Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Because of this, wrath has gone out against you from the Lord.

[amigo de christo]

The scripture I referenced sounds like a balancing act, so maybe I'm not too far off course....."they are enemies for the gospel's sake, but loved on account of the patriarchs."

I wasn't accusing you of anything, only reminding us all of what Jesus said about loving our enemies. Regarding your posts on the subject, it's a good discussion to try and iron out the will and wisdom of God on it. My position in case it helps to clarify, is that I don't believe we are called to love geopolitical entities called nation-states.....only to love people. I believe meting out justice to criminals and enemies of war belongs to the governments of this world (Rom 13) and to God ultimately, not to the church. The church's job and mandate is to show mercy and forgiveness to people, as a witness to the gospel.

And just want to mention (I don't know your view on this), that Israel's time as a theocracy was for the purpose of acting as an allegory for the kingdom of God (ensample to the church).....it isn't how things normally work in this world. It never works out well to have mixing of church and state. Israel back then served as an allegory in the natural realm for heavenly/spiritual realities pointing ahead to the gospel and kingdom of God....biblical principle of first the natural then the spiritual.

Man proved and has proven this time and time again dear sister .
its never good to blend the two . Our Kingdom is the heavenly one indeed dear sister .
And The first Kingdom made after the pattern , BUT NOT THE VERY IMAGE itself
was for a time till THE CHRIST would Himself enter into the HEAVENLY by his own sacrifice.
And how often even those in the first Kingdom who had the temple built by hands
Would tie thier hopes and loyalties and love into thier lovers such as eygpt , and others .
And would become a stink to a The VERY GOD whose temple
built by hands , HE would demolish at least twice . For finding fault with them
He brought the new heavenly second covenant , established upon far better promises by
the Very KING and GOD of ISRAEL .
IT has NEVER went well for any church when said church got tied into these earthen govts .
Always they have sold out and in time MUCH BLOOD as come from their so called LETS BRING PEACE on earth .
And in these last and late hours , IT will soon repeat on a global scale .
As in times past blood was shed by christendom and those who shed it always beleived
it was DOING service to GOD , SO TOO will the many in these late and last hours
beleive , when rounding up the sheep , THEY DO so by the will of GOD to establish this kingdom utopia
for world peace n safety . People cannot see what the mixture does and will do .
Ye cannot serve man and GOD
You cannot serve the kingdom of men and of God
Always much compromise is made , and by peace much blood be shed . And its coming .

 

[amigo de christo]

Never thought you were sniffing paint brother, good golly, and don't know what gave you that idea. We do want to guard against an "aha!" attitude at times though. I'm sure you get around to more threads and read many more posts than I do these days and I can only go by what posts I have read. Even so I don't want to approach people with suspicion and accusations necessarily...we're not wrestling with flesh and blood. I'd rather try reasoning with them from the scriptures in case they can be helped by that, and others reading might be helped or edified too. What the Lord is gracious to show me for my own sake, I'm happy to share when I can. Yes, unfortunately many are falling for that deception, and unless I'm much mistaken, I believe it is going to culminate with the Temple in Jerusalem....we sure are in a falling away, sadly.

OH i knew you didnt think such a thing dear sister .
To the trenches for the hour grows late and the deluison has grown great
and all who sip of that cup will be led to their own destruction On the day of the LORD .

 

[Lizbeth]

I'll try to explain the issue. The text might be lengthy, but understand that I'm attempting to condense 2,700 years of history into a single forum post.

Historically, the Northern Kingdom of Israel, comprising ten tribes, was conquered by Assyria around 722 BCE. The Assyrians deported much of Israel's population to regions like Assyria, Mesopotamia, and Media, as part of their policy of scattering conquered peoples (2 Kings 17:24). This led to the "lost ten tribes," who largely assimilated into other nations, and the Northern Kingdom ceased to exist as a state.

