One of the defining characteristics of Dispensationalism is the distinction between Israel and the Church. Israel, meaning the Jewish people, was given specific promises regarding the land of Israel, which are not applicable to the Church in any way but to the Jews only. As I understand it, Dispensationalists believe these will be fulfilled during the Millennium. I am still trying to wrap my head around the Dispensationalist idea of Israelology, by which they mean the study of the Biblical concept of "Israel." They would define it as an ethnic/genetic category, as the descendants of Israel, a.k.a. Jacob. In Orthodox Judaism, one is considered a Jew if your mother is Jewish or if you are a Halahically valid convert to Judaism, i.e. it is both matrilineal and by conversion. My understanding is that Dispensationalism, at least in its classical form, would exclude converts to Judaism from their definition of "Israel" (see for instance this article ). **What is unclear to me is whether physical descent is defined (by Dispensationalists) matrilineally or patrilineally or some mixture. For instance, if my maternal grandfather and/or paternal grandmother are part of Israel, am I?** I have not been able to find a source that gives a well-defined answer to this question. ChatGPT told me that the Dispensationalist theologian Arnold Fruchtenbaum, head of Ariel Ministries argued in his book *Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology* for a patrilineal-only definition of Israel, but without having a copy of that book, I haven't been able to track down any explicit statement to that effect. The quote from Jon Mark Ruthven cited in this article suggests that Ruthven might include either matrilineal or patrilineal descent: > The tradition of identifying a Jew as one whose mother was Jew may represent an attempt to preserve the genetic identity of Jews in the Diaspora. Before that, Jews were those whose fathers were Jews. During the dispersion, oppression of the Jews made it difficult to know who someone’s father was, due to the frequent rape of Jewish women by their oppressors, in times of war and peace. Conversions to Judaism, of course, complicate this purely genetic model somewhat. But the children of these concerts will marry Jews and raise their children to do the same. So Jewish genes soon predominate. However, the quote doesn't define what "Jewish genes" means. It surely does not imply that a genetic Jew is someone whose genetic material is mostly derived from the patriarchs, as that would almost certainly not be applicable to anyone at all who is separated from them by more than two generations. He also does not say whether the shift from patrilineal to matrilineal was legitimate as regards the covenants. To be clear, I am asking about the full Israelite identity, as Dispensationalists often separate partaking fully in the covenants verses spiritual blessings only. I am asking about those who are full partakers in the OT covenants -- is it common among Dispensationalists to believe that this is exclusively for those who are patrilineally descended from Jacob? How is this Israelite identity determined?

I see Eastern Orthodox keyboard warriors commonly posting memes, bite size apologetics and propaganda against Catholicism which make some variation on the claim "4 out of 5 Patriarchs choose Eastern Orthodoxy. You should too". I was wondering how much veracity is behind this claim. I was under the impression that the Patriarch of Alexandria wasn't even in communion with the Eastern Orthodox church at all. I thought he was a Copt and a member of the Oriental Orthodox communion instead? Likewise for Jerusalem and Antioch. I thought that the only Patriarch of the original Pentarchy that is an actual Eastern Orthodox is the Patriarch of Constantinople? My understanding is that 1 out of 5 Patriarchs chooses Catholicism, 1 out of 5 Patriarchs chooses Eastern Orthodoxy, and 3 out of 5 Patriarchs choose Oriental Orthodoxy. Please help me understand this situation further?

Mormons receive something called a "patriarchal blessing" during which they are sorted into one of the 12 tribes of Israel. - Where did this practice originate? - What do these tribe assignments signify to Mormons? Do Mormons use these assignments for anything?

**My context** : I am totally ignorant. LOL. Michael L Brown said > Just as most Christians are almost totally ignorant of what real Muslims believe, so also most Jews are almost totally ignorant of what real followers of Jesus believe. So Orthodoxen are ignorant of what Catholics believe, Catholics are ignorant of what Orthodoxen believe, etc. Please ELI5, don't judge me, etc. In Catholic schools I went to, I learned about Catholic vs Protestant stuff like sola scriptura, sola fide, etc and even about Eastern Catholic , but I'm fairly certainly our teachers didn't teach us about the existence of the Orthodox Church. Idk. I didn't even know about filioque. --- Based on 2:32 or 4:55 in Why Christianity Is So Divided - January 11, 2025 by Versedyoutube (channel ID ) and on my previous question https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/105402/list-of-jewish-ecumenical-patriarchs-of-constantinople (Perhaps my question is wrong because I don't even understand the 2 seemingly conflicting answers) : I notice the East-West split was and still is just Catholic (Rome) vs Eastern Orthodox (Constantinople) and not anything else for Antioch, Jerusalem or Alexandria. Why'd Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem & Alexandria break away from Rome but then the 4 of them united under Constantinople and are still united even to today instead of like a separate 3rd 4th & 5th things for Antioch, Jerusalem & Alexandria? The ff is afaiu : 1. The 4 Eastern bishops didn't mind Rome to rule over them as long as Rome ruled in a 'primus inter pares' way, not a primacy way. 2. The 4 Eastern bishops just then picked Constantinople to replace Rome. 3. Since then Antioch, Jerusalem & Alexandria have no beef whatsoever with the 'primus inter pares' way that Constantinople rules over them.

