Gentiles

[handy]

The term "goy" or "goyim" (Gentiles, nations)does not have any reference or relationship to either Adam or Noah. The term is used for those who are not genetically Israeli.

I agree. One reason to believe this is the way that Paul uses the term in his letters. For Paul, the term denoted precisely what you say - those who were not "genetically Israeli".

You do know that the acrostic for Israel is Isiac,,,Sarah,,,,Rebekah,,,,,Abraham,,,,,and Leah,,,,funny how none of these people were gentile either they all were Adamic....

hmmm, wonder what the Y stands for. In Hebrew, Israel starts with Y. Not that that has any thing to do with anything. Gee, and the e is lacking a person. Not that this has anything to do with the discussion at hand anyway.

Whirlwind, agree with whom you like. This is apologetics and theology. I suppose that anyone can apologize for whatever theology they like. Myself, I like to stick with the Scriptures.

Listen, this thread isn't really about gentiles. I don't care what we come up with to support the origination of the gentiles, it will be disagreed with because the fundamental issue in this discussion is the false teaching that Adam wasn't the only man that God created in Genesis 1. All goes back to that false teaching.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Nightmare, you asked, "Where did the gentiles come from?" As inhopeofglory already pointed out, the text shows quite clearly that the gentile nations originated from the sons of Japheth. Gentiles are descended from Noah and from Adam. If you really are interested in the truth of the matter, we can do a full study on the word "gowy" which is the word for gentile and for nation.

If your mind is made up and no fact is going to confuse you and you are just going to laugh at those who disagree with your false premise that the gentiles are not descended from Adam and Noah, then there is no need to go further with the conversation.

I really do have to go now. I'll check back later to see if this is going to be a true discussion of seeking after Biblical truth and actually studying what the scriptures has to say in the matter, or ...not.

PS, good posts Drew and mondar.

I laughed because I pictured you slamming a cup of coffee and stomping your foot when you said....

All people come form Adam,,period.

I think we already know what the word "goy" means,,,,(Strong's No. 1471) and basically means foreigners, foreign nations, heathens, or people.....I agree that "isle" means coastlines,,,,and to be a mite more specific,,,lol (i like that phrase) they probably come from the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea......

A heathen people to whom????To the 8 adamic souls that got off the ark......

I think your set in your ways though,,,,because you probably have not stuied Genesis 1 in the light of the truth so theres going to be problems later on in the book and this is a prime example.....

SO tell me how much time went by form this verses::


Gen. 8:14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.
Gen. 8:15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
Gen. 8:16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ wives with thee.
Gen. 8:17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.
Gen. 8:18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives with him:

until this::

Gen. 10:5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.

I will get more precise later but its under 300 years.....Sorry your idea (tradition) doesnt fit....

 

[NIGHTMARE]

You do know that the acrostic for Israel is Isiac,,,Sarah,,,,Rebekah,,,,,Abraham,,,,,and Leah,,,,funny how none of these people were gentile either they all were Adamic....[/quote]


hmmm, wonder what the Y stands for. In Hebrew, Israel starts with Y. Not that that has any thing to do with anything. Gee, and the e is lacking a person. Not that this has anything to do with the discussion at hand anyway.

Whirlwind, agree with whom you like. This is apologetics and theology. I suppose that anyone can apologize for whatever theology they like. Myself, I like to stick with the Scriptures.

Listen, this thread isn't really about gentiles. I don't care what we come up with to support the origination of the gentiles, it will be disagreed with because the fundamental issue in this discussion is the false teaching that Adam wasn't the only man that God created in Genesis 1. All goes back to that false teaching.[/quote]

Because the word confirms itself,,,just becase you call it false doesnt make it so,,,you said that gentiles come from Japheth which is completly wrong........

Ok who was the first Gentile??????And if you say Japheth im going to :rolling because How can Japheth be a Gentile (foriegner) when His father and mother were adamic......

 

[NIGHTMARE]

You do know that the acrostic for Israel is Isiac,,,Sarah,,,,Rebekah,,,,,Abraham,,,,,and Leah,,,,funny how none of these people were gentile either they all were Adamic....

I am not sure what your point is here. It seems clear to me what Paul meant by the term "Gentile" - he meant everyone who is not an ethnic Jew:

14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do (A)instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, ..

