quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:
Doing the imdependent study was something you needed to do, the pdf just backs up what you already learned on your own, it's the way things work for some.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang: Well, it was a nice study and I certainly enjoyed it.

It did make me wonder though how many people ever catch that the promises of Kings and Nations were split amongst Jacob's son Judah and his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh...

quote:

Originally posted by bryan: Not enough.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang: Not enough what?

quote:

Originally posted by bryan: Catch the promises and stuff. And a lot never seem to read Amos or Hosea either.

Ahhh, OK.

quote:

Originally posted by bryan: Was reading a bunch of comments related to an article about Israel returning Lebanon to the stone age. Most of the initial ones I saw were end-of-day comments, as if Israel as given in the Bible actually existed. Like stuff the posse might write or read.

Boggles the mind, it does!

Was rather surprised, as I wasn't expecting all the religious comments made, including the Russia/Turkey/Iran business.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:
Indeed remembering is good, and seeing the roses between the thorns isn’t bad either.

True that!

Oh, got an email from mrs exp. Seems she didn't get my last email explaining that she was using the wrong URL for getting onto Aantares. Hopefully she will get the one I sent today and we will see her here soon.

Nope, she hasn't made the trip to Hawaii yet...

Will keep looking for her, but I believe I’m getting frustrated with the format too!

I sent her 2 emails yesterday and called her 3 times this morning...nadda. It sounded like someone picked up the receiver on the other end, but I couldn't hear a thing. Have no idea what that may mean unless there is service interruption there.

Ahhh, just tried again and I reached her! She is fine but there seems to be something amiss with her phone and email. She isn't getting some emails and is either not hearing the phone or maybe the calls aren't making it through. Dunno, but she is going to try logging on here again.

Guess I'm getting use to the format and am now able to manipulate it a little bit.

I sure hope mrs exp is able to log on, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
I sure hope mrs exp is able to log on, too.

Yeah, me too. I'm missing her bunches.

Vicki
I was referring to God returning them to the Land from Babylon through His providence, arranging Cyrus' decree, seeing that the temple was rebuilt, building the walls around Jerusalem, etc. God did not forget His promises to His people.

Vicki
I don't see why the partitioning to create the country of Israel in 1948, can't be seen as God working, in His providence, also, just as He did to end the Babylonian captivity. There were people who stayed behind in Persia that helped to financially support the settlers who moved back to Judea in Ezra's and Nehemiah's day. So I don't see a contradiction in many Jewish people living outside of Israel today.[/QUOTE]

Bryan
Because even Jews state that the creation of Israel went against God. It is initially why orthodox Jews rejected going there, and why even some there now, state Israels creation was a mistake.

Vicki
That doesn't mean that God wasn't behind the recreation of the state of Israel in 1948.

Bryan
And they are right. Israel's creation was based on the Jewish love of death.[/QUOTE]

Vicki
No it wasn't. The dream of a Jewish homeland was not based on the love of death. It was a yearning for what was lost and then the awful circumstances of the Holocaust.

To JR,

I have been really busy this past week, but I've been able to do some research in between tasks on your theory that the lost tribes of Israel became Christians.


Have you considered that Judah absorbed a number of people from the northern kingdom when the priests and Levites left Jeroboam and took their stand with Rehoboam in Jerusalem and that there were people from every tribe that followed the priests to Jerusalem because they were loyal to God? (2 Chron 11). This wasn't the only time when people from the 10 tribes migrated to Judah. Look at 2Chron 15, the revival under Asa. Descendants of these people from the north, would have been swept up by King Nebuchadnezzar and would have been called Jews too while exiled by the Babylonians, even though they were descended from the 10 northern tribes.

If you look at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, "Jew" and Israel" were interchangeable. I'm not saying that when various prophets prophesied about how someday God would bring back Israel, they were not referring to the 10 tribes. But, not every mention of Israel after the split is referring to just the northern tribes. People were looking forward to the reinstatement of Israel.

The prophets never referred to the nations as Israel, though. They had separate prophecies for the nations. Gentiles were not identified as the lost tribes of Israel in the Bible. Ezekiel said that Israel would be gathered from the nations. How could that happen if Israel is the nations?

Gentile believers in Jesus are grafted in to the root. Believers from the lost tribes of Israel would not need to be grafted in, like Gentile believers.

