Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul, the Gentiles and lost Israel

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David Hindley" <dhindley AT compuserve.com>
  • To: "'Corpus-Paul'" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Paul, the Gentiles and lost Israel
  • Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 23:27:56 -0700

S,

There's nothing wrong with debate.

Tony, Mark and George were correct, though, that this has been a topic of
discussion on this list. The specific issue is whether
IOUDAIOS refers to "Judeans" (as in, those who reside in the province of
Judea and maybe Galilee) or "Those of Judean
descent/religion," and whether EQNOS refers to those of
non-Jewish/Judean/Galilean nations or extends to include those of Jewish
descent/religion who reside outside of Judea and maybe Galilee. This debate
was engendered by the Malina/Pilch book that Loren
reviewed. So, in effect, recent scholarship has sought definitions for these
terms that are more nuanced that those traditionally
assumed, whether rightly or wrongly.

Personally, I think the issues are not well enough defined.

It has not brought in the legal status of Jews in the Roman empire. My
understanding is that "Jews" were treated as an independent
EQNOS wherever they resided, possessing the right to their own self
governance and court system, with the nominal head being the
High Priest in Jerusalem (as Ethnarch, although in actual practice it seems
the degree of actual control that he exerted outside of
Judea was relatively small).

I also do not think that enough thought has gone into how much the legal
constitutions of Judea (a Roman province), the Jewish
people as a nation (nominally headquartered in Jerusalem, with a territory
under its control that included the temple and part/all
of the territory in the Roman province of Judea), or Galilee (a client
kingdom) would affect the terms commonly used to describe the
inhabitants of these regions, or those of Jewish ethnicity/religion who
resided outside of those areas.

All of these factors could affect the meaning of the terms that are used to
describe "Jews" and "Gentiles" in ancient literature.

Mark Nanos has also written a book on Galatians that discusses the groups he
thinks the letter to the Galatians refers or alludes
to, and somewhat of what can be gleaned about their agendas. His analysis
assumes a more traditional understanding of the meaning of
the words usually translated "Jew" and "Gentile".

You may need to familiarize yourself with Mark's book or at least the issues
of who the folks were who Paul was railing against, and
the status of those whom he was addressing.

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio USA







-----Original Message-----
From: corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of house_of blonde
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 7:03 PM
To: corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [Corpus-Paul] Paul, the Gentiles and lost Israel


Greetings corpus-paul list members!

My name is S. John and this is my first message to the list.

I am currently studying for a debate wherein my "Anglo-Israel" opponent
claims that Paul's Gentile believers were actually "lost"
Israelites of the Ten Tribes. Rooted in this assertion is the claim that the
Gospel was only to Israelites due to Christ's claim
that "I come only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" in Mat 15:24. I
am arguing against this position with the claim that
the Gentiles were non-Israelites and that Christ's statement in Mat
15:24 was amended to include "all" ethnos after He rose from the dead and
stated "all" ethnos to be baptized. I base my claim on the
many items of scripture where Paul - and Christ - clearly distinguishes
between Israelites and Gentiles (also including Isaiah 56
for OT prophecy of adding in non-Israelites to God's people).

I am currently in the process of building a rebuttal and thought I would post
some items I am refuting and see if anyone has any
comments.

1st alleged "proof" that Paul was speaking to Israelites whom he considered
to be Gentiles:

Paul's use of "our fathers" and "our father Abraham"
when speaking to the Gentiles.

My opponent claims that Paul recognizes the Gentiles to be Israelites with
these statements.

2nd alleged "proof" that Paul was speaking to Israelites whom he considered
to be Gentiles:

Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the
Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Rom 9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them
my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
Rom 9:26 And it shall come to pass, [that] in the
place where it was said unto them, Ye [are] not my people; there shall they
be called the children of the living God.

My opponent asserts that the verse above shows the Gentiles to be the
northern Israelites of Hosea.

These are the two most common claims I am running into so far.

I am interested in hearing some rebuttals to these verses.

Thanks,
S. John


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Corpus-Paul mailing list
Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page