Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?

[Chrysostomos]

Your question: "

Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?​

My answer : Yes

• Many genetic studies find that Jewish populations (Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Mizrahi) cluster genetically with one another, and share measurable ancestry with populations from the Middle East (Levant) rather than being entirely European or from unrelated origins. For example:
  • A study of 678 autosomal microsatellite markers found Jewish groups clustering together and lying intermediate between Middle Eastern and European non-Jewish populations. PMC+2PubMed+2
  • Research on Y-chromosome lineages in Ashkenazi Jews found a “Levantine” signature for a group of Levites (traditional priestly lineages) suggesting descent from a common male ancestor in the Fertile Crescent ~1,500-2,500 years ago. Stanford Medicine+2Digital Commons WSU+2
  • Genetic work has found for Ashkenazi Jews a substantial Middle Eastern component, even though there is also admixture with European populations. systemsbiology.columbia.edu+1
• These findings lend support to the idea that at least part of the ancestry of Jewish populations (and by extension, the modern Israeli Jewish population) is derived from peoples of the ancient Levant. This is consistent with having roots among ancient Israelite / Judean populations.

I agree that without ancient DNA from known members of the “lost tribes,” or from the northern Israelite kingdoms at the time of the exile, it’s impossible to definitively state continuity from those specific groups. Genetic continuity may exist broadly but not necessarily lineages tied to those exact tribes.

Your continued evasion is remarkable. You proudly present genetic data that, in fact, proves my point while completely ignoring the demographic reality that dismantles your entire argument.

You keep shouting "DNA!" to answer a question about direct descent from specific lost tribes. But your own sources admit the fatal flaw: "without ancient DNA from known members of the 'lost tribes,'... it’s impossible to definitively state continuity from those specific groups."

Thank you for admitting that. Your entire genetic argument is, by your own admission, speculative.

Now, let's move from what you can't prove to what we can observe in the real world. You are committing the ecological fallacy on a grand scale. You see a "Levantine component" in the average Ashkenazi genome and assume it applies to every individual. This is a statistical error that renders your conclusion meaningless when applied to the 2 million repatriates from the former USSR.

Here is the undeniable fact you keep running from:

A significant portion of these 2 million people are, by your own cherished genetic standard, not direct descendants. How do we know? Because many carry the Slavic R1a Y-chromosome, which is largely absent in the Levant. Furthermore, a vast number are not even considered Jewish by rabbinical law (Halakha); they are spouses, children, and grandchildren who gained citizenship under the Law of Return. Their connection is legal and familial, not genetic.

Your genetic studies are useless here. You are using a population-level finding to make a claim about individuals to which it does not apply. This is like saying "the average person in this room has one ovary and one testicle," therefore every individual in the room is intersex. It's a complete logical failure.

 

[Chrysostomos]

However, we also have a continuation of creed and culture that gives strong evidence that they are actual descendants. This creed and culture was kept in spite of the persecution involved. There was no vested interest in lying about it.

Once again, your question:

Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?​

Yes, based on genetic possibility coupled with creed and culture adherence despite persecution. What proof do you have they are not?

Regarding culture and religion, this opens up a very broad path for discussion.

First, even during the existence of the Old Testament Northern Kingdom of Israel, there were major problems with its culture and faith. I wrote about this back in the second post of this topic:

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.

Even more can be said about the culture of the Jews after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
In the Babylonian Talmud—"the" central text of Rabbinic Judaism, studied and revered in Orthodox yeshivas to this day—there are explicit passages about a figure widely identified by scholars (both Jewish and Christian) as Jesus of Nazareth:

- Gittin 57a: A sorcerer named Yeshu (Jesus) is summoned from the afterlife by Onkelos. When asked about his punishment, Yeshu replies that he is being punished "with boiling hot excrement" for mocking the words of the Sages. The text contrasts this with the lesser punishments of gentile idol-worshippers, implying Jewish sinners like Yeshu suffer more severely.

- Shabbat 104b: Jesus is called "ben Stada" (son of Stada), but the rabbis clarify: his mother was Miriam the hairdresser (a play on *megaddela*, which also means "braider of hair" but is used here as a euphemism for infidelity). They explain: "The husband was Stada, the paramour was Pandera." Pandera is understood as a Roman soldier—thus Jesus is the product of adultery.