After this, only the Southern Kingdom of Judah remained, primarily made up of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and some Levites. Judah was later conquered by Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar II around 587/586 BCE, and its people were taken into the Babylonian captivity. After Babylon fell to the Persians in 539 BCE, King Cyrus the Great issued a decree allowing the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple (Ezra 1:1–4), which was completed around 516 BCE. From that point until the time of Jesus (circa 4 BCE–30 CE), the restored community was known as Judah, not Israel. It existed under Persian, Greek, and later Roman rule (from 63 BCE, when Pompey captured Jerusalem). In 70 CE, the Romans, under Titus, destroyed the Second Temple and Jerusalem, effectively ending Judah as a center of Jewish statehood until modern times.

The problem isn't just the name "Israel" being used for the modern state founded in 1948. The original Israel, as a unified nation, existed before the split into two kingdoms, but after the Assyrian conquest, only Judah remained as a distinct entity. If modern Israelis claim descent from Abraham, the question is: from which tribes? Since the ten tribes of Israel were scattered and largely lost, the Jewish people who returned from Babylon were mainly from Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. Logically, if descendants of Judah and Benjamin were to restore their state, they would call it Judah, not Israel, as Israel was a separate, sometimes hostile kingdom to them in biblical times.

Yet, in 1948, the founders of the modern state chose the name "Israel." This choice is significant because the descendants of the biblical Israel were dispersed long before the Second Temple period, and over 2,000 years have passed since the destruction of Judah in 70 CE. Some question whether modern Israelis are truly descendants of Abraham’s tribes, given the long history of dispersion and intermingling, especially for the "lost" tribes of Israel, whose assimilation began over 2,700 years ago.

This brings us to your point about Paul’s reference to "Israel after the flesh." Paul, writing in the first century, was referring to the Jews of his time—primarily from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, as the other tribes had long been scattered. So, what basis is there to connect Paul’s words to modern Israelis?

The name "Israel" for the modern state might evoke the biblical unity of all twelve tribes, but historically and genealogically, claiming direct continuity with the ancient Israel is questionable.

I can't contribute much to this topic, but there apparently were communities of the house of Israel in Jesus' time who were not assimilated.....He went to preach to them north of Israel and sent His disciples to them as well. (see the context of Matt. 10:6 and 15:24)

But also whoever existed in the Jewish nation in Jesus' time were referred to as Israel all through the new testament, so I don't think we should make too much of them calling their nation state by the name of Israel.

Jews that I have talked with...many of them know what tribe they are from through oral tradition passed down through the generations, even though the genealogical records were lost.

The bible says their gifts and callings were without repentance....we have the Lord and we have discernment to sometimes see it.

 

[amigo de christo]

I can't contribute much to this topic, but there apparently were communities of the house of Israel in Jesus' time who were not assimilated.....He went to preach to them north of Israel and sent His disciples to them as well. (see the context of Matt. 10:6 and 15:24)

But also whoever existed in the Jewish nation in Jesus' time were referred to as Israel all through the new testament, so I don't think we should make too much of them calling their nation state by the name of Israel.

Jews that I have talked with...many of them know what tribe they are from through oral tradition passed down through the generations, even though the genealogical records were lost.

The bible says their gifts and callings were without repentance....we have the Lord and we have discernment to sometimes see it.

Yes indeed dear sister . we see both . its true that the kingdom of judah of jeruslam in which i beleive also benjamin
was part of it
and then the other ten tribes commonly called israel .
AND yet at times BOTH were called ISRAEL . For though they had been divided due to solmons error
and done so by Rehoboam
Still all was Israel . just namely the Kingdom of david of the kings lineage
would be centered in Jersusalem , judah
the other ten scattered in their own terrorities . YET even then They too , the ten
were to STILL come to JERSUALEM for to offer worship and sacrifice at the temple for passover and etc .
But even the first KING of israel rebelled and built his own place on the moutains . WITH WHOM GOD was NOT PLEASED
for during that time the key sacrfice was to be done IN JERUSALEM .
And now a word , a reminder of what JESUS said was to come when speaking to the Samaritan women
You say JERSUALEM is the place to worship .
And JESUS said salvation of the jews ,
BUT THE TIME cometh wherein ye shall neither worship at this moutain nor in JERUSALEM .
FOR GOD IS SPIRIT and they who worship HIM must do so in Spirit and in truth .
THE EARTHERN WOULD BE REPLACED . ITS TEMPLE replaced
AND NOW THE TRUE JERUSALEM IS ABOVE and the TEMPLE IS , not made by hands after the true
BUT GOD AND THE LAMB HIMSELF . And what GOD has JOINED , let no man put asunder .
The heavenly cannot be married , cannot be blended
EITHER OUR KINGDOM is of the HEAVENLY , or it is of the earthern but it cannot and will not be both .
As for the sheep OURS IS HEAVENLY . Now lift t hose hands up and praise the LORD
THE HEAVENLY WHEREIN ISRAEL IS NOW ONE in SPIRIT which consists of both beleiving jews and gentiles too .