The idea that Christians are the lost tribes of Israel simply makes no sense. People become Christians, not by being descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. We become Christians by repentance, trust in Jesus, and being born from above- a spiritual act of God.

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
Vicki
I was referring to God returning them to the Land from Babylon through His providence, arranging Cyrus' decree, seeing that the temple was rebuilt, building the walls around Jerusalem, etc. God did not forget His promises to His people.

Vicki
I don't see why the partitioning to create the country of Israel in 1948, can't be seen as God working, in His providence, also, just as He did to end the Babylonian captivity. There were people who stayed behind in Persia that helped to financially support the settlers who moved back to Judea in Ezra's and Nehemiah's day. So I don't see a contradiction in many Jewish people living outside of Israel today.

Bryan
Because even Jews state that the creation of Israel went against God. It is initially why orthodox Jews rejected going there, and why even some there now, state Israels creation was a mistake.

Vicki
That doesn't mean that God wasn't behind the recreation of the state of Israel in 1948.

Bryan
And they are right. Israel's creation was based on the Jewish love of death.[/QUOTE]

Vicki
No it wasn't. The dream of a Jewish homeland was not based on the love of death. It was a yearning for what was lost and then the awful circumstances of the Holocaust.[/QUOTE]

Torah states otherwise. It states the Jews love death.

Israel was created out of fear, not love. And it still feeds on fear, fear of life.

And according to Jewish prophecy, the House of Israel won't be reconstituted till the/a Messiah makes himself present. One reason some rejected Israel initially, especially Jews in the U.S. at the time. And it's why some in Israel still object.

Also their is no indication, I believe that Israel or Judah was going to be returned to them. And some indication of another land and city.

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
I sure hope mrs exp is able to log on, too.

Yeah, me too. I'm missing her bunches.

Honey bunches?


Btw, managed to get myself banned from Times of Israel, I guess they didn't appreciate some of the Bible quotes indicating that Israel doesn't exist Either that or the quotes on "1 teacher" and "ruling over the liaty".

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:

quote:

Originally posted by Reed N D Dark:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:
Btw if you send me some of your snow, I'll give you my heat wave.

Does you heat wave come in the form of grass fires?

No, the warning of the heat wave warned of the fires though. At least locally we were on a fire alert for the county.

Stay safe, I can’t imagine a fire in balboa park!

Enough homeless probably there to start one.

We recently had a boat fire that went on for like 2+ days on the harbor that was obnoxious.

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
To JR,

I have been really busy this past week, but I've been able to do some research in between tasks on your theory that the lost tribes of Israel became Christians.


Have you considered that Judah absorbed a number of people from the northern kingdom when the priests and Levites left Jeroboam and took their stand with Rehoboam in Jerusalem and that there were people from every tribe that followed the priests to Jerusalem because they were loyal to God? (2 Chron 11). This wasn't the only time when people from the 10 tribes migrated to Judah. Look at 2Chron 15, the revival under Asa. Descendants of these people from the north, would have been swept up by King Nebuchadnezzar and would have been called Jews too while exiled by the Babylonians, even though they were descended from the 10 northern tribes.

If you look at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, "Jew" and Israel" were interchangeable. I'm not saying that when various prophets prophesied about how someday God would bring back Israel, they were not referring to the 10 tribes. But, not every mention of Israel after the split is referring to just the northern tribes. People were looking forward to the reinstatement of Israel.

The prophets never referred to the nations as Israel, though. They had separate prophecies for the nations. Gentiles were not identified as the lost tribes of Israel in the Bible. Ezekiel said that Israel would be gathered from the nations. How could that happen if Israel is the nations?

Gentile believers in Jesus are grafted in to the root. Believers from the lost tribes of Israel would not need to be grafted in, like Gentile believers.

The idea that Christians are the lost tribes of Israel simply makes no sense. People become Christians, not by being descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. We become Christians by repentance, trust in Jesus, and being born from above- a spiritual act of God.

Actually you become Christians by becoming Christs, which is the status most Christians claim. Interestingly enough, this, among other things would make you part of the House of Israel.

bleep

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:



To Bryan,


Vicki said:
The idea that Christians are the lost tribes of Israel simply makes no sense. People become Christians, not by being descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. We become Christians by repentance, trust in Jesus, and being born from above- a spiritual act of God.