- Sanhedrin 106a: A proverb is quoted: "She who was descended from princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." This is a direct insult to Mary—claiming a woman of Davidic lineage (a "princess") committed adultery with a common laborer (Joseph the carpenter).

These are not obscure footnotes. They appear in the standard Vilna edition of the Talmud, taught in religious schools, and defended by some Orthodox scholars as legitimate counter-narrative to Christian claims.

The Talmudic passages I quoted aren't dusty relics; they're printed in every standard edition (Vilna, ArtScroll, Steinsaltz) and studied in Orthodox yeshivas worldwide. When a 21st-century rabbi teaches Gittin 57a and tells students that Yeshu (Jesus) is boiling in excrement for mocking the Sages, that's not "ancient history"—that's active transmission of contempt.

So, what "culture and faith" are you even talking about? A culture of fighting against God and Satanism? And this is while, according to polls, about 50% of Israelis identify as atheists.

So, what are you even referring to when you speak of religion and culture in the context of a connection to the lost 10 tribes of Israel?

 

[Chrysostomos]

Once again, your question:

Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?​

Yes, based on genetic possibility coupled with creed and culture adherence despite persecution. What proof do you have they are not?

Regarding culture, you reminded me of a story my acquaintances, repatriates from Ukraine, told me about. After they moved to Israel, it was time to celebrate the New Year. In the Soviet Union Christmas wasn't celebrated. The main holiday in the USSR was New Year.

In Soviet culture, it was customary to “decorate the Christmas tree” (fir tree or pine tree) for New Year. In the West, however, the tradition of decorating a tree is primarily associated with Christmas.

Now, imagine this: in a very short period, over a million people from this Soviet background repatriated to Israel. And all those 1 million people started decorating Christmas trees for New Year. The local Israelis were shocked. They thought a wave of Christians had flooded into Israel. For them, it seemed like a catastrophe.

To calm the local population, the authorities even had to publish an article in the newspaper explaining that, yes, a massive wave of repatriates from the former Soviet states had arrived, and they have a tradition of decorating a tree for New Year, but this has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity.

So, when you talk about those 2 million repatriates from the USSR, what culture and religion are you even referring to? You have no idea what the USSR was like or how its society was structured. Talking about culture and religion in the context of 2 million Soviet repatriates is frankly absurd.

 

[HealthyShape]

However, we also have a continuation of creed and culture that gives strong evidence that they are actual descendants. This creed and culture was kept in spite of the persecution involved. There was no vested interest in lying about it.

What about proselytism? There were many Gentiles recorded who accepted the Jewish faith even in the New Testament, that is how old the Jewish proselytism is.

 

[shepherdsword]

Regarding culture and religion, this opens up a very broad path for discussion.

First, even during the existence of the Old Testament Northern Kingdom of Israel, there were major problems with its culture and faith. I wrote about this back in the second post of this topic:

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.

Even more can be said about the culture of the Jews after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
In the Babylonian Talmud—"the" central text of Rabbinic Judaism, studied and revered in Orthodox yeshivas to this day—there are explicit passages about a figure widely identified by scholars (both Jewish and Christian) as Jesus of Nazareth:

- Gittin 57a: A sorcerer named Yeshu (Jesus) is summoned from the afterlife by Onkelos. When asked about his punishment, Yeshu replies that he is being punished "with boiling hot excrement" for mocking the words of the Sages. The text contrasts this with the lesser punishments of gentile idol-worshippers, implying Jewish sinners like Yeshu suffer more severely.

- Shabbat 104b: Jesus is called "ben Stada" (son of Stada), but the rabbis clarify: his mother was Miriam the hairdresser (a play on *megaddela*, which also means "braider of hair" but is used here as a euphemism for infidelity). They explain: "The husband was Stada, the paramour was Pandera." Pandera is understood as a Roman soldier—thus Jesus is the product of adultery.

- Sanhedrin 106a: A proverb is quoted: "She who was descended from princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." This is a direct insult to Mary—claiming a woman of Davidic lineage (a "princess") committed adultery with a common laborer (Joseph the carpenter).

