution of Jesus Christ on the cross. However, the Roman Empire was portrayed as the antagonist and Pilate was drawn as playing a good role in all this jazz just because Paul was interested in spreading Christianity all over Rome. - Is there historical evidence that Pilate stole money from the Holy Temple in Israel and invested that money in building an aqueduct? - What historical sources provide information about the money stolen by Pilate?

I was debating with my Jewish friend on the messiah and one of his objections was that the messiah would be from the direct linage of David and that the messiah could not be adopted into the linage, especially the messianic linage, how would you respond to this?

I was going to respond to a question along similar lines I saw here but apparently I don't have a reputation yet so I can't respond.. So, here I am.. I already know the answer better than most who will respond I bet, but I'd like to see what a high reputation can add to the discussion, please bring verse.. Kind regards P.S. Apparently I can't create new tags without a 300 reputation either.. I better get busy... ha