Yes, Jesus was a Jew...born of a Jewish Mother, of the Jewish house of David, of the tribe of Judah therefore in His veins flowed the royal blood of Israel's kings. In truth Jesus was so much of a Jew that He took to task those who in His day discredited the teachings of God through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses to the children of Israel. The Apostles, except St. Luke, were Jews. The first converts, 3,000 of them, who under the leadership of St.Peter, formed the nucleus of the Church Militant, were Jews. So, yes, the Jews should have great pride in the realization that the Great Master Himself as well as the pages of the OT, which Jesus said gave testimony of Himself, were all of Jewish origin. So, yes, I know where Jesus came from for it is also in this that Catholicism finds its firm foundation.  

So for you, it's Jesus minus His Messiaship yet He died primarily for the Jews.  Sorry, Leauki, I don't buy that based upon St.Paul who infallibly taught that "Christ died for all.."

yes He did.  I agree.   He came for His own though and His own knew Him not.  If it wasn't for the rejection and now we know the blindness of the Jews Abraham's promise would not have been totally fulfilled. 

Luke was not an Apostle.  He was a follower, and a doctor but was not an Apostle.  So yes, all the Apostles were Jewish. 

Somebody said that Jesus died for all people which is true yet Paul says this  ' I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience is bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have a heavy sorrow and unceasing pain in my heart. For I could be ACCUSED FROM CHRISST ON BEHALF OF MY BROTHERS, MY COUNTRYMEN , WHO ARE ISRAELITES, whose are the adoption and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service, and the promises; '(Romans 9:1-4)

Lula, you have such animosity against the Jews.  The fact that you support the PA due to your underlining belief in Replace Theology 'Israel shouldn't be there'.    Also you brought up the the parable of the Two Sons (I like to call it the Prodigal Father).  How the one Son represents the Gentiles and the other the angry bitter Jews.  Mean while, this parable was to Jewish people so the assumption would be the audience would be lead to believe both sons were Jewish.  The younger gave up and left.  You almost vilify the Jewish people.  What the younger Son did was to make his older brother jealous for the Father was ALWAYS RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM.

This goes with what Paul says 'I say, then, Did not they stumble that they fall? Let it not be!  But by their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles, to provoke them to jealousy.  But if their transgression is the riches of the world, and their defeat is the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!'

There is the meat of it: there is a GREATER BLESSING when they come into the FULLNESS.  As Believers we should be making the Jewish people jealous.  Yes, we should be making the world jealous.  Paul did say to the Jews first and guess what?  He always went to the Synagogues first.

The hockey game is back on.

kfc posts:

I don't have a particular set of rules for Israel or anyone...sin and wickedness is sin and wickedness no matter who commits it.

Leauki brought up God's promise of land and I told him that Scripture tells us that over time the Jews lost it because of their unfaithfulness, disobedience and idolatry.

My comment was a direct response to Leauki who wrote:

Well true. God does and did...He told us so in Scripture.  

kfc posts:

I pray for Jews to come to Christ. 

KFC,

It's useless to persist in your baseless assertion that I bash Jews telling them God is finished with them. I"VE NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING for I don't believe that.... I've said so a few pages back I WROTE:

I believe God is not done with the Jews. Based on the fact that God wills all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth proves that He is not done with the Jews or anyone else for that matter. Through the merits of Christ's Passion and Death, this, right here and now, the present time is the age of God's Grace for all mankind.

Even though God rejected parts of the OLd Mosaic covenant, the Temple, its sacrifices, etc., God has not rejected His people. So yes, of course, the Jews have a future with God. St. Paul answers the question, Has God rejected His people saying,

.....God forbid. For I also am an Israelite of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God hath not cast away his people, which he foreknew. Know you not what the scripture saith of Elias; how he calleth on God against Israel? 3 Lord, they have slain thy prophets, they have dug down thy altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. 4 But what saith the divine answer to him? I have left me seven thousand men, that have not bowed their knees to Baal. 5 Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant saved according to the election of grace.