These are not obscure footnotes. They appear in the standard Vilna edition of the Talmud, taught in religious schools, and defended by some Orthodox scholars as legitimate counter-narrative to Christian claims.

The Talmudic passages I quoted aren't dusty relics; they're printed in every standard edition (Vilna, ArtScroll, Steinsaltz) and studied in Orthodox yeshivas worldwide. When a 21st-century rabbi teaches Gittin 57a and tells students that Yeshu (Jesus) is boiling in excrement for mocking the Sages, that's not "ancient history"—that's active transmission of contempt.

So, what "culture and faith" are you even talking about? A culture of fighting against God and Satanism? And this is while, according to polls, about 50% of Israelis identify as atheists.

So, what are you even referring to when you speak of religion and culture in the context of a connection to the lost 10 tribes of Israel?

There are no "lost tribes" as has been previously proven. There were remnants from ALL tribes in Jerusalem before Rome destroyed it. It is this dispersion we see as having kept the creed and culture that makes Jews such a distinct people. This distinction is something you willfully ignore. My position is that if these were not real descendants then why claim to be when there are anti-semitic murderers that hate and desire to kill them. 6 million of them kept their cultural heritage even on pain of death. That is not something a pretender would do. As for the genetic aspect? While it can't be proven conclusively there is enough of a possibility to state it's real when coupled with the adherence to Jewish heritage. This is enough for me. If it's not enough for you then...

 

[shepherdsword]

What about proselytism? There were many Gentiles recorded who accepted the Jewish faith even in the New Testament, that is how old the Jewish proselytism is.

There was also a mixed multitude that came from Egypt with the descendants of Jacob.

Ex 12:37-38 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

None to mention Jacob was descended from the Amorites and Hittites according to the scripture.

Eze 16:45
Thou art thy mother's daughter, that lotheth her husband and her children; and thou art the sister of thy sisters, which lothed their husbands and their children: your mother was an Hittite, and your father an Amorite

 

[shepherdsword]

Regarding culture, you reminded me of a story my acquaintances, repatriates from Ukraine, told me about. After they moved to Israel, it was time to celebrate the New Year. In the Soviet Union Christmas wasn't celebrated. The main holiday in the USSR was New Year.

In Soviet culture, it was customary to “decorate the Christmas tree” (fir tree or pine tree) for New Year. In the West, however, the tradition of decorating a tree is primarily associated with Christmas.

Now, imagine this: in a very short period, over a million people from this Soviet background repatriated to Israel. And all those 1 million people started decorating Christmas trees for New Year. The local Israelis were shocked. They thought a wave of Christians had flooded into Israel. For them, it seemed like a catastrophe.

To calm the local population, the authorities even had to publish an article in the newspaper explaining that, yes, a massive wave of repatriates from the former Soviet states had arrived, and they have a tradition of decorating a tree for New Year, but this has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity.

So, when you talk about those 2 million repatriates from the USSR, what culture and religion are you even referring to? You have no idea what the USSR was like or how its society was structured. Talking about culture and religion in the context of 2 million Soviet repatriates is frankly absurd.

Would they have kept the tradition if it was a death sentence to do so? I think not.

 

[HealthyShape]

There was also a mixed multitude that came from Egypt with the descendants of Jacob.

Ex 12:37-38 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

None to mention Jacob was descended from the Amorites and Hittites according to the scripture.

Eze 16:45
Thou art thy mother's daughter, that lotheth her husband and her children; and thou art the sister of thy sisters, which lothed their husbands and their children: your mother was an Hittite, and your father an Amorite

So, if we have "Jews" who are not the original Jews for literally thousands of years and today's nations in Mesopotamia seem so mixed that it is impossible to define who is from what historical ethnic group, ... how does your argument about the creed/culture work?

 

[shepherdsword]

So, if we have "Jews" who are not the original Jews for literally thousands of years and today's nations in Mesopotamia seem so mixed that it is impossible to define who is from what historical ethnic group, ... how does your argument about the creed/culture work?

Read the posts...If Jews held to their creed on even the pain of death then it's a strong indicator that they are real descendants. Why would 6 million die by Hitler's hand if they were not real?

