Israel, Abraham, and Modern Times

jgr said:

Not in the Greek.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 5043: τέκνον

τέκνον, τέκνου, τό (τίκτω, τεκεῖν), from Homer down, the Sept. chiefly for בֵּן, sometimes for יֶלֶד, offspring; plural children;
a. properly, α. universally and without regard to sex, child: Mark 13:12; Luke 1:7; Acts 7:5; Revelation 12:4; plural, Matthew 7:11; Matthew 10:21; Matthew 15:26; Mark 7:27

Universally.

No mention or implication of "Jewish".

Click to expand...

Matthew 15:24, which I have already quoted to you before, already spell out the context of what Jesus was saying there.

He was only sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. So children, in context, cannot be gentile children, if so, he would be contradicting himself.

But I understand why you would find all ways to dance around this clear exposition in the KJV. If you disagree and prefer alternative interpretations, no one can stop you.

Guojing said:

Matthew 15:24, which I have already quoted to you before, already spell out the context of what Jesus was saying there.

He was only sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. So children, in context, cannot be gentile children, if so, he would be contradicting himself.

But I understand why you would find all ways to dance around this clear exposition in the KJV. If you disagree and prefer alternative interpretations, no one can stop you.

Click to expand...

Dispensationalism must desperately attempt to racialize every Scripture that it sees, because its very survival and existence is dependent upon Jew/Gentile racialization and the promotion of racial division.

It is clear from the original Greek that "the children" is aracial.

What about "dogs"?

2952. kunarion
Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 2952: κυνάριον

κυνάριον, κυναριου, τό (diminutive of κύων, equivalent to κυνίδιον, which Phryn. prefers; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 180; cf. γυναικάριον),a little dog: Matthew 15:26; Mark 7:27f

Once again it is evident from the original Greek that there is no racial aspect to these "dogs".

Jesus in fact deracializes the word by using "kunarion" (little dog) rather than the racialized pejorative "kuon" (wild cur) used by racist Jews.


Dispensationalism's attempted impositions notwithstanding, God, His Son, and His Holy Spirit are not racists.

jgr said:

Dispensationalism must desperately attempt to racialize every Scripture that it sees, because its very survival and existence is dependent upon Jew/Gentile racialization and the promotion of racial division.

It is clear from the original Greek that "the children" is aracial.

Click to expand...

"universally and without regard to sex"

Somehow you jump from this vague phrase to conclude that the children in that verse also include gentiles, ignoