Dan_79

2 minutes ago, Yowm said:

John corrected it? John said 'those who call themselves Jews'..there is no correction.

This why I asked what kind of "Jew" is Paul telling us he is.

And why did Jesus ask the same person who endorses Paul in Simon(Peter)  look after his flock in Johns scriptures three times (It grieved Peter).

17 minutes ago, Adstar said:

Ok i did not know that... Thanks for the info...

Many modern day Jews have really been twisted by the tulmud and the traditions of men.. And the zohar and other uninspired books

There are multiple sources accrediting this online. (use discernment always).

I think Josephus the historian "Jew" says something similar.

Yowm.

Ok here is another way of putting it..

Gal 3:28

Then read

Rev 3:9 

It shouldn't even be an issue if we only heard Paul so why did John correct this?

5 minutes ago, Yowm said:

In context of the passage it  is associated with the circumcised under the Mosaic Law and that has been my point, you need to ask in relation to what?

So, it would help if you gave your reason for asking 'what is a Jew'?

I do or have done.

"Jew" being the most interchangable word in the bible it must of inspired John to warn about this in Rev.

6 minutes ago, Adstar said:

I do not know where you get the Edomites and Esau from and why you are associating them with the Jewish decdnants of Israel..

Edomites where not Jews..

No I'm not.

I am saying if you did not know what "Jew" was in this context you would unwittingly include "Jews" as the same as Edom/Esau.

The "Jews" who wrote the encyclopedia Judaica state that Edom is in modern JEWRY.

so originally I asked is it not better to use distinction in ALL uses of scripture instead of using the generalization?

Where "Jews" means Isrealites use "Israelites" and drop the former "Jew" to add clarity or distinction?

7 minutes ago, Adstar said:

Yes some Jews are atheist.. 

The truth is the only definition that covers all Jews is people who believe they are genetic decendants of the man Israel.. all other definitions will not cover all Jews..

Interesting, as the term "Jew" from originally meaning a Judahite (from or of the tribe of Judah), who have Gods "ever lasting" covenant now can be used to include edom and the accursed Esau?

5 minutes ago, Adstar said:

 

 

Many Jews are not religious in any way Torah or tulmud or zohar they reject them all..

Ok so please correct me if I am wrong..

"Atheist" can now be added to the list of definitions for the term "Jew" ?

17 minutes ago, Adstar said:

As far as i know the term Jew came as a descriptor of people who where native citizens of the kingdom of Judea..  

Judah is one of the 12 tribes of Israel..

The people of the 12 tribes when they left Egypt where known as Hebrews..

During the history of the land called Israel the Kingdom split and the two kingdoms became Israel 10 tribes and Judea I think the tribes Judah and Benjamin ( being much smaller ) and also some of the tribe of Levi because the tribe of Levi where the tribe responsible for being priests in the Temple in Jerusalem and seeing that Jerusalem was in the kingdom of Judea then some Levi tribes people stayed there..   Since the majority of the population where of the tribe of Judah then the kingdom became known as Judea and thus the people came to be known as Jews..

Modern day Jews are people who claim to be genetic descendants of Israel who was the father of 12 sons who's descendants became the 12 tribes..  While there is a Jewish religion.. Most modern day Jewish people are secular / atheists..

Well that's my take on the term Jew..  I am sure others will be quick to correct me on anything i have messed up on..

Hi Adstar.

Yes.

Modern "Jews" follow the talmud which is not the same as Christianity (hence Judeo-Christianity is oxymoronic) and the jewish encyclopedia of 1925 states that "edom is in modern jewry" so to use "that" rendering of the word "Jew" would not count as a reference to meaning Israelite (descendant of Jacob).

The beginings of confusion showing....

16 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Paul called Peter a Jew (to differentiate between a gentle)

Galatians 2:14 NKJV
[14] But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?

 

So we at least have another use here that compares differently to the first usage of the word. Is the word "Jew" meaning Israelites in Gal 2:14 ?