 

[Chrysostomos]

Would they have kept the tradition if it was a death sentence to do so? I think not.

I already tackled this in post #32. Your logic boils down to:
“People hate Jews → therefore Jews exist → therefore they’re the real ancient Israelites.”
Did I get that right?
I’m not denying there’s a group calling themselves “Jews” today. It’s obvious—just look at Israel. I even told you about my friends who “discovered” they were Jewish after the USSR collapsed—total news to them.
I’m also not saying no one hates those who call themselves “Jews.”
But how does that prove modern Israelis are descendants of the lost 10 northern tribes from the Kingdom of Israel?

On top of that, Hitler didn’t persecute Jews because he thought they were direct descendants of the lost tribes.
In Mein Kampf, he laid it out clear as day. He pointed to Russia as his nightmare for Germany, claiming Jews were the masterminds behind the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, using communism to wreck traditional societies, religion, and especially Christianity. He called the Bolsheviks—whom he tied to Jews—responsible for killing millions, including Christians, aristocrats, and peasants, in what he labeled a “genocide” against “normal” society.
Here’s a direct quote:

“The Jew has always been a people without roots, a parasite in the body of other nations. In Russia, we see the final result of his rule: the destruction of the Christian order, the murder of millions, and terror led by the Bolsheviks, who are nothing but tools of Jewish world domination.” (Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Ch. 11)

You paint this picture of some group, supposedly in cahoots, calling themselves “Jews,” always and everywhere persecuted.
But history tells the opposite story.
Take the USSR: under so-called “Jewish management,” it saw the largest genocide of Christians in history, with peoples oppressed by those you call Jews.
Now look at Gaza—open genocide, according to the UN, streaming live.
Where are the persecuted Jews today?
My friends in the US straight-up told me they’re scared to even like my LiveJournal posts where I say the same stuff as here—well-known historical facts, official stats, and personal observations.
Think about that. People are afraid to read what I write. Why? Because they’re scared of Jews.
And you’re still talking about “persecuted Jews”?

 

[Chrysostomos]

There are no "lost tribes" as has been previously proven. There were remnants from ALL tribes in Jerusalem before Rome destroyed it. It is this dispersion we see as having kept the creed and culture that makes Jews such a distinct people. This distinction is something you willfully ignore. My position is that if these were not real descendants then why claim to be when there are anti-semitic murderers that hate and desire to kill them. 6 million of them kept their cultural heritage even on pain of death. That is not something a pretender would do. As for the genetic aspect? While it can't be proven conclusively there is enough of a possibility to state it's real when coupled with the adherence to Jewish heritage. This is enough for me. If it's not enough for you then...

First off, you’ve proven nothing. In fact, you’ve proven my point.
Second, on religion and culture—you dodged every single question I asked. You’re ignoring what I wrote above about it.
Third, since you brought up Hitler, you’re clearly twisting things. You paint this picture of “poor oppressed Jews” versus “evil Nazis.”
That’s not how it went.
There were Jews effectively controlling the USSR, orchestrating the largest genocide of Christians in human history.
And in reaction to that, Europe got Hitler.
He saw the Jews backing the Bolsheviks as a threat.
That was the political reality of the time.

 

[Brakelite]

Do you really believe modern Israelis are direct descendants of those "lost" northern tribes scattered by Assyria 2,700 years ago?

Nope

 

[HealthyShape]

Read the posts...If Jews held to their creed on even the pain of death then it's a strong indicator that they are real descendants. Why would 6 million die by Hitler's hand if they were not real?

I do not find your reasoning convincing. Again, being a Jew religiously does not mean they are Jews genetically. Proselyting was common in the Hellenistic era and you even added that the nation of Israel was ethnically mixed long before that.

 

[shepherdsword]

I already tackled this in post #32. Your logic boils down to:
“People hate Jews → therefore Jews exist → therefore they’re the real ancient Israelites.”

1)Jews have a rich creed and culture
2)They adhere to this creed even on pain of death
3)This creed can be traced back to the destruction of Jerusalem through Rabbinic writings:

The Mishnah and Talmud codified and expanded Jewish law and ethics.
We have historic evidence for diaspora communities flourished across the Roman Empire, Persia, and Europe
Jewish culture became diverse-Sephardi, Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, etc. - but retained continuity through shared texts, rituals, and memory of Jerusalem.