Bryan said:
Actually you become Christians by becoming Christs, which is the status most Christians claim. Interestingly enough, this, among other things would make you part of the House of Israel.

Vicki says,
I became a Christian through repentance, trust in Jesus. and being born from above. I pray that my life reflects the beauty of our Lord, but I wouldn't describe it as becoming Christ. It is my hope to be like him.

I have had my DNA tested and there is no per centage of House of Israel.

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
To JR,

I have been really busy this past week, but I've been able to do some research in between tasks on your theory that the lost tribes of Israel became Christians.


Have you considered that Judah absorbed a number of people from the northern kingdom when the priests and Levites left Jeroboam and took their stand with Rehoboam in Jerusalem and that there were people from every tribe that followed the priests to Jerusalem because they were loyal to God? (2 Chron 11). This wasn't the only time when people from the 10 tribes migrated to Judah. Look at 2Chron 15, the revival under Asa. Descendants of these people from the north, would have been swept up by King Nebuchadnezzar and would have been called Jews too while exiled by the Babylonians, even though they were descended from the 10 northern tribes.

If you look at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, "Jew" and Israel" were interchangeable. I'm not saying that when various prophets prophesied about how someday God would bring back Israel, they were not referring to the 10 tribes. But, not every mention of Israel after the split is referring to just the northern tribes. People were looking forward to the reinstatement of Israel.

The prophets never referred to the nations as Israel, though. They had separate prophecies for the nations. Gentiles were not identified as the lost tribes of Israel in the Bible. Ezekiel said that Israel would be gathered from the nations. How could that happen if Israel is the nations?

Gentile believers in Jesus are grafted in to the root. Believers from the lost tribes of Israel would not need to be grafted in, like Gentile believers.

The idea that Christians are the lost tribes of Israel simply makes no sense. People become Christians, not by being descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. We become Christians by repentance, trust in Jesus, and being born from above- a spiritual act of God.

Vicki: I have been really busy this past week, but I've been able to do some research in between tasks on your theory that the lost tribes of Israel became Christians.

Have you considered that Judah absorbed a number of people from the northern kingdom when the priests and Levites left Jeroboam and took their stand with Rehoboam in Jerusalem and that there were people from every tribe that followed the priests to Jerusalem because they were loyal to God? (2 Chron 11). This wasn't the only time when people from the 10 tribes migrated to Judah. Look at 2Chron 15, the revival under Asa. Descendants of these people from the north, would have been swept up by King Nebuchadnezzar and would have been called Jews too while exiled by the Babylonians, even though they were descended from the 10 northern tribes.

JR: Yes, I have looked at and considered it. But an Israelite of the Northern Kingdom does not cease to be from the House of Israel just because he lives outside the allotted landmass for his tribe. Without a doubt there were some from the Northern Kingdom of Israel who returned to the Southern Kingdom of Judah. And likewise, it is just as likely that some from the Southern Kingdom of Judah moved themselves to the Northern Kingdom of Israel. But I'm talking about the Biblical "sands of the sea" not to be conflated with the few here and there.

The Northern Kingdom of Israel was considerably more populous than the Southern Kingdom. The tribe of Dan mostly became seafarers and joined up with the Phoenicians, because their landmass was insufficient to support them, long before David and Solomon took to the Throne of God in Israel.

Even during the time of Jesus, there were numerous Jews, and most probably some inhabitants from the Northern Kingdom as well, who had fled Judah/Judea to Egypt when Nebuchadnezzar overran Judah, and had never returned. Migration continued from Judah to Egypt even after the return from Babylon. The city of Alexander was full of them. They had their own Temple and practiced the older religion of David and Solomon vice the version practiced by the repatriated Jews from Babylon.

Bottom line: When one runs the numbers, using the Biblical counts of the tribes, and multiplies them over the course of 2000 years, the issue of landmass becomes a little more clear. The allotted landmass would simply not have supported the numbers.

Vicki: If you look at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, "Jew" and Israel" were interchangeable. I'm not saying that when various prophets prophesied about how someday God would bring back Israel, they were not referring to the 10 tribes. But, not every mention of Israel after the split is referring to just the northern tribes. People were looking forward to the reinstatement of Israel.