5 minutes ago, Christine said:

‘Now in Shushan the palace 
there was a certain Jew, 
whose name was Mordecai, 
the son of Jair, 
the son of Shimei, 
the son of Kish, 
a Benjamite; ...
(Est 2:5)  

Hello Dan_79,

The verse above is the first usage of the word that I could find, and in the margin of my Bible, in relation to this, it ways,

'a certain Jew' = a man (Heb. 'ish'), a Jew. The contrast between Judah and Israel was lost in a strange land; and, as Nebuchadnezzar's campaign was against Judah, so 'Jew' became the name used by Gentiles.

Hope this is of help to you.

In Christ Jesus

Chris

Hi Christine.

Yes it is a help.

As the first use of the word "Jew" is given to mean "Judahite" (from the tribe of Judah), this shows it's original usage. Thanks.

6 minutes ago, Yowm said:

 

That's how I generally use it, scripture uses it in various ways, so it should be explained how one is using it at the time.

Is it correct to use any other term as to what it should mean at that time?

I find the generalization is what is causing the confusion for me personally.

Example:

If we are discussing Paul and you mention he is a "Jew" but you mean by the context that it means descendant of Jacob is it not better to say "Paul the Israelite" ?

I know your not suggesting anything here but for polite respectful discussion...

Can you help me answer the question

(I don't know Hitler or what his thoughts were personally or like what I have read about him so would rather not immediately try to attach my genuine concern to that of a genocidal world event).

Can anyone else help?

I have been visiting this forum now for a short while.

I have read many very great posts and am very gratful to everyone who has taken the time to answer or correct me in my  knowledge of scripture.

Some will notice I keep stumbling on one term or phrase that keeps popping up on this forum and it is trying to define the term "Jew".

"Jesus was a Jew"

"Paul was a Jew"

...."was a Jew also"

The word Jew has become synonymous in the English language to mean a multitude of things. I am not alone in this thought either.

Many non ecclesiastical dictionaries approach this word with a whole host of meanings and either intentionally or not intermingle or give multiple meanings to this word.

Is it correct to call an Israelite a Jew? Or a Jew an Israelite?

What is a "Jew"?

A Judean (someone who inhabited a land mass in the bible called Judea) ?

An Israelite who is from the seed of Jacob?

A biblical Character mentioned in the language called Hebrew?

A Hebrew?

An adherent of the religion of Judaism (or someone who observes the teachings of the Talmud)?

A Judahite (someone from the tribe of Judah) ?

Or does the term "Jew" simply mean all of the above in every instance?

Example:

If you would not call a Gorilla a primate, or a Chimpanzee a primate, where either instance required clarification because they are both primates, then what is the purpose of distinction if not for clarity?

A Vegetable soup will have many combinations that fall under this term.... So using vegetable soup to determine Leeks and Carrots isnt the same as Potato and Leek...

Why am I so confused over such a simple biblical term?

1 hour ago, Not me said:

I use to work at a food bank handing out food. It’s sad, but 80-90% of the people that came in enjoyed living like they were. They’ed go from food bank to food bank stocking up on whatever they could get. Sell/trade  want they could, mostly for drugs and alcohol. Kept what they wanted. Had no desire to change or improve that state. That was the sad part, was a real eye opener. The 10% or so that wanted to get out of their situation, I felt compassion for. The rest, they were just looking for a way to take advantage. They’ed talk a good game but it was  just talk. It was just so you’d let your guard down and give them more. Every once in awhile you’d meet someone had a good heart, that were honestly trying to do the right thing. They would most definitely make your day. 

Much love in Christ, Not me

I visited a church that houses a foodbank on its premises. These people helped a great few families.

What I didn't understand was why this one individual church had all of this vacant land around it, land that was arrable that could be used to grow food coming direct from God to the hungry?

I attended so I could ask why they were the only thing in the way of that land being used and that having a foodbank on their premises was a direct show of human need in that area and guess what I got fobbed off, but not after my idea was praised as worthy (?) 

The fig tree?

That land I calculated could feed multiple families who are landless, could be used to educate both young and old, become a place to go and meet likeminded people etc

That land is growing grass with not even animals on it.