Who has the "Law" (clearly an allusion to the Law of Moses)? Answer: the Jews. How does Paul characterize the Gentiles? Answer: those who are not under the Law of Moses, obviously everyone who is not an "ethnic" Jew.

For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith (AX)is one.

Clearly Paul has carved up all humanity into two camps - the Jew who are circumcised and under the Law and the Gentiles who are neither. Clearly, Paul is using the term "Gentile" to refer to those who are not ethnically Jewish.

Ok do you know who/what a Jew is??????

And if we all come from one man then we would have no different ethic groups......

but I think you might be a little confused on what a Jew is......

 

[Drew]

Ok do you know who/what a Jew is??????

I am fairly confident what Paul means when he uses the term "Jew". He means any genetic descendent of the 12 sons of Jacob, possibly as supplemented by people who "convert" to Judaism - who choose to be integrated into the world of Torah observance. Another way of expressing this: Paul sees the world as split into 2 camps - those who are under the Torah and those who are not. The Torah was a "national charter" for a specific people and it demarcated those people from the rest of the world.

Paul refers to those outside of the embrace of Torah as Gentiles. I am not commenting on anything beyond how Paul uses the term. But how Paul uses it is clear - the Gentile is anyone who is not a member of the highly integrated and distinct people who followed the dictates of the Torah. Essentially these people are the descendents of the 12 sons of Jacob (plus a few proselytes)

 

[Joe67]

Abram was called while in uncircumcision.

Is uncircumcision Jewish or Gentile in the natural state?

To be accepted as Jewish in the flesh, circumcision is required.

So, when Abram was called, was he Jewish or Gentile?

Joe

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Ok do you know who/what a Jew is??????

I am fairly confident what Paul means when he uses the term "Jew". He means any genetic descendent of the 12 sons of Jacob, possibly as supplemented by people who "convert" to Judaism - who choose to be integrated into the world of Torah observance. Another way of expressing this: Paul sees the world as split into 2 camps - those who are under the Torah and those who are not. The Torah was a "national charter" for a specific people and it demarcated those people from the rest of the world.

Paul refers to those outside of the embrace of Torah as Gentiles. I am not commenting on anything beyond how Paul uses the term. But how Paul uses it is clear - the Gentile is anyone who is not a member of the highly integrated and distinct people who followed the dictates of the Torah. Essentially these people are the descendents of the 12 sons of Jacob (plus a few proselytes)

IL keep this short......

You may be confident but your wrong,,,,,,the 12 tribes were split,,,,10 tribes were captured by babylon and later spread acroos the north,,,towards the americas,,,,,the other 2 tribes along with some of the tribe of the levites were captured by the Assyrians and returned.....

Benjamin Judah and some of Levite...these are the Jews......all 12 tribes are NOT jews.............

Maybe I will start a thread on it because it seems dang near everyone thinks 12 tribes=Jews

 

[Drew]

IL keep this short......

You may be confident but your wrong,,,,,,the 12 tribes were split,,,,10 tribes were captured by babylon and later spread acroos the north,,,towards the americas,,,,,the othe 2 tribes along with some of the tribe of the levites were captured by the Assyrians and returned.....

Benjamin Judah and some of Levite...these are the Jews......all 12 tribes are NOT jews.............

Maybe I will start a thread on it because it seems dang near everyone thing 12 tribes=Jews

Well, I suggest that both Paul and Jesus disagree with you.

As has already been shown by a couple of texts from Romans, Paul sees the Jew as those "under the Torah". And all 12 tribes were present at Sinai when the Torah was given. I could marshal a wide range of further arguments to the effect that Paul uses the term "Jew" to refer to those under the Torah. And the Torah was given to all 12 tribes, regardless of what happened to them later.

And now Jesus. One of Jesus' prime actions was to re-constitute Israel - to "re-define" the true people of God. One powerful symbolic way He did this was his choice of 12 disciples - a number clearly chosen to match the 12 tribes. So we can clearly infer that Jesus understood the nation of Israel - the "Israel" that he was re-constituting - consisted of the 12 tribes.

And we have this statement from Jesus:

And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when (A)the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, (B)you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

There is a lot of complexity here – I do not think that Jesus is actually talking about the literal 12 tribes – I think He is talking about Israel as “re-constitutedâ€Â. But that is besides the point. Clearly Jesus is working from a model where the Jews – the people of Israel are seen as members of 12 tribes.