Now, show me proof they are not the real ancient Israelites.

 

[Chrysostomos]

1)Jews have a rich creed and culture
2)They adhere to this creed even on pain of death
3)This creed can be traced back to the destruction of Jerusalem through Rabbinic writings:

The Mishnah and Talmud codified and expanded Jewish law and ethics.
We have historic evidence for diaspora communities flourished across the Roman Empire, Persia, and Europe
Jewish culture became diverse-Sephardi, Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, etc. - but retained continuity through shared texts, rituals, and memory of Jerusalem.



Now, show me proof they are not the real ancient Israelites.

Let me state this again: I am not denying that

1) There is a certain group of people who call themselves Jews,

2) Who adhere to a religion in which they believe that "Jesus is a false prophet, a sorcerer, and a bastard. His mother is a whore. He is eternally damned in the most degrading way imaginable."

This is what we can observe today.

The question is how does this prove:

1) That the culture and religion of the group that now calls itself "Jews" is a continuation of the faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? After all, even during the time of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, the prophets were already questioning its faithfulness.

2) How does adherence to a religion that teaches that "Jesus is a false prophet, a sorcerer, and a bastard; that his mother is a whore; and that he is eternally damned in the most degrading way imaginable" prove that they are the genetic descendants of those very lost 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel?

 

[shepherdsword]

Let me state this again: I am not denying that

1) There is a certain group of people who call themselves Jews,

2) Who adhere to a religion in which they believe that "Jesus is a false prophet, a sorcerer, and a bastard. His mother is a whore. He is eternally damned in the most degrading way imaginable."

Ro 11:28-29 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.

They will suffer unimaginably for their rejection of Christ. Here is the progression what I see:

1)Israel will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews ( Joel 2:32

2)Half of Jerusalem will be destroyed.(Zech 14:2)

3)Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement. (Zech 13:8)

4)The remaining one third will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" and repent to have faith in Jesus Christ(Matt 23:39)

5)And so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

6) Jew and Gentile will be united into an everlasting Messianic Kingdom(Eph 2:15-22)

 

[Chrysostomos]

Ro 11:28-29 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.

They will suffer unimaginably for their rejection of Christ. Here is the progression what I see:

1)Israel will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews ( Joel 2:32

2)Half of Jerusalem will be destroyed.(Zech 14:2)

3)Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement. (Zech 13:8)

4)The remaining one third will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" and repent to have faith in Jesus Christ(Matt 23:39)

5)And so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

6) Jew and Gentile will be united into an everlasting Messianic Kingdom(Eph 2:15-22)

First, on what basis do you assume the words of the Apostle Paul apply to modern Israelis? Paul was speaking about the Jews who lived in the 1st century AD.

Second, if I understand you correctly, you are employing the ideas of John Nelson Darby concerning a sharp division between Israel (the Jews) and the Church (whom he labeled as Gentiles).

In the 19th century, John Nelson Darby revived the condemned idea of chiliasm, wove it into his system of dispensationalism, and added his own inventions—the Rapture and a radical schism between Israel (the Jews) and the Church (the Gentiles). None of this is found in Scripture.

This leads to a critical question: Why do you label those Gentiles who converted to Judaism, or who remained atheists but now call themselves Jews, as "Jews"...
...while you continue to call Christians, who believe in Jesus as the Messiah and Savior, "Gentiles"?

There are entire nations that embraced Christianity in the first centuries and have been Christian for nearly 2,000 years.
Yet, John Nelson Darby's framework still categorizes them as "pagan" nations.
At the same time, if someone converts to Judaism, or someone in Ukraine buys a certificate "proving" Jewish roots and obtains an Israeli passport, you call him a Jew, not a Gentile.

Where is the logic in this? Why does this double standard exist?

 

[shepherdsword]

First, on what basis do you assume the words of the Apostle Paul apply to modern Israelis? Paul was speaking about the Jews who lived in the 1st century AD.