So notice the answer about whether the Jews are rejected concerns the hope to restore individual salvation to as many Jews as possible and NOT TO A CORPORATE NATIONAL REVIVAL SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE.

Read it again..the answer shows that the salvation of Israel will be just as it was in the OT. Out of a nation of millions, God tells Elias there were only 7,000 who had remained faithful. So, it's no surprise that v.5, even in this present time, there is a "remnant" of Jewish people that is far smaller than the majority.

Almighty God is fulfilling all the OT prophecies about Israel's salvation here and now  as Jews from every nation to which they have been scattered are being gathered into one Body of Christ. The one Body into which the Jews from all nations are being gathered is the Church, the Messianic kingdom of God present here and now, the Church age also known as the Millennium.

Huh?  Did I mis something?  This story is one of three in this chapter (lost sheep, lost coin, lost son) and the whole point of the three stories is God's joy is found in the one sinner who repents.

The story of the two brothers reveal two extreme sinners living under the same roof.  The elder brother is the Pharisee.  He is a legalist with no real respect for the father he pretends to serve.  The other brother is a fool who works fast and unwisely.  He is driven by lust and fast living.  He joined himself to the Gentiles (so neither brother could be a Gentile) when he defiled himself by working on a pig farm.

So Lula if you're saying one of these is a gentile you are gravely mistaken.  That's not the point of the story at all.  Somebody is giving you a bad interpretation.  The assumption as the People's Party has mentioned is a pretty strong one and that is that both sons were Jewish.  V1 & 2 give you a clue.  The ones listening are the publicans (who were hated by the Pharisees) and other "sinners" and then on the other side you see the Pharisees and the scribes.

So instead of Jew and Gentile you might want to read the story again and put sinner (younger son) and Pharisee (older son) and see how that works.   

yes, the story is more about the father than anything. 

and what does "And so all Israel shall be saved..." mean to you in Romans 11:26?  I agree that it's only going to be a remnant.  No argument from me there.  In fact I believe 2/3 of the Jews are going to perish in the "great tribulation."  But God is going to bring this group in as a corporate group; and all Israel will be saved meaning as a nation.  I don't see that said about any other nations. 

Lula, in response to your last posting.  I have one question.  Who are the 144,000 in Revelation 7 and when does this take place?   

Also I know that in order for the Jews, as you say to have a part in God's plan they have to become RCC?  Correct? 

kfc posts:

Where is any of this in Scripture? ................................Save your time...it isn't there. The antichrist deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made about this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of Millenarianism.

When Christ returns Scripture tells us it will be on the last day of this earth to judge the living and the dead; not to set up His earthly kingdom.

Jesus Christ died and lives again. Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords now seated at the right hand of the Father He possesses all power in Heaven and on earth. He is far above all rule, authority, power and dominion for the Father has put "all things under His feet". Christ is Lord over the cosmos and of history.

Since the Ascension, God's plan has entered into its fulfillment. Christ the Lord has already set up His earthly kingdom, the Church. As Lord, Christ is Eternal Head of the Church, which is His Body. Christ dwells on earth in His Church. LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN....CHRIST DWELLS ON EARTH IN HIS CHURCH. Christ by the Holy Spirit exercises His authority over His Church.

Christ's kingdom is already present on earth, the seed, and in mystery, the beginning of the eternal heavenly Kingdom, the glorious Messianic New Jerusalem which according to the prophets will bring all men justice, love and peace. Is. 11:9.

We are in "the last days". The Church, Christ's kingdom is already endowed with a sanctity that is real but imperfect. 1Cor. 10:11. This reign is under attack by the evil powers, even though they've been defeated by Christ's Passover. 2Thess. 2:7. According to the Lord, the present time is the time of the Spirit and of witness to His Gospel, but a time marked by distress and trial of evil which does not spare the Chruch and ushers in the struggles of the endtimes.

KFC, it is a time of waiting, of watching and of praying, not taking Scripture and looking at events in the Middle East and the European Union and making endtime predictions.  