 

[Drew]

Romans 2 makes it clear that Paul uses the term "Jew" to denote those people who are given the Law of Moses. And that is not just 2 tribes, it is all 12 - all 12 tribes were present at Sinai and given the Law:

But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God,....

Or what about this from Romans 3:

Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Paul is clearly refer to the covenant responsibility of the Jews to be a light to the world - the "oracles of God" are entusted to them for the benefit of the world. When did that occur? Before or after the spliting of the 2 kingdoms? Answer: Before.

Paul uses the term "Jew" to refer to that nation of people who were given a covenant job to be a light to the nations.

And that responsibility was given to all 12 tribes, largely through the giving of Torah at Sinai.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

IL keep this short......

You may be confident but your wrong,,,,,,the 12 tribes were split,,,,10 tribes were captured by babylon and later spread acroos the north,,,towards the americas,,,,,the othe 2 tribes along with some of the tribe of the levites were captured by the Assyrians and returned.....

Benjamin Judah and some of Levite...these are the Jews......all 12 tribes are NOT jews.............

Maybe I will start a thread on it because it seems dang near everyone thing 12 tribes=Jews

Well, I suggest that both Paul and Jesus disagree with you.

As has already been shown by a couple of texts from Romans, Paul sees the Jew as those "under the Torah". And all 12 tribes were present at Sinai when the Torah was given. I could marshal a wide range of further arguments to the effect that Paul uses the term "Jew" to refer to those under the Torah. And the Torah was given to all 12 tribes, regardless of what happened to them later.

And now Jesus. One of Jesus' prime actions was to re-constitute Israel - to "re-define" the true people of God. One powerful symbolic way He did this was his choice of 12 disciples - a number clearly chosen to match the 12 tribes. So we can clearly infer that Jesus understood the nation of Israel - the "Israel" that he was re-constituting - consisted of the 12 tribes.

And we have this statement from Jesus:

And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when (A)the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, (B)you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

There is a lot of complexity here – I do not think that Jesus is actually talking about the literal 12 tribes – I think He is talking about Israel as “re-constitutedâ€Â. But that is besides the point. Clearly Jesus is working from a model where the Jews – the people of Israel are seen as members of 12 tribes.

Why dont you just go back and read the old testament.....No Paul doesnt disagree with me nor does Christ......Christ said:::Matthew 15:24
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

DO you know who these lost sheep are?????They are people of the 10 tribes I told you about,,,,,but if what you say is correct then Christ would have never said this Because your saying all the tribes are Jews and none of them are lost.......

Please dont use Paul to cover for not reading the old testament,,,,jus go back and read:::

I Kings 16:21 "Then were the People of Israel divided into two parts: half of the People followed Tibni the son of Ginath, to make him king; and half followed Omri."

You need to really go back and study.........

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Abram was called while in uncircumcision.

Is uncircumcision Jewish or Gentile in the natural state?

To be accepted as Jewish in the flesh, circumcision is required.

So, when Abram was called, was he Jewish or Gentile?

Joe

Hello Joe who are you asking????

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Romans 2 makes it clear that Paul uses the term "Jew" to denote those people who are given the Law of Moses. And that is not just 2 tribes, it is all 12 - all 12 tribes were present at Sinai and given the Law:

But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God,....

Or what about this from Romans 3:

Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Paul is clearly refer to the covenant responsibility of the Jews to be a light to the world - the "oracles of God" are entusted to them for the benefit of the world. When did that occur? Before or after the spliting of the 2 kingdoms? Answer: Before.

Paul uses the term "Jew" to refer to that nation of people who were given a covenant job to be a light to the nations.

And that responsibility was given to all 12 tribes, largely through the giving of Torah at Sinai.

Hey im dont have alot of time but I did find this because I dont have alot of time to go far into it probably tonight though,,,,have a gander and then you can take it from there:::

After the death of Solomon, the state of Israel divided. Judah and Benjamin (possibly the Levies) were to the south which are known as the Jewish People became the Kingdom of Judah. The Kingdom of Judah has its capitol in Jerusalem. The rest of the tribes to the north remained the Kingdom of Israel, having its capital in Samaria. Israel and Judah maintained seperate kingdoms for over two centuries. In 722 B.C., Israel was conquered by the Assyrians, and the 10 tribes were scattered being referred to as "The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel". In 586 B.C. the Kingdom of Judah was overthrown by the Chaldeans under Nebuchadnezzar. When Cyrus the Persian conquered the Chaldeans, he freed the Jews and allowed them to return to their native land. In 332 B.C, it was captured by Alexander the Great and after his death was placed under the rule of Egypt. In 63 B.C, it became a Roman protectorate.