It is very sad ?

I guess tins trump fresh in their eyes and the supermarkets (who keep 90% of the church alive) always got payment for the foodstuffs first.

(the church got the local praise, the supermarket got some profit and the government took its cut in taxes....all the main parties were kept happy first and foremost).

I could never understand how such a wasteful enterprise could have the nerve to put the foodbank donation boxes on that side of the tills.

23 hours ago, Heart2Soul said:

The sheep are the saints that make up the body of Christ.....so in Revelation....why were the seven churches of Asia singled out and each had a fault that needed to be dealt with....seeing that the churches were already beginning to feign in their upright walk and talk it was a concern to God as it would only decay more and more if not addressed.....In Ezekiel it was prophesied that in the last days there would rise up a Shepard who no longer fed the sheep but ate of the fat of them and desired wealth and gain rather than Godly edifying of the sheep......

Throughout the bible warns against false teachers, false prophets, false preachers who would lead the sheep astray if they were not skilled in rightly dividing the truth and in discerning of what spirit was operating.....

The bible indicates throughout OT and NT that there is a purpose for the church....and need....a command to be faithful in gathering together in unity of faith....but not to get into a debate about a building........it is a place of gathering of believers......to come together to worship Him and to pray and lift one another up...to teach.....

Even Paul addressed the issue of women teaching in the church....not to allow that.....just making a point that the Bible addresses the "Church" often.

And the seven churches addressed in Revelation..it wasn't addressed to the pastor it was addressed to the entire church........we as believers have a responsibility to keep God's House a place of holiness and a place of worship.....

Whew I am going to take a break.....really am enjoying the discussion! God Bless!

I agree, God gave us Laws Stautes and Ordinances in the OT that people reject as they think they are not valid for the life of a Christian.

The festivals we are told to attend, the gatherings are clearly detailed to help become acquainted with eachother.

So when the Church leader doesnt have high regard for all these things is it because he shouldnt be leading (for lack of knowledge)?

What are the sheep meant to do?

Do they find somewhere that does? (that would mean leaving the church or becoming divided between the fellowship).

If we are all responsible for eachother then why do we not get a fully integrated service where the leader/s are humble to the youngest in question?

Why isnt EVERYONE given the oportunity to give the service Or why do modern ministers assume authority over the followers?

Or... What do we need a church leader for if we are leading our own church using Gods word as gathered?

Only asking

I do not claim to know (remember I left the church for these very reasons...and some)

Sorry for such a vague answer but it is mixed with assylum que.

The only way I could find out was to see for myself.

Our local authority doesn't give honesty in this area as it makes them look like the people they are. To rely on their figures is to keep yourself ignorant of how serious a problem it is. Relying on knowledge of where they are at any given time is not on their expenditure list.

Mathew 7:14

5 minutes ago, Heart2Soul said:

Okay so the angels gather them back into the safety of the fold........who is the fold.

The Lord obviously.

What Im saying is we can be watching out for eachothers safety but we are not neccessarily at fault for the way the churches are heading...churches are led (they have a leadership a hierarchy an agenda...) the sheep are sheep...they are followers...they turn up listen give tribute and leave for home till the next instalment...

While I agree I cannot help ask was it ever any different for my generation?

The founding fathers of the US had a good church as they finally threw off the bad yolk...they left it behind to find somewhere to build up a nation from GODS word ...and it worked....until the wolves/goats/tarea etc showed up...

For the US with its fresh history how a decline can be evidenced is much more easily discernable.

When I look through the history of the churches in my country (England) I doubt I would of accepted any of them at this point of my life even hundreds of years ago.

The reason I ask is most church denominations in my country where borm out of one schism or another, based primarily upon a moulding of Gods immutable laws into mans will. A slow degradation that was known soon after the death and ressurection of the Lord.

Jesus knew his sheep would be scattered amongst all nations, John knew this also...

Church splits and splits etc but only Jesus with his angels have the task of bringing them back into the safety of the fold. Not man.