Re https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/105244/list-of-jewish-popes-cardinals and https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/105402/list-of-jewish-ecumenical-patriarchs-of-constantinople **What's the equivalent of 'cardinals' in eastern orthodox?** Like who votes for the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople? Or what's below this patriarch in hierarchy? My intention is actually to ask next about Jewish 'cardinals' of Orthodoxy, but well of course I can't ask about what I don't understand. Maybe since the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople is 'primus inter pares', the cardinals would be like the other bishops ... namely of Antioch, Jerusalem or Alexandria ? Idk.

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

Personally I consider Tamar, the wife of Judah, to be one of the great women of Bible -- the Mother of most Jews and the foremother of Jesus. However, her story is a troubling one. She is most famous for disguising herself as a harlot (or sacred prostitute) in order to receive Judah's seed after he refused to give his last surviving son to her. > When Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is going up to Timnah to > shear his sheep,” she put off her widow’s garments, put on a veil, > wrapped herself up, and sat down at the entrance to Enaim, which is on > the road to Timnah. She saw that Shelah was grown up, yet she had not > been given to him in marriage. When Judah saw her, he thought her > to be a prostitute, for she had covered her face. He went over to > her at the roadside and said, “Come, let me come in to you,” for he > did not know that she was his daughter-in-law... > > About three months later Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar > has prostituted herself; moreover, she is pregnant as a result of > prostitution.” And Judah said, “Bring her out, and let her be burned.” > As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law, “It > was the owner of these who made me pregnant.” And she said, “Take > note, please, whose these are, the signet and the cord and the staff.” > Then Judah acknowledged them and said, “She is more in the right than > I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah.” (Gen. 38) I know that Tamar is listed in the NT as one of Jesus' ancestors in Matthew 1: > Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and > Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, and Judah the father of > Perez and Zerah by Tamar. However, I have noticed that Tamar is not much discussed by Christian pastors or my Jewish friends. I'd be interested to know more about how she is seen in these traditions.

There are several examples in the Bible where faithful people were given a new name: - Abram became Abraham (Genesis 17:5 ) - Sarai became Sarah (Genesis 17:15 ) - Jacob became Israel (Genesis 32:28 ; 35:10 ) - Simon became Peter (Matthew 16:18 ; John 1:42 ) Usually, we refer to Abraham as Abraham, Sarah as Sarah, and Peter as Peter – using their new names. Given that pattern, why is it more common to refer to Jacob as Jacob, rather than his new name, Israel? Interestingly, it seems that Jacob was given his new name twice, as if he forgot it the first time (Genesis 32 and 35). Among the mentions of Jacob/Israel in the Bible, there are 17 occurrences of the phrase “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” but only four occurrences of “Abraham, Isaac, and Israel.” Sometimes God himself uses the name Jacob, after having said “you will no longer be called Jacob” (Genesis 35:10). As evidence of modern usage, the Wikipedia article for Abram/Abraham is Abraham , but the Wikipedia article for Jacob/Israel is Jacob . Also, Abraham and Jacob are the names of the relevant tags here on Christianity Stack Exchange.

**What is the process of deposing an Orthodox Patriarch as head of their particular Orthodox Church?** After posting this question (**Does the Russian Orthodox Church actively support Putin and his war in Ukraine?**), I was wandering if it is at all possible to depose an Orthodox Patriarch as head of their particular Orthodox Church? The YouTube video, Ukrainian priests of Moscow Patriarchate call to ban Russian religious doctrine , suggests that there is some sort of religious tribunal that could possibly see the the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill deposed as head of the Russian Orthodox Church. > "Russian World" - an ideology that laid the foundation of Russian hatred of Ukraine. Ukrainian priests of Moscow Patriarchate "filed a suit" to the highest church judicial authority calling to condemn the doctrine spread by the Russian Orthodox Church and its heretical leader - Patriarch Kirill. If such a Orthodox tribunal is possible against the Patriarch of Moscow, what the requirements to be set out according to the rules within Orthodoxy to depose a patriarch, if it is even possible? > The Orthodox Churches are those churches with Apostolic Succession (bishops able to trace their ordaining bishops back to the Apostles) not recognizing the universal papal primacy. Instead, these churches recognize the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (now Istanbul) as being the primus inter pares among Orthodox bishops. The Orthodox Churches consider themselves autocephalous. > > Because of their adherence to autocephaly, the Orthodox Churches don't have a codified canon law. However, many of their important canons and decrees are found in a compilation known as the ***Pedalion*** (Greek; literally, "rudder") and are derived from decrees formulated at the Council in Trullo (692). The Council in Trullo was held in Constantinople for the purpose of drawing up disciplinary canons following the fifth and sixth general church councils (Constantinople II (553) and Constantinople III (680 - 681)). - Canon Law: Eastern Orthodox Churches

Reading from [here](http://blog.adw.org/2017/02/noah-really-live-950/) and [Genesis 5](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen%205&version=ESV) we see that there are mentions of longevity among prophets: - Adam – 930 - Seth – 912 - Enosh – 905 - Jared – 962 - Methuselah – 969 - Noah – 950 - Shem – 600 - Eber – 464 - Abraham – 175 - Moses – 120 My question is are there any **other** historical books (a book that has nothing to do with Abrahamic religions) that mention any of these ages? Basically what I'm asking was there any non-religious, secular book written that cites these ages? Or a book written by Abrahamic followers that is still somewhat *universally* accepted? I personally consider the Old and New Testament as (partially history) books that can be referenced but consider that out of the scope of the question.