Israel wanted a man king like all the other nations,,,but God wanted to be there King........When they got there man Kings,,,lets just say they did a bad job and God was mad and the nation was split....

Judah and benjamin and some of levi were south,,,,,,these are the Jews....

The other tribes went north these are what is refered to as the Lost tribes......

 

[Drew]

Why dont you just go back and read the old testament.....No Paul doesnt disagree with me nor does Christ......Christ said:::Matthew 15:24
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
DO you know who these lost sheep are?????They are people of the 10 tribes I told you about,,,,,but if what you say is correct then Christ would have never said this Because your saying all the tribes are Jews and none of them are lost.......

First of all, Jesus' statement coheres perfectly with my position. I can legitimately argue that Jesus is referring to all 12 tribes in this statement. And they are not lost in a "geographical" sense, they are lost in the sense that the 12 tribes, as whole, have failed to fulfill their covenant obligations.

You simply assert that Jesus is here referring to the 10 tribes that were lost – you need to actually make a case for this. And the case cannot be based to appealing to “Judah-Israel†distinction – the fact that one of the 2 kingdoms was called Judah and the other called Israel. This is because there is a lot of Biblical precedent for the term “Israel†being used to refer to all 12 tribes. And I suggest that this is precisely what Jesus is doing here - precisley as he does when He refers to the twelve tribes of Israel.

Can you give any actual support for your assertion that Jesus is here referring to the lost tribes and not to the 12 tribes?

In any event, the case is clear that Paul uses the term “Jew†to denote all twelve tribes. Consider the text from Romans 3 again:

Therefore what advantage does the Jew have, or what is the value of circumcision?

Paul clearly uses the term Jew to denote those who are circumcised. Who gets circumcised? Only the members of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi?

No. All members of all 12 tribes get circumcised. Paul uses the term “Jew†to refer to the members of the 12 tribes, those who live under Torah.

You need to really go back and study.........

Then I guess that Paul needs to study as well. I see no possible way to sustain the position that Paul uses the term "Jew" to denote a specific subset of the 12 tribes. The ways he actually uses the word rules out such a possibility.

 

[Drew]

After the death of Solomon, ......t....

Judah and benjamin and some of levi were south,,,,,,these are the Jews....

The other tribes went north these are what is refered to as the Lost tribes......

I am well aware of the entire story of the 2 kingdoms - I have read 1 Kings and 2 Kings at least twice in the last three years. So I know all about the two kingdoms.

You are not engaging the actual content of my arguments. Paul, for example, uses the term "Jew" in a manner that forces us to conclude that he is talking about all 12 tribes. Romans 3:1 makes this case all by itself.

Can you provide any scriptural evidence that the term "Jew" was used to refer to only the members of the southern kingdom?

 

[whirlwind]

After the death of Solomon, ......t....

Judah and benjamin and some of levi were south,,,,,,these are the Jews....

The other tribes went north these are what is refered to as the Lost tribes......

I am well aware of the entire story of the 2 kingdoms - I have read 1 Kings and 2 Kings at least twice in the last three years. So I know all about the two kingdoms.

You are not engaging the actual content of my arguments. Paul, for example, uses the term "Jew" in a manner that forces us to conclude that he is talking about all 12 tribes. Romans 3:1 makes this case all by itself.

Can you provide any scriptural evidence that the term "Jew" was used to refer to only the members of the southern kingdom?

Hi Drew,

Jews are of Jew-dah. They are the house of Judah. (Judah and Benjamin). The larger portion of Israel is the house of Israel (10 northern tribes.) All twelve are Israel but only the house of Judah are Jews.

• * Ezekiel 37:11 Then He said unto me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost:
  
  37:16-17 "Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.
  
  37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all; and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

The house of Israel never returned from captivity so Paul was not referring to them. Consider too that Jew can mean of the tribes or simply be a resident of Judea.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

After the death of Solomon, ......t....

Judah and benjamin and some of levi were south,,,,,,these are the Jews....

The other tribes went north these are what is refered to as the Lost tribes......

