this is a very good study, but its also why the definition of “jew” is so important. Myself, I cannot think about that word translated except in only 2 ways: Of Judah (by birth) or a resident of Judea (which could be anyone, including those in 1 Chr 2:55). and there is mixing/variety of both within when our Lord speaks via the scripts. It also causes me confusion, as I know some, who think that the “jews” are the people of the tribes of Isreal and Judah in a bloodline view. this is not correct. does bloodline matter? No, because John 3:16 is what counts. but sin entered in, and the seeds of deception are carried and have been carried by a root…and yes, others pick-up those seeds and scatter them in the same way we Christians scatter/broadcast truth-seeds.
Sorry Linda, I couldn’t understand some of what you were wrote. I’ll address what I can.
I wouldn’t get too caught up on a word. Jesus was talking to the Jews of the synagogue. By the time of Christ, the 12 Tribes of Israel had mixed together to a reasonable degree. In fact, as you read the Old Testament, you will discover some of the Israelites from the Northern Kingdom fled their wicked kings and went South.
Concerning 1 Chronicles 2:55, it speaks of the “the house of Rechab.” The Bible says, Jonadab was from “the house of Rechab,” and Jonadab helped kill all the Baal worshippers, (2 Kings 10:15-27). Interestingly enough, in Jeremiah 35:18-19 God blessed the descendants of Jonadab for their faithfulness to adhere to his rules.
Why?
No doubt, God was impressed. After all, the Israelites hardly followed God, and He is the Creator, while Jonadab was just a man.
Ironically enough, “Jonadab ” literally means , “Jehovah largessed” being “Jehovah generously gifts”.
It is worth mentioning, when God blessed Jonadab’s descendants, He said they would always “stand before me”. This phrase even indicates priestly responsibilities. We find this phrase consistently used for Moses and other servants of God, (1 Ki 18:15, 2 Ki 3:14, Jer 7:10, 15:1, 19, Eze 44:15).
Further, God blessing Jonadab’s descendants is recorded in Jeremiah which was written in 580 B.C., while Chronicles was penned 130 years later in 450 B.C.
Look what we find there,
1 Chronicles 2:55
And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.
130 years after God blessed Jonadab’s descendants with potential priestly responsibilities, we find them performing scribe work as if they were fulfilling God’s promise. God would certainly not bless an evil soul with a position in His House.
You can read more in, Why Did Jesus Say Jews Were Children Of The Devil?
Since I cannot read or speak either Greek nor Hebrew, my only real resort is strong’s. And I do think there is lots of trouble in this earth when definitions themselves get twisted or “altered”…I actually consider that babel/confusion. We see lots of this today even down to the “rewriting” of history. So, for the word “jew”, I stick to the definition from which the that word was translated to…then it becomes easier to ascertain what is being said and who is being addressed. We already know, that even a resident of Judea might even be a person of an actual tribe of the Hebrew, or another nation altogether and also we know that people become associated with whatever area they actually live (we see that with the travels of the House of Israel even. I think there will be grave error to not know the difference of who the “chosen people” are…for example. So I won’t stay far from that knowledge…but yes, lots of mixing generally for the most part…that is why I think certain “families” (like the 144K for example) will remain in earth. Thanks for responding, and yes, I cannot write as fast as I think and I don’t do drafts, so I also apologize for the unreadability. It’s why I won’t teach…
After reading both studies, to me, there is a learning tool (for lack of a better term) brought out in them.
We need to use the same procedural discernment standard for all parties involved in a particular subject even if they are at different areas. I have been guilty of not doing this and not seeing it for whatever reason.
I took this standard back to Gen 3:15.
If the bruising of Christ’s heel is literal, then Satan’s head bruise would have to be literal, and it is not. The bruising of the head is figurative as is the heel.
Same with the enmity between the seeds. The seed through Christ (The children of the kingdom, wheat) and the seed through Satan. (The children of the wicked one, tares) Bloodline doesn’t play a part in the whole equation.
The enmity didn’t take long to show its ugly head. Cain and Able, but that is not the whole equation.
When Satan comes after (enmity, ill will) the woman and the remnant of her seed, we know for a certainty that it is not just physical offspring, it is the true church. Bloodline is not part of the equation. Christian haters have enmity toward us and God.
I think we can’t dismiss bloodline if for no other reason we are in the flesh. I think both can be true, both for example as to how the 4 gospel writers kind of took a view from different angles. when that happens, it’s not that one or the other in incorrect, it’s just that we get a fuller view. back to the 144K—am to assume you do not take that as anything to do with the souls in a particular flesh body? both flesh and spiritual aspects, to me, just give more fullness to the truth.
Not sure where you are coming from.
My comment was Gen 3:15, related to the wheat and tares and the word seed.
Said nothing of the 144. I am not dismissing the blood line, just saying that it can’t be introduced where it isn’t relevant, and I have been led to believe this too many times when I was new to scripture. This fits right in with Brandon’s last study.
This is where we need to stay on topic.
yes it does fit into stuff about a bloodline, when bloodline is mentioned. but we know the family will or is the family of God through Christ (bloodline of no accord), or will be of satan’s family. Ultimately, when the flesh is no more a factor, then blood is irrelevant altogether (of course).
No doubt, 'bloodlines are irrelevant concerning spiritual salvation and redemption in Christ [only] . John 3:16 states ‘whosoever’ meaning, no exceptions or exclusions. However I do agree that in the world, bloodlines and surnames are extremely relevant, but like everything of the world, stature, rank and position are very temporary unlike salvation in Christ that is forever and forever.
Huge difference!