Yeah, right and Jesus was speaking to first century jews in the gospels and Paul was speaking to first century gentiles and Peter was speaking to first century jews so none of this is applicable to us. Actually Paul was dealing with an attitude. An arrogant prideful attitude displayed by those who were wise in their own conceit:

Ro 11:25-26 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:

As wise as they thought they were they failed to understand that Israel was merely shelved and not cast away. And Israel's current blindness was only for a set time...until the fullness of the gentiles.

Second, if I understand you correctly, you are employing the ideas of John Nelson Darby concerning a sharp division between Israel (the Jews) and the Church (whom he labeled as Gentiles).

In the 19th century, John Nelson Darby revived the condemned idea of chiliasm, wove it into his system of dispensationalism, and added his own inventions—the Rapture and a radical schism between Israel (the Jews) and the Church (the Gentiles). None of this is found in Scripture.

I do not adhere to the dispensationalism of Darby. I lean more towards historic premillennialism

This leads to a critical question: Why do you label those Gentiles who converted to Judaism, or who remained atheists but now call themselves Jews, as "Jews"...
...while you continue to call Christians, who believe in Jesus as the Messiah and Savior, "Gentiles"?

Please prove they are only converts. I keep asking you to provide some proof that modern jews aren't descended from ancient Israel but you keep sidestepping.

There are entire nations that embraced Christianity in the first centuries and have been Christian for nearly 2,000 years.
Yet, John Nelson Darby's framework still categorizes them as "pagan" nations.
At the same time, if someone converts to Judaism, or someone in Ukraine buys a certificate "proving" Jewish roots and obtains an Israeli passport, you call him a Jew, not a Gentile.

Where is the logic in this? Why does this double standard exist?

I am beginning to see why you are foaming at the mouth in rabid criticism of modern Jews. You are an adherent to classic amillennialism. You seem to understand that if Israel has really come back into existence it makes your eschatological model obsolete. After all, it was only fabricated to force fulfillment of the promises to Israel onto the church. Your ilk puts the church in that place since it seemed impossible they could be fulfilled to a non-existent nation. Well, Israel HAS returned to the land in fulfillment of this prophecy...one that is impossible to be fulfilled in the church. Therefore, you can discard that outdated and obsolete eschatological model held by the RCC and receive truth.

Am 9:14-15 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God.

 

[HealthyShape]

Yeah, right and Jesus was speaking to first century jews in the gospels and Paul was speaking to first century gentiles and Peter was speaking to first century jews so none of this is applicable to us. Actually Paul was dealing with an attitude. An arrogant prideful attitude displayed by those who were wise in their own conceit:

Ro 11:25-26 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:

As wise as they thought they were they failed to understand that Israel was merely shelved and not cast away. And Israel's current blindness was only for a set time...until the fullness of the gentiles.

I think you are misreading the text in Romans. I guess you read it :
"Part of the Israel is blind until the fullness of the Gentiles come in. And after that everybody in Israel will be saved."

However, the text says "so", or "in this way" all Israel will be saved. In what way? In the way of the Gentiles coming in - the true Israel is composed of believing Jews and of believing Gentiles, this is the theology of Paul which we find throughout his letters.

 

[shepherdsword]

I think you are misreading the text in Romans. I guess you read it :
"Part of the Israel is blind until the fullness of the Gentiles come in. And after that everybody in Israel will be saved."

However, the text says "so", or "in this way" all Israel will be saved. In what way? In the way of the Gentiles coming in - the true Israel is composed of believing Jews and of believing Gentiles, this is the theology of Paul which we find throughout his letters.

You are wresting the text into your own paradigm. Let's look at the text. In no way can it be discombobulated into the caricature of interpretation that you present. it doesn't mean "after that"...LOL

ἄχρις οὗ (achris hou) is a Greek phrase that means “until” or “up to the time when.”
It’s composed of:

• ἄχρι(ς) — “until,” “as far as,” or “up to.”
• οὗ — a relative pronoun in the genitive case, meaning “of which” or “when” (in this idiomatic expression, it gives the sense of “until the time when”).

So, ἄχρις οὗ = “until” (a point in time).

Examples:

• Μείνε ἐνθάδε ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθω. → “Stay here until I come.”
• In the New Testament: ἄχρις οὗ πληρωθῶσιν καιροί ἐθνῶν → “until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” (Luke 21:24)