 

[Lizbeth]

But, if you are a dispensationalist, you actually believe that it will be bad for Jews to be in Israel, eventually, don't you? Even worse than anything else in history.

It seems to me that dispensationalism is quite a schizophrenic view - Christians who hold it support Jews moving to Israel, while expecting them to be horribly judged by God, there.

I'm not dispensationalist. I think I fall into the partial preterist range. It is God who raises and lowers kings and kingdoms, as the Psalms say and as Nebuchadnezzar had to learn the hard way. If we truly believe what God's word says about that, we should accept that modern day Israel exists in His sovereign will for His ultimate purposes.....which like anything could be for good or evil, or a mixture of both. But we are not to follow or link arms (unequally yoked) with unbelieving Israel. They are lost souls. And how should we be towards lost souls? Not judging/condemning I hope.

 

[soberxp]

I need clarification on your stance. You reference Paul’s words about Jews (e.g., Romans 11:28, wishing himself accursed for their salvation), but seem to apply them to modern Israelis, suggesting God’s love for them through the patriarchs extends to today’s Israel. Am I misunderstanding, or do you believe Paul’s words about Jews directly relate to modern Israelis?

Here’s the issue: Israel’s founders in 1948 chose the name “Israel” over “Judea.” Why?
Israel (the Northern Kingdom) had zero God-pleasing kings—all 19, from Jeroboam I to Hoshea, were condemned for idolatry (1–2 Kings).

Judea, however, had 8 godly kings out of 20: Asa, Jehoshaphat, Joash, Azariah, Jotham, Hezekiah, Manasseh (after repentance), and Josiah (2 Kings 18–23).
By choosing “Israel,” the founders signaled a vision tied to a rebellious, idolatrous legacy, not Judea’s godly remnant. If modern Israel isn’t even claiming Judea’s heritage, why assume Paul’s words about biblical Jews apply to them?

Even if modern Israelis were descendants of biblical Israel, Scripture asks: “Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Because of this, wrath has gone out against you from the Lord” (2 Chronicles 19:2).

Today, with 99.7% of Israelis rejecting Christ (CBS/Pew 2025) and pushing a Third Temple that denies His sacrifice (Hebrews 10:10–14), it’s worse.

Do you agree Christians shouldn’t support modern Israel’s agenda? If so, the problem is Zionist propaganda sowing tares in Christian circles. We can’t ignore this—we must confront it, right?

Because the people who joined were also tares....

 

[Chrysostomos]

The scripture I referenced sounds like a balancing act, so maybe I'm not too far off course....."they are enemies for the gospel's sake, but loved on account of the patriarchs."

I wasn't accusing you of anything, only reminding us all of what Jesus said about loving our enemies. Regarding your posts on the subject, it's a good discussion to try and iron out the will and wisdom of God on it. My position in case it helps to clarify, is that I don't believe we are called to love geopolitical entities called nation-states.....only to love people. I believe meting out justice to criminals and enemies of war belongs to the governments of this world (Rom 13) and to God ultimately, not to the church. The church's job and mandate is to show mercy and forgiveness to people, as a witness to the gospel.