While the other part of your post was a bit jumbled, I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion.

The Romans came, killed Rabbi Jesus, killed thousands of other Jewish leaders. They destroyed the land of Israel, destroyed the Temple, and renamed Jerusalem and Israel after Zeus and Israel´s enemies.

And now they want Israel to accept Roman rule forever, top gain salvation from their god?

Never.

You are describing the ancient Roman Empire here...the same Roman Empire that persecuted the Church Christ established.

Don't confuse the Roman Empire with the Church.

Christ established His Church for one purpose only, for the salvation of souls. Some Jews understand this and convert.

"The Lord added daily to the Church those who would be saved." Acts of the Apostles 2:47.

If you don't want to be confused with the Roman Empire, don't act like the Roman Empire.

What's the big difference? The Roman Empire claimed to have authority over Israel, denied Jewish rights to Jerusalem and condemned Jewish independence.

And so do you.

Whether you call your god Jupiter or pretend that you now pray to the god of Israel doesn't matter. It's the actions that count.

All you changed was the name of your god.

I bet if it was up to you you would name the holy land "Palestine", the name the pagan Romans gave it, and not "Eretz Yisrael", the name G-d gave it.

The Roman Empire persecuted the Christian Church when the Church was a Jewish organisation. The Roman Empire persecuted ALL Jewish organisations. Once the Church became Roman and distanced itself from the Jews (and started condemning Jews and Israel) the Roman Empire didn't persecute the Church any more and made it the state religion.

It was only with the Persian and later Muslim invasions that Jews were even allowed back into Jerusalem.

And yes, some Jews were frightened of Rome's power and converted. But that has nothing to do with faith in the saviour and everything to do with the secular power of the Roman Church.

leauki

First, as far as saying "the Christian Church when the Church was a Jewish organization"...while some thought of the early Church as a  Jewish sect, it really wasn't. That notion and confusion ended at Christ's death when the Temple Veil was rent in two from top to bottom. Almighty God was making it known that the ceremonies, rites and rituals of the Old Covenant were to be abolished for good. It happened in 70AD.

After the death of Christ, the Jews persecuted the Church because they were threatened by its success in the flourishing of the Christian faith. In the Gospels we read over and over, "for fear of the Jews". The Books of Acts details the actual history of this persecution. This would continue until the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem and the Jews went into dispersion. The Roman Empire didn't want Christianity to spread and persecuted the Church. That's why they went underground into the Catacombs to celebrate Mass. History records that for 300 years, Caesar after Caesar persecuted the Church and 32 Popes from St.Peter in 67AD to Pope Melchiades in 315 AD died the death of martyrdom for the one true Faith of Christ. These Popes werre buried in the catacombs and with Emperor Constantine, the era of persecution ceased.

What I've said is evident from secular history when a search is made regarding the 52 Ceaesars who reigned from Nero to Constantine in contrast to the historic data regarding the 32 Bishops of Rome from St. Peter to St. Melchiades, the Popes of that same period who died for the one true, Catholic and Apostolic Faith of Christ.

In 6AD, the emperor Augustus turned the kingdom of Judah into the Roman province of Judea. Although the Romans treated the Jews cruelly, they allowed the Jews to practice their religion. In 66, the Jews rebelled and overpowered the small Roman army in Jerusalem. By 70, the Roman army retook Jerusalem and the Jews were forced into dispersion.  Even though they were scattered, by 90, the Jews had set up academies to promote the study of the Torah of which their various interpretations resulted in the Talmud and Talmudic Judaism.

In 132, after another unsuccessful rebellion, the Romans banned Jews from living in Jerusalem altogether and they were forced to live in other parts of the Mediterranean and the Middle East.

First, what is freely asserted can be freely denied. So, for accuracy, of the universal Catholic Church, the only one that was and is known as the Roman Church is the one located in the Roman diocese.

Second, for accuracy, the Edict of Milan in 312, did not make Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire, rather, the Edict decreed that all religious groups in the empire, including Christians, were free to worship as they pleased.