I am well aware of the entire story of the 2 kingdoms - I have read 1 Kings and 2 Kings at least twice in the last three years. So I know all about the two kingdoms.

You are not engaging the actual content of my arguments. Paul, for example, uses the term "Jew" in a manner that forces us to conclude that he is talking about all 12 tribes. Romans 3:1 makes this case all by itself.

Can you provide any scriptural evidence that the term "Jew" was used to refer to only the members of the southern kingdom?

Dude,,,o dude,,,lets look at you verse:::

Romans 3:1 "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?"

Ok does this verse tell you what a Jew is???????? NO,,,,a question is being asked....
You cant ask someone what 2+2 is,,,,if they have never learned what math is......

My point is ,,,the bible tells you what a Jew is long before this was written,,,,you are tweeking the old test to fit the new test....but there is more written about what a Jew is,,, in the old text then the new......

check out the post above.....

 

[Drew]

Dude,,,o dude,,,lets look at you verse:::

Romans 3:1 "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?"

Ok does this verse tell you what a Jew is???????? NO,,,,a question is being asked....
You cant ask someone what 2+2 is,,,,if they have never learned what math is......

This text clearly establishes an identity between being a Jew and being circumcized. Paul sees the Jew as the person who is circumcized.

Imagine that you're right - that the term "Jew" denotes only those from the Southern Kingdom. Remembering that members of all 12 tribes are subject to circumcision, your position has Paul asking this:

What advantage then hath the member of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi, or what profit is there of being a member of the tribe of Judah, Benjamin, Levi, Dan, Asher, Gad, Issachaar, Reuben, etc....

That is entirely incoherent - you have Paul talking about 2 different groups, one a superset of the other.

No. In order for what he says to make any sense at all, the Jew is the person who is circumcised. If there are really two distinct groups, as your position forces you to, then which group is being talked about in the very next statement:

Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God.

Who is the “they� Is it the Jew (which limits things to the 2 (or 3) tribes)? Or is it those that are circumcised (which includes all 12 tribes)?

On my view there is no such incoherence – there is only one group being described in 2 ways. Besides there are other texts from Paul that show that he uses the word “Jew†to denote anybody who is under the Torah. And that is not limited to Judah, Benjamin, and Levi.

 

[Drew]

Jews are of Jew-dah. They are the house of Judah. (Judah and Benjamin). The larger portion of Israel is the house of Israel (10 northern tribes.) All twelve are Israel but only the house of Judah are Jews. [/b]

That may well be how you see it. But for reasons that I have already provided, this is not how Paul used the term "Jew".

The house of Israel never returned from captivity so Paul was not referring to them. Consider too that Jew can mean of the tribes or simply be a resident of Judea.[/b]

This cannot be. In Romans 3:1 Paul uses the term "Jew" to denote anyone who is circumcized. Please refer to my previous post. I agree that the term "Jew" could be used to denote a person from Judea. But Paul uses the term in such a manner that shows he cannot be using the term this way.

 

[Drew]

More evidence that, for Paul, the term Jew cannot denote only the members of the southern kingdom:

Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

Clearly, one is either circumcised or one is not. And clearly, this statement establishes that Paul sees Jews as those who are circumcised. Are members of the 10 lost tribes circumcised? Obviously, they are.

Therefore the term "Jew" here must include them as well.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Jews are of Jew-dah. They are the house of Judah. (Judah and Benjamin). The larger portion of Israel is the house of Israel (10 northern tribes.) All twelve are Israel but only the house of Judah are Jews. [/b]

That may well be how you see it. But for reasons that I have already provided, this is not how Paul used the term "Jew".

The house of Israel never returned from captivity so Paul was not referring to them. Consider too that Jew can mean of the tribes or simply be a resident of Judea.[/b]

This cannot be. In Romans 3:1 Paul uses the term "Jew" to denote anyone who is circumcized. Please refer to my previous post.

You have already been showed what to read how about just we read it again and see if you get something different......

I have already read your 1 verse,,,,,,, I repeat your 1 little verse that your using trying to claim all of Israel is Jews,,,,,,how about going and reading from 1 kings to Christ cause thats
what I am claiming will tell you what a Jew is.......

Christ was a Jew right ?????? YUP ,,,DO you know what tribes he belongs to??????

Will you just think its a coinsedence if He comes from 2 of the 3 tribes that I have told you are the Jews?????