And just want to mention (I don't know your view on this), that Israel's time as a theocracy was for the purpose of acting as an allegory for the kingdom of God (ensample to the church).....it isn't how things normally work in this world. It never works out well to have mixing of church and state. Israel back then served as an allegory in the natural realm for heavenly/spiritual realities pointing ahead to the gospel and kingdom of God....biblical principle of first the natural then the spiritual.

It’s true that Christians aren’t called to love geopolitical entities like nation-states—only people—and that justice for criminals or war enemies is the domain of governments (Rom. 13), while the church focuses on mercy and forgiveness as a witness to the Gospel. I agree with that in principle. Your view on Israel as an Old Testament theocracy serving as an allegory for God’s kingdom is also solid, and it’s a good reminder that mixing church and state often ends badly. But let’s be honest—this doesn’t address the questions I raised in my previous post.

I asked specifically about how Paul’s words in Romans apply (or don’t) to modern Israelis—whether they can be considered direct descendants of the biblical Jews, given the historical, theological, and biblical evidence I laid out. You didn’t engage with that at all. I also asked how Christians should respond when Zionism infiltrates Christianity, pushing geopolitical agendas under the guise of faith. Again, no response. Instead, you pivot to “finding balance,” which feels like a way to sidestep the specifics without committing to anything concrete. It’s a classic balancing act, but it leaves the real issues hanging.

This “balance” seems to rest on a common misconception: that Jesus taught us to love all enemies indiscriminately—even military foes, criminals, or enemies of God Himself. But that’s a distortion.
see posts #184 and #185–187. Don't ignore

 

[amigo de christo]

I'm not dispensationalist. I think I fall into the partial preterist range. It is God who raises and lowers kings and kingdoms, as the Psalms say and as Nebuchadnezzar had to learn the hard way. If we truly believe what God's word says about that, we should accept that modern day Israel exists in His sovereign will for His ultimate purposes.....which like anything could be for good or evil, or a mixture of both. But we are not to follow or link arms (unequally yoked) with unbelieving Israel. They are lost souls. And how should we be towards lost souls? Not judging/condemning I hope.

Your not partial preterist either .
Its just you simply beleive what is written . As always even the false , such as preterism
can have some truths within it .
But you yourself are not a partail preterist .
It would be like me saying i am a partial calvnists just because some things he said were true .
I aint no calvinist .
IT would be like me saying i am a partial Roman catholic just cause they had some truths
BUT we both know i aint that either .
Do not identity at all with preterism sister . Just speak the truth .

 

[Marvelloustime]

Yes indeed dear sister . we see both . its true that the kingdom of judah of jeruslam in which i beleive also benjamin
was part of it
and then the other ten tribes commonly called israel .
AND yet at times BOTH were called ISRAEL . For though they had been divided due to solmons error
and done so by Rehoboam
Still all was Israel . just namely the Kingdom of david of the kings lineage
would be centered in Jersusalem , judah
the other ten scattered in their own terrorities . YET even then They too , the ten
were to STILL come to JERSUALEM for to offer worship and sacrifice at the temple for passover and etc .
But even the first KING of israel rebelled and built his own place on the moutains . WITH WHOM GOD was NOT PLEASED
for during that time the key sacrfice was to be done IN JERUSALEM .
And now a word , a reminder of what JESUS said was to come when speaking to the Samaritan women
You say JERSUALEM is the place to worship .
And JESUS said salvation of the jews ,
BUT THE TIME cometh wherein ye shall neither worship at this moutain nor in JERUSALEM .
FOR GOD IS SPIRIT and they who worship HIM must do so in Spirit and in truth .
THE EARTHERN WOULD BE REPLACED . ITS TEMPLE replaced
AND NOW THE TRUE JERUSALEM IS ABOVE and the TEMPLE IS , not made by hands after the true
BUT GOD AND THE LAMB HIMSELF . And what GOD has JOINED , let no man put asunder .
The heavenly cannot be married , cannot be blended
EITHER OUR KINGDOM is of the HEAVENLY , or it is of the earthern but it cannot and will not be both .
As for the sheep OURS IS HEAVENLY . Now lift t hose hands up and praise the LORD
THE HEAVENLY WHEREIN ISRAEL IS NOW ONE in SPIRIT which consists of both beleiving jews and gentiles too .