JR: Context, context context. And yes, they were "looking forward" to the return of Israel. But the fact remains, Judah/Judea has never been, and never will be, 'All Israel' - therefore that little word "and" between "Israel" and "Judah" in the majority of the post-Jeroboam/Rehoboam writings. But it is no secret that there are some Jews who believe themselves to be 'all Israel' (even today), but that hardly changes the fact that the majority of the texts make a clear distinction between the two.

Vicki: The prophets never referred to the nations as Israel, though. They had separate prophecies for the nations. Gentiles were not identified as the lost tribes of Israel in the Bible. Ezekiel said that Israel would be gathered from the nations. How could that happen if Israel is the nations?

JR: Seems to me that you are getting wrapped around words rather than looking at it conceptually. It is no secret that the Northern Kingdom of Israel was deported and "divorced" by God according to Hosea, meaning they were no longer in a covenant relationship with Him. The word Gentiles and Nations are the same word with the same meaning. And yes, they are used interchangeably in certain prophecies, which is why I gave you the different translations of Genesis 48:19. But nowhere has anyone intimated that ALL the inhabitants of any of the nations are strictly transplants of the House of Israel; that is nothing more than a straw-man.

Of course, there are no nations named after the Kingdom of Israel, but there are some nations named after certain tribes; i.e., Denmark after the Danes of the tribe of Dan, as pointed out in one of Steven Collins' books on the "Lost Tribes of Israel." Some linguists have posited that the River Danube is also named after the tribe of Dan. Does that mean all Danes are of the tribe of Dan? No more likely than all Jews are of the tribe of Judah. But the point is that the nations are full of (fullness of the Nations/Gentiles) the tribes from the House of Israel, because when they were scattered by Assyria, they continued to migrate after Assyria was defeated by the Medes and Chaldeans.

See also "The Lacedemonian Greeks" at http://www.hope-of-israel.org/i000035a.htm

Vicki: Gentile believers in Jesus are grafted in to the root. Believers from the lost tribes of Israel would not need to be grafted in, like Gentile believers.

The idea that Christians are the lost tribes of Israel simply makes no sense. People become Christians, not by being descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. We become Christians by repentance, trust in Jesus, and being born from above- a spiritual act of God.

JR: Per the prophet Hosea, the House of Israel was divorced by God (were no longer in covenant relationship with Him), but they were not abandoned forever - ergo the promises specified by Hosea being reiterated by the apostles in the NT. And they ARE the ones to "whom the promises pertain" - not the non-Israelites of the nations. They would be grafted into the New Covenant and become the "Bride of Christ." Does that mean that ONLY the House of Israel will become Christian? Absolutely not! The word "redemption" means to be "bought back" (as delineated by Hosea's redemption of his "errant wife" who represents the Northern Kingdom of Israel) and "salvation" means to be "brought into", so regardless of whether one is of Israelite blood, the process of redemption or salvation is the same: belief in God through faith in Jesus' redemptive work; "For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." (Isaiah 53:12) and as reiterated by Paul in "So Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring "salvation" to those who are waiting for him." (Hebrews 9:28). Not to mention that all the nations belong to God according to Psalm 82:8 "Rise up, O God, and judge the earth, for all the nations belong to you."

It's certainly not a black-or-white-all-or-nothing reading of the Bible. Nor is it a reading meant to prop up any particular Christian or denominational theological view. It's a reading that uncovers the spiritual richness contained in the text regarding the promises of God; a reading that, for some of us, exponentially increases our faith over the lukewarm reading of most churches these days.

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
I sure hope mrs exp is able to log on, too.

Yeah, me too. I'm missing her bunches.

Honey bunches?

Btw, managed to get myself banned from Times of Israel, I guess they didn't appreciate some of the Bible quotes indicating that Israel doesn't exist Either that or the quotes on "1 teacher" and "ruling over the liaty".

Yep, Honey Bunches!

Banned? Not you!

But it is a subject a lot of people don't want to hear or think about because it upsets the theological view they have been taught and/or teaching for most of their lives.

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:
Actually you become Christians by becoming Christs, which is the status most Christians claim. Interestingly enough, this, among other things would make you part of the House of Israel.

Right - Christian: little Christs/Anointed ones...