I could write about all the Church denominations I have visited once, either by invite (weddings communion christenings funerals etc) or by choice.

It is best I do not lol.

All gave me a fair and honest insight into church life.

It just wasn't for me. That could change to, I am not a closed book. 

The churches should all keep the holidays and festivals to be genuine anyway. These are great for meeting like minded Christians.

15 minutes ago, Heart2Soul said:

I totally understand.....been there myself....I currently do attend a "church" although I would like to find one that really teaches.....I am not into those 1 scripture preachers who read 1 verse then ad lib his thoughts throughout the rest of the sermon using metaphors, humor, maybe some personal experience etc.

This is the strange thing of my experience like yourself wanting truth, I was led to a church and guided straight back out of it when I picked this book up and read it to myself. 

I felt like God gave me free reign on his message, once I recieved this bible I had only the limitations of the time I gave to reading it and studying it.

I am not anti preacher but like all preachers you need to be able to apply at least some discernment to the message you get from them, it helps you see and understand that man does sometimes have or works to an agenda, is fallible and open to error, which is basically good for the truth to know all mans additions to the word are based on what is in his heart.

6 minutes ago, Heart2Soul said:

wow, so you obviously had some knowledge of Christianity to seek it yourself.....but how did you grow.....did you get a bible and start reading? I wholeheartedly believe that as the scriptures say "no man need teach you anything but the Holy Spirit will lead and guide you into all truth".....however....who can truly say they hear the Holy Spirit when He speaks....not all do.....some...but not all.

I sought like minded people...some were sheep some were wolves.

I wandered into a church service once early on in my mission to find truth... on invite from someone whose directions to get there were not clear, ended up in another church where I recieved my own bible...it went from there really. 

Tried a few churches and my thirst for truth just wasnt being quenched properly.

I found that I preferred to just sit and read and formulate questions based on points in scripture that I could not find clarity on and I have never stopped. 

18 minutes ago, Heart2Soul said:

No it doesn't but with the lack of teaching at home or at school and with government banning public display of Christianity there isn't much hope to see a body of believers grow and enjoy the meat of God's Word because there are no teachers....no preachers...no evangelists....no prophets....no apostles.....where does one go to grow....if I was a new born-again believer who got saved by someone sharing on the street and then went there way and I went mine....then what....I don't know a thing about the bible....I don't know a thing about the different religions....I am stuck just knowing Jesus as my saviour and that is where I will remain.....

and when the enemy comes and attacks me...you know...when you hear the truth of God's Word immediately the enemy comes to snatch it away...

Good point.

I cannot speak for anyone else here, you would be suprised to learn how people recieve the message.

My experience is not that uncommon.

I was not raised as a Christian. Had 2 atheist parents and I was guided to where the confrontation was presented to me, no one applied any pressure on me, I decieded to seek him myself or so it seemed buy I already felt repentive, guilt ridden etc...I was looking for help and someone answered.

1 minute ago, Heart2Soul said:

As long as there are families that believe and will teach I love this! but what about those families who don't....who may have gotten saved but never attended church to learn and grow....will they be effective in teaching what they don't understand?

If they have the Holy Spirit yes, I cannot see a reason why not.

6 minutes ago, Heart2Soul said:

No it doesn't but with the lack of teaching at home or at school and with government banning public display of Christianity there isn't much hope to see a body of believers grow and enjoy the meat of God's Word because there are no teachers....no preachers...no evangelists....no prophets....no apostles.....where does one go to grow....if I was a new born-again believer who got saved by someone sharing on the street and then went there way and I went mine....then what....I don't know a thing about the bible....I don't know a thing about the different religions....I am stuck just knowing Jesus as my saviour and that is where I will remain.....

and when the enemy comes and attacks me...you know...when you hear the truth of God's Word immediately the enemy comes to snatch it away...

I have edited my previous post to include some commentary to my initial post which might seem a bit off.

The Sabbath is what God gave to you personally, time put aside to learn about the bible...with your whole family!!

What better company could you wish for?

Mathew 18:20