@amigo de christo

 

[Lizbeth]

I asked specifically about how Paul’s words in Romans apply (or don’t) to modern Israelis—whether they can be considered direct descendants of the biblical Jews, given the historical, theological, and biblical evidence I laid out

But you haven't proven anything, only raised questions and doubts. To which I have answered as best as I could.

I also asked how Christians should respond when Zionism infiltrates Christianity, pushing geopolitical agendas under the guise of faith. Again, no response.

I thought I had made myself clear on that. Here as well as in past posts of yours. Geopolitical concerns are not the business of the church. I believe the Hebrew roots movement is a dangerous deception.

Instead, you pivot to “finding balance,” which feels like a way to sidestep the specifics without committing to anything concrete. It’s a classic balancing act, but it leaves the real issues hanging.

This “balance” seems to rest on a common misconception: that Jesus taught us to love all enemies indiscriminately—even military foes, criminals, or enemies of God Himself. But that’s a distortion.
see posts #184 and #185–187. Don't ignore

Well, maybe you would like to explain or expound how you read what Paul wrote about the Jews being enemies for the gospel's sake, yet being loved for the sake of the patriarchs?

I've already stated my understanding that criminal and military justice is not the church's mandate, mercy is. Sounds like we agree on that. I'm not sure what you feel I'm missing from your posts on the subject.

 

[Lizbeth]

Your not partial preterist either .
Its just you simply beleive what is written . As always even the false , such as preterism
can have some truths within it .
But you yourself are not a partail preterist .
It would be like me saying i am a partial calvnists just because some things he said were true .
I aint no calvinist .
IT would be like me saying i am a partial Roman catholic just cause they had some truths
BUT we both know i aint that either .
Do not identity at all with preterism sister . Just speak the truth .

I'm not even entirely clear on the exact definitions of these terms brother. Just that I think people would probably categorize me as being partial-preterist. My believe is that many things were fulfilled already as concerns Israel after the flesh, but not yet as concerns the church, for whom Israel serves as an example/allegory.

 

[Chrysostomos]

I can't contribute much to this topic, but there apparently were communities of the house of Israel in Jesus' time who were not assimilated.....He went to preach to them north of Israel and sent His disciples to them as well. (see the context of Matt. 10:6 and 15:24)

But also whoever existed in the Jewish nation in Jesus' time were referred to as Israel all through the new testament, so I don't think we should make too much of them calling their nation state by the name of Israel.

Jews that I have talked with...many of them know what tribe they are from through oral tradition passed down through the generations, even though the genealogical records were lost.

The bible says their gifts and callings were without repentance....we have the Lord and we have discernment to sometimes see it.

The passages you mentioned (Matthew 10:6 and 15:24) refer to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel," but this is a metaphorical way of describing the scattered or spiritually wayward Jewish people of the time—mostly from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi living in Judea and Galilee under Roman rule.
There's no historical evidence (from Josephus, archaeology, or other sources) of organized, unassimilated communities from the ten northern tribes (the ones conquered by Assyria in 722 BCE) still existing as distinct groups in 1st-century Palestine. The northern territory had long been repopulated by Samaritans—a mixed group of Assyrian settlers and remnant Israelites who intermarried and developed their own syncretic faith.
Jesus and his disciples were preaching to Jews, not to some preserved northern Israelite enclaves "north of Israel."

the 1st century, "Israel" as a national or tribal entity from the united monarchy era (pre-922 BCE) no longer existed. The northern kingdom had vanished 800 years earlier, assimilated into Assyrian territories, leaving only the southern kingdom's remnants (Judeans, or Jews).
That's why descendants of Judah/Benjamin would historically have named a restored state "Judah," not "Israel"—the two were separate (and often rival) kingdoms in the Bible.

So, here's my direct question: Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?

P.S. Many of my classmates, acquaintances, and friends emigrated to Israel after the collapse of the USSR. Before they repatriated to Israel, none of them knew they were Jewish. But now, all of them—100%—are certain they know which tribe they come from.