Now this is what I call the true Christian spirit:

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/loca...wer-outage/665483591

quote:

Originally posted by That JR Thang:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vicki:
To JR,



JR: Yes, I have looked at and considered it. But an Israelite of the Northern Kingdom does not cease to be from the House of Israel just because he lives outside the allotted landmass for his tribe.


Vicki:
Yet, Jews and people from the Northern Kingdom are Israelites.


JR: But I'm talking about the Biblical "sands of the sea" not to be conflated with the few here and there.

Vicki: I think you are taking the Biblical "sands of the sea" in the wrong direction. The nations are not Israelites, whether from the Northern Kingdom nor the Southern Kingdom.

JR: The Northern Kingdom of Israel was considerably more populous than the Southern Kingdom. The tribe of Dan mostly became seafarers and joined up with the Phoenicians, because their landmass was insufficient to support them, long before David and Solomon took to the Throne of God in Israel.

Vicki: According to the book of Judges, the tribe of Dan went north, to Laish, and conquered it, after falling into idolatry. Judges 18. They built a city called Dan and according to Kings 12:25-33. Dan was one of the cities in the northern kingdom where Jeroboam built one of his worship centers.

JR: Even during the time of Jesus, there were numerous Jews, and most probably some inhabitants from the Northern Kingdom as well, who had fled Judah/Judea to Egypt when Nebuchadnezzar overran Judah, and had never returned. Migration continued from Judah to Egypt even after the return from Babylon. The city of Alexander was full of them. They had their own Temple and practiced the older religion of David and Solomon vice the version practiced by the repatriated Jews from Babylon.

Vicki: Jews were spread out through much of the Roman Empire by the time that Jesus was born, not just Egypt. I have to disagree with you about what religion you think that David and Solomon followed, however.

JR: Bottom line: When one runs the numbers, using the Biblical counts of the tribes, and multiplies them over the course of 2000 years, the issue of landmass becomes a little more clear. The allotted landmass would simply not have supported the numbers.

Vicki: I don't follow you, here. What are you multiplying over 2000 years?

Vicki: If you look at the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, "Jew" and Israel" were interchangeable. I'm not saying that when various prophets prophesied about how someday God would bring back Israel, they were not referring to the 10 tribes. But, not every mention of Israel after the split is referring to just the northern tribes. People were looking forward to the reinstatement of Israel.

JR: Context, context context. And yes, they were "looking forward" to the return of Israel. But the fact remains, Judah/Judea has never been, and never will be, 'All Israel' - therefore that little word "and" between "Israel" and "Judah" in the majority of the post-Jeroboam/Rehoboam writings. But it is no secret that there are some Jews who believe themselves to be 'all Israel' (even today), but that hardly changes the fact that the majority of the texts make a clear distinction between the two.

Vicki: I agree context is crucial. However, Israel has never been identified as Gentile.

Vicki: The prophets never referred to the nations as Israel, though. They had separate prophecies for the nations. Gentiles were not identified as the lost tribes of Israel in the Bible. Ezekiel said that Israel would be gathered from the nations. How could that happen if Israel is the nations?

JR: Seems to me that you are getting wrapped around words rather than looking at it conceptually. It is no secret that the Northern Kingdom of Israel was deported and "divorced" by God according to Hosea, meaning they were no longer in a covenant relationship with Him.

Vicki: Well, the divorce wasn't final, according to Hosea. God promised to restore the covenant to Israel.

JR: The word Gentiles and Nations are the same word with the same meaning. And yes, they are used interchangeably in certain prophecies, which is why I gave you the different translations of Genesis 48:19. But nowhere has anyone intimated that ALL the inhabitants of any of the nations are strictly transplants of the House of Israel; that is nothing more than a straw-man.

JR: Of course, there are no nations named after the Kingdom of Israel, but there are some nations named after certain tribes; i.e., Denmark after the Danes of the tribe of Dan, as pointed out in one of Steven Collins' books on the "Lost Tribes of Israel."

Vicki: I find the theory that the tribe of Dan somehow made their way to Scandinavia (before or after the Assyrians deported the northern kingdom?) a bit far-fetched. The Dani were of the same stock as the Swedes. As for the Danube River, there are a lot of rivers that have the same root- Don, Dnieper, Dunajec, Daugava, Dniestr. Isn't it more likely that the Danube is from old Indo European word "danu", rather than from the tribe of Dan?