 

[amigo de christo]

But you haven't proven anything, only raised questions and doubts. To which I have answered as best as I could.


I thought I had made myself clear on that. Here as well as in past posts of yours. Geopolitical concerns are not the business of the church. I believe the Hebrew roots movement is a dangerous deception.


Well, maybe you would like to explain or expound how you read what Paul wrote about the Jews being enemies for the gospel's sake, yet being loved for the sake of the patriarchs?

I've already stated my understanding that criminal and military justice is not the church's mandate, mercy is. Sounds like we agree on that. I'm not sure what you feel I'm missing from your posts on the subject.

Geopolitical concerns are indeed NOT the business of the church .
And the hebrews roots movement is a dangerous and deadly deception too .
Always they focus on the flesh suit .
Paul having been born a jew yet LATER on the road to damascus would become A TRUE JEW .
Even he had much to say about these who focused upon the flesh suit
And always paul would cut the legs off , spiritual speaking , OF all who pointed and boasted in the f lesh .
Are they an isrealite , WELL so am i
Paul was saying this TO POINT THEM ALL back TO CHRIST and away FROM the flesh .
And now in these later hours we have folks even pointing , NOT ONLY to the flesh of a jew
but to the so called flesh of even ISHAMEL as muslims are now being grafted into the lie
as are other religoins .
Men have always desired the pre eminence
But what i say to one i say to all , WE POINT TO CHRIST for the flesh profits nothing .
A jew who rejected Christ will wail as loudly as a gentile who did the same .
And if not all of ISRAEL is of isreal
IF JESUS said not all of even abraham Were the true children of Abraham
And that would include ISSAC . for they all came of that lineage .
THEN how on earth is one of ishamel EVEN OF GOD .
NO sirs and no mams . I WILL TELL US plainly WHO are of GOD and who are the children of GOD .
ITS NOT the children born of the flesh
ITS THOSE WHO FAITH BE IN JESUS CHRIST , whether jew or gentile .
AND if any desires to boast , BOAST AND GLORY IN GOD , IN CHRIST . HE alone shall recieve the pre eminence
on our watch . WE are BUT SINNERS saved and changed by g race . WE are but wee things
WHO by the mercy and grace of GOD given us iN CHRIST JESUS have been saved and changed .
ITS TO THE LORD we owe all and thus TO HE ALONE , TO CHRIST ALONE shall we point and shall we boast .

 

[amigo de christo]

The passages you mentioned (Matthew 10:6 and 15:24) refer to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel," but this is a metaphorical way of describing the scattered or spiritually wayward Jewish people of the time—mostly from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi living in Judea and Galilee under Roman rule.
There's no historical evidence (from Josephus, archaeology, or other sources) of organized, unassimilated communities from the ten northern tribes (the ones conquered by Assyria in 722 BCE) still existing as distinct groups in 1st-century Palestine. The northern territory had long been repopulated by Samaritans—a mixed group of Assyrian settlers and remnant Israelites who intermarried and developed their own syncretic faith.
Jesus and his disciples were preaching to Jews, not to some preserved northern Israelite enclaves "north of Israel."

the 1st century, "Israel" as a national or tribal entity from the united monarchy era (pre-922 BCE) no longer existed. The northern kingdom had vanished 800 years earlier, assimilated into Assyrian territories, leaving only the southern kingdom's remnants (Judeans, or Jews).
That's why descendants of Judah/Benjamin would historically have named a restored state "Judah," not "Israel"—the two were separate (and often rival) kingdoms in the Bible.

So, here's my direct question: Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?

P.S. Many of my classmates, acquaintances, and friends emigrated to Israel after the collapse of the USSR. Before they repatriated to Israel, none of them knew they were Jewish. But now, all of them—100%—are certain they know which tribe they come from.