JR: Per the prophet Hosea, the House of Israel was divorced by God (were no longer in covenant relationship with Him), but they were not abandoned forever - ergo the promises specified by Hosea being reiterated by the apostles in the NT.

Vicki: What promises did the apostles make?

JR: And they ARE the ones to "whom the promises pertain" - not the non-Israelites of the nations.

Vicki: Are you talking about the promises God made to Israel in Hosea or are you talking about the apostles' promises?

JR: They would be grafted into the New Covenant and become the "Bride of Christ."

Vicki: Which "they" are you talking about, here? Israel or Gentiles?

JR: It's certainly not a black-or-white-all-or-nothing reading of the Bible. Nor is it a reading meant to prop up any particular Christian or denominational theological view. It's a reading that uncovers the spiritual richness contained in the text regarding the promises of God; a reading that, for some of us, exponentially increases our faith over the lukewarm reading of most churches these days.

Vicki: The proponents of the Two House Theory are reading the Bible to prop up their theology. I would hardly call it lukewarm, just because I don't agree with it.

I can see how a new theory can be exciting. I have to admit I had a wonderful time researching it. I have wondered about the promises that God made to the northern kingdom- how is He going to keep those promises. It is interesting to speculate.

But, in the long run, it is one's relationship with God and being changed by His Word that provides richness and experience of God that increases our faith, imo.

I have so missed these kinds of discussions, even though we disagree at various points. I hope I haven't offended you in any way in what I have posted.

My apologies to all, especially JR as I owe you a big one.

quote:

Originally posted by Vicki:
JR: Yes, I have looked at and considered it. But an Israelite of the Northern Kingdom does not cease to be from the House of Israel just because he lives outside the allotted landmass for his tribe.

Vicki:
Yet, Jews and people from the Northern Kingdom are Israelites.

JR: I'm in no way disputing that. What I am saying is that the Bible makes a distinction between the 2 nations following Solomon's reign.

We seem to be going in circles here.

quote:

JR: But I'm talking about the Biblical "sands of the sea" not to be conflated with the few here and there.

Vicki: I think you are taking the Biblical "sands of the sea" in the wrong direction. The nations are not Israelites, whether from the Northern Kingdom nor the Southern Kingdom.

I'm not taking them anywhere. I'm simply following what the Bible states.

quote:

JR: The Northern Kingdom of Israel was considerably more populous than the Southern Kingdom. The tribe of Dan mostly became seafarers and joined up with the Phoenicians, because their landmass was insufficient to support them, long before David and Solomon took to the Throne of God in Israel.

Vicki: According to the book of Judges, the tribe of Dan went north, to Laish, and conquered it, after falling into idolatry. Judges 18. They built a city called Dan and according to Kings 12:25-33. Dan was one of the cities in the northern kingdom where Jeroboam built one of his worship centers.

Yes, they went north, butting right up against the territory of the Phoenicians, with whom they joined as seafarers.

If you will but actually study the Bible, you will notice that the tribe of Dan was considerably larger than that of Judah, but was given a tract of land wedged between Ephraim and Judah, with it's western edge on the Mediterranean Sea; a mere sliver of territory compared to that of Judah. Being a prolific tribe, it is no wonder they moved on, becoming seafarers. Joshua 19:47 records that point: "And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelled therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father." It doesn't take much imagination to figure out that if the coast of Dan's allotted landmass "went out to little", then Lashem or Laish was also going to be too small for such a large tribe. Oh, and Lashem and Laish are 2 different cities in 2 entirely different places according to:
http://hebrewnations.com/artic...the-serpent-way.html

According to the Song of Deborah in Judges 5:2-31, Dan stayed in his ships (v. 17), not lending aid in the battle. So clearly they were already seafarers when Judges was written.

quote:

JR: Even during the time of Jesus, there were numerous Jews, and most probably some inhabitants from the Northern Kingdom as well, who had fled Judah/Judea to Egypt when Nebuchadnezzar overran Judah, and had never returned. Migration continued from Judah to Egypt even after the return from Babylon. The city of Alexander was full of them. They had their own Temple and practiced the older religion of David and Solomon vice the version practiced by the repatriated Jews from Babylon.

Vicki: Jews were spread out through much of the Roman Empire by the time that Jesus was born, not just Egypt. I have to disagree with you about what religion you think that David and Solomon followed, however.

Egypt became a Roman province in 30 BC when Octavian defeated Mark Antony, but my statement in no way excludes Jews from other parts of the Roman empire.

And you are perfectly free to disagree, but what you haven't done is substantiate your position.

quote:

JR: Bottom line: When one runs the numbers, using the Biblical counts of the tribes, and multiplies them over the course of 2000 years, the issue of landmass becomes a little more clear. The allotted landmass would simply not have supported the numbers.

Vicki: I don't follow you, here. What are you multiplying over 2000 years?

"Biblical counts of the tribes" = people. "Landmass" = square miles.

quote:

JR: Context, context context. And yes, they were "looking forward" to the return of Israel. But the fact remains, Judah/Judea has never been, and never will be, 'All Israel' - therefore that little word "and" between "Israel" and "Judah" in the majority of the post-Jeroboam/Rehoboam writings. But it is no secret that there are some Jews who believe themselves to be 'all Israel' (even today), but that hardly changes the fact that the majority of the texts make a clear distinction between the two.

Vicki: I agree context is crucial. However, Israel has never been identified as Gentile.

Then how do you explain Peter and Paul using quotes from Hosea when writing to Gentiles, since Hosea WAS written to Israel?

quote:

JR: Seems to me that you are getting wrapped around words rather than looking at it conceptually. It is no secret that the Northern Kingdom of Israel was deported and "divorced" by God according to Hosea, meaning they were no longer in a covenant relationship with Him.

Vicki: Well, the divorce wasn't final, according to Hosea. God promised to restore the covenant to Israel.

As I have stated by quoting Paul and Peter of the NT.

quote:

JR: The word Gentiles and Nations are the same word with the same meaning. And yes, they are used interchangeably in certain prophecies, which is why I gave you the different translations of Genesis 48:19. But nowhere has anyone intimated that ALL the inhabitants of any of the nations are strictly transplants of the House of Israel; that is nothing more than a straw-man.

JR: Of course, there are no nations named after the Kingdom of Israel, but there are some nations named after certain tribes; i.e., Denmark after the Danes of the tribe of Dan, as pointed out in one of Steven Collins' books on the "Lost Tribes of Israel."

Vicki: I find the theory that the tribe of Dan somehow made their way to Scandinavia (before or after the Assyrians deported the northern kingdom?) a bit far-fetched. The Dani were of the same stock as the Swedes. As for the Danube River, there are a lot of rivers that have the same root- Don, Dnieper, Dunajec, Daugava, Dniestr. Isn't it more likely that the Danube is from old Indo European word "danu", rather than from the tribe of Dan?

Ah yeah, that old Indo European "danu"... Given the length of time we are speaking of, it doesn't even occur to you that the tribe of Dan had become Indo European by that time? That does seem to be the thesis of the linguistics experts.

quote:

JR: Per the prophet Hosea, the House of Israel was divorced by God (were no longer in covenant relationship with Him), but they were not abandoned forever - ergo the promises specified by Hosea being reiterated by the apostles in the NT.

Vicki: What promises did the apostles make?

JR: And they ARE the ones to "whom the promises pertain" - not the non-Israelites of the nations.

Vicki: Are you talking about the promises God made to Israel in Hosea or are you talking about the apostles' promises?

The apostles made no promises, but quoted from the book of Hosea.

quote:

JR: They would be grafted into the New Covenant and become the "Bride of Christ."

Vicki: Which "they" are you talking about, here? Israel or Gentiles?

Israel is the Wife of God according to Ezekiel 16:8-14; Ezekiel 16:59-60; Isaiah 54:5; Hosea 2:7 and others (36? in all). It is in the book of Hosea that God is said to have divorced the Northern Kingdom of Israel. There is no such edict for the Southern Kingdom of Judah. It is a covenant which "they" broke according to Jeremiah, but "they" would be given a New Covenant according to v 31:32. In Jeremiah 11:16 "The LORD called your name, "A green olive tree, beautiful in fruit and form"; With the noise of a great tumult He has kindled fire on it, And its branches are worthless." "They" were the "broken off vine" according to Paul in Romans 11:16 "If the first part of the dough is holy, so is the whole batch; if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17Now if some branches have been broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others to share in the nourishment of the olive root, 18do not boast over those branches. If you do, remember this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you.…" and are being "grafted into the True Vine" of John 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman."

quote:

JR: It's certainly not a black-or-white-all-or-nothing reading of the Bible. Nor is it a reading meant to prop up any particular Christian or denominational theological view. It's a reading that uncovers the spiritual richness contained in the text regarding the promises of God; a reading that, for some of us, exponentially increases our faith over the lukewarm reading of most churches these days.