Even if some are direct descendants
it will profit them nothing.
HERE is who are the TRUE children of GOD .
any jew or gentile WHOSE FAITH BE IN THE MESSIAH , THE CHRIST OF GOD , CHRIST JESUS .
The flesh will profit no man . whether he be of Issac ,
whether he claim even abraham , or even MOSES can this profit him .
FOR MANY jews , even muslims can claim Abraham , can cliam moses
AND YET THEY HEAR NOT THE LAW OR EVEN MOSES or the PROPHETS .
And how do i know t hat . CAUSE IF THEY WERE of abraham they would have done the works of abraham
ABRAHAM BELEIVED GOD and yet many DO NOT BELIEVE GOD .
FOR if one believes NOT CHRIST , BELIEVE ME THEY BELIEVE NOT HE WHO SENT CHRIST .
IF a man cliams to follow MOSES , Yet BELIEVES NOT IN HE WHOM MOSES SPOKE OF
THEN he hears not MOSES , the law or the prophets .
SO you can bank on the fact THAT THIS ECUMINCAL INT ERFIATH IS OF ANTI CHRIST
and its peace WILL DESTROY many . The muslims , other religoins and unbelieving jews
DO NOT WORSHIP the same GOD WE DO . SO its about high time this church age
REPENTS and GOT BACK to preaching the ONLY NAME i KNOW SAVES and the DIRE NEED for all to repent and BELEIVE
ON THAT NAME , which is CHRIST JESUS , SON OF GOD , the MESSIAH , the WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE .

 

[amigo de christo]

The passages you mentioned (Matthew 10:6 and 15:24) refer to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel," but this is a metaphorical way of describing the scattered or spiritually wayward Jewish people of the time—mostly from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi living in Judea and Galilee under Roman rule.
There's no historical evidence (from Josephus, archaeology, or other sources) of organized, unassimilated communities from the ten northern tribes (the ones conquered by Assyria in 722 BCE) still existing as distinct groups in 1st-century Palestine. The northern territory had long been repopulated by Samaritans—a mixed group of Assyrian settlers and remnant Israelites who intermarried and developed their own syncretic faith.
Jesus and his disciples were preaching to Jews, not to some preserved northern Israelite enclaves "north of Israel."

the 1st century, "Israel" as a national or tribal entity from the united monarchy era (pre-922 BCE) no longer existed. The northern kingdom had vanished 800 years earlier, assimilated into Assyrian territories, leaving only the southern kingdom's remnants (Judeans, or Jews).
That's why descendants of Judah/Benjamin would historically have named a restored state "Judah," not "Israel"—the two were separate (and often rival) kingdoms in the Bible.

So, here's my direct question: Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?

P.S. Many of my classmates, acquaintances, and friends emigrated to Israel after the collapse of the USSR. Before they repatriated to Israel, none of them knew they were Jewish. But now, all of them—100%—are certain they know which tribe they come from.

Funny how that works my friend . All of a sudden everyone is finding their genealogy to be of jewish origin .
Sure some still exist , but even those MUST REPENT and BELEIVE ON CHRIST JESUS or they too shall perish
Many are getting caught up on the flesh and seeing being jewish born as a profit and chasing after genealogies .
BUT DARN SURE NOT AFTER CHRIST . Many desire to BE SEEN as something
to be even oowed and awwed of man . NOT THE SHEEP .
I already know exactly what i was , one of the worst of the worst
BUT NOW THANKS BE TO GOD , TO CHRIST am saved and have been changed and given new d esires
by which are pleasing to HE who has saved us . The ONLY ONE gonna be boasted in or pointed too
on my watch , WELL IT AINT ME , and it aint man , ITS GOD , <HIS CHRIST . t ime for all to go and do the same .

 

[Chrysostomos]

But you haven't proven anything, only raised questions and doubts. To which I have answered as best as I could.

I’m not just raising doubts for the sake of it—I'm pointing to well-established historical facts. By the 1st century CE, "Israel" as a national or tribal entity from the united monarchy (pre-922 BCE) no longer existed. The Northern Kingdom of Israel, with its ten tribes, was conquered by Assyria in 722 BCE, and its population was deported and assimilated across Assyrian territories, as confirmed by Assyrian records and biblical accounts (2 Kings 17:6, 24). This isn’t speculation; it’s a widely accepted historical reality backed by archaeology and ancient texts like the Annals of Sargon II. The Jewish people of Jesus’ time, referred to as "Israel" in the New Testament, were primarily descendants of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi—the tribes of the Southern Kingdom of Judah.