Vicki: The proponents of the Two House Theory are reading the Bible to prop up their theology. I would hardly call it lukewarm, just because I don't agree with it.

Well, I don't have a "theology" so I'm just letting the Spirit lead me into studies - which do seem to run against the grain of most church theologies. Oh well. My faith is sufficient to handle it.

And I call it lukewarm because the churches really don't follow the Bible so much as they follow a theology.

quote:

Vicki: I can see how a new theory can be exciting. I have to admit I had a wonderful time researching it. I have wondered about the promises that God made to the northern kingdom- how is He going to keep those promises. It is interesting to speculate.

I don't wonder about the promises God made to Israel anymore. I simply followed them in the Bible and then into history/archeology.

quote:

Vicki: But, in the long run, it is one's relationship with God and being changed by His Word that provides richness and experience of God that increases our faith, imo.

Ah, but following the promises did change/increase my faith, which enriches my experience of God, which also increases my faith!

quote:

Vicki: I have so missed these kinds of discussions, even though we disagree at various points. I hope I haven't offended you in any way in what I have posted.

Yeah, I've missed them too. But I hardly expect agreement at every point in our biblical studies or walk of faith. Seems the Spirit knows what each of us needs, and if we will but follow her lead, we will find what we are looking for. We are each on our journey to the promised land, and hopefully we will each find our faith increasing as we continue to study and experience God on that journey.

quote:

Originally posted by bryan:
Actually you become Christians by becoming Christs, which is the status most Christians claim. Interestingly enough, this, among other things would make you part of the House of Israel.

I'm struggling to cope with the fact that someone as widely read as you can be so focussed on Judaeo-Christianity???

Certainly it is the lingua franca. However, using only the "Christ" word to identify a mythological concept, which goes at least as far back as Krishna, locks the entire concept into a single culture -- a major error. I'm all for ecumenism in its broadest sense.

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu...er/KrishnaChrist.htm

Given the mess our world is in, primarily because of the Middle East religions, we need to get back to the real beginning.

Given that every "Chosen People" (all of us, really) are promised to come to the number of the particles of sand on a beach, today's Indian population of 1.32 billion, closing in on China's 1.8 billion, is far closer to that symbol than any population limited world-wide to about 15 million.

Krishna mythology has a version of the Slaughter of the Innocents, and as you know I found the exact same story in Jewish folklore, this time referring to the about-to-be born Abram and the king of his time, when a star in the sky foretold a boy was about to be born who would become a great threat to that seemingly unnamed king.

A great number of mythological heroes have been to Hell and back (Hades, in real terms) and, without looking too hard, I know of assertions about Christian mystics who flew in a trance, and Christian saints whose suffered terrible wounds before becoming one with God.

Both of those are virtually identical to the initiations of the oldest-known shamans.

I can't imagine too many people are interested in digging far back into time for religious or dramatic purposes. However, many British scriptwriters (possibly university-educated in the Classics) certainly do.

IIRC, in Monty Python's search for the Holy Grail, one of the closing scenes had the knights facing the challenge of a warrior guarding a narrow bridge which they had to cross before they could achieve their goal.

Sound familiar?

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto (spiritual) life, and few there be that find it.

That concept is in countless shamanistic and other spiritual mythologies. For some of the oldest mythologies, that narrowness was symbolised by the sharp edge of weapons, a lot tougher than the shamanistic fire-walking of so many Polynesians.

For those who need a reminder:

https://genius.com/Monty-pytho...e-of-death-annotated

quote:

Originally posted by Allan:
My apologies to all, especially JR as I owe you a big one.

Well Dahlin', I right here waiting to collect. Now what was it that you owed me...?

Are you being way to busy these days? 'Cause I'm not seeing much of you here.