So, my question stands: Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago? If so, what evidence supports that claim, given the historical record of their assimilation?

I thought I had made myself clear on that. Here as well as in past posts of yours. Geopolitical concerns are not the business of the church. I believe the Hebrew roots movement is a dangerous deception.

I hear you saying that geopolitical concerns, including Zionism, aren’t the church’s business and that the Hebrew Roots movement is a deception. I agree that there’s a problem—Zionist ideas can infiltrate Christian spaces, sowing confusion by blending biblical promises with modern political agendas. You’ve acknowledged this issue, which is a start, but you haven’t addressed my core question: how should Christians respond to this infiltration? Instead, you talk about seeking balance, yet you echo Zionist talking points, like implying Paul’s words about “Israel” (Romans 11:29) somehow apply to the modern state of Israel and its citizens. That’s the disconnect

It’s like a patient telling a doctor, “I have an infection,” and the doctor saying, “Yes, I agree, it’s bad.” When the patient asks, “What do I do about it?” the doctor just repeats, “I already said you have an infection—what more do you want?” Recognizing the problem isn’t enough; we need a way to address it. So, my question remains: How should Christians counter the spread of Zionist propaganda in churches, especially when it misuses scripture to conflate biblical Israel with a modern political entity? What’s your practical response to this challenge?

Well, maybe you would like to explain or expound how you read what Paul wrote about the Jews being enemies for the gospel's sake, yet being loved for the sake of the patriarchs?

I've already stated my understanding that criminal and military justice is not the church's mandate, mercy is. Sounds like we agree on that. I'm not sure what you feel I'm missing from your posts on the subject.

I’ve already stated clearly that Paul’s words in Romans 11:28—about the Jews being “enemies for the sake of the gospel, yet loved for the sake of the patriarchs”—refer to the Jewish people of his time, primarily from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi, not the modern state of Israel or its citizens.

 

[HealthyShape]

The reference to the 144,000 from the twelve tribes in Revelation 7:4–8 is allegorical, not a literal census of 1st-century Jewish tribes. The Book of Revelation is steeped in symbolic imagery.

By the 1st century, the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom were long assimilated after the Assyrian conquest (722 BCE), leaving only Judah, Benjamin, and some Levites.

Expand on your question. What are you trying to say? Are you suggesting that the passage in Revelation 7:4–8 is a literal, factual census of Judea’s population in the 1st century? Or something else?

You quoted Revelation 7:4–8 and asked how I understand it. To me, the Book of Revelation is the most ambiguous in terms of interpretation. It’s filled with so many images and symbols that it can be understood in various ways. Even the early church fathers had different interpretations of Revelation. Moreover, it needs to be understood in context. In this context, I understand that the passage in Revelation 7:4–8 is not a literal historical census of Judea’s population in the 1st century.

It talks (in the 1st century) about tribes that were long gone, in your view. No matter if the 144,000 is literal or not, the tribes are still worked with, at least conceptually.

I asked how you understand it and I think your answer is that you do not understand it. That is fine, I do not expect you to have all answers.

 

[Chrysostomos]

It talks (in the 1st century) about tribes that were long gone, in your view. No matter if the 144,000 is literal or not, the tribes are still worked with, at least conceptually.

I asked how you understand it and I think your answer is that you do not understand it. That is fine, I do not expect you to have all answers.

Don’t put words in my mouth. I never said I don’t understand the quote you cited. I clearly stated that I see Revelation 7:4–8 as irrelevant to this topic.

You’re the one speaking in riddles.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Spotted.
@amigo de christo

He's got spots?

You’re the one speaking in riddles.

Kinda like the Joker on the Batman TV show?

 

[Chrysostomos]

Kinda like the Joker on the Batman TV show?

I don’t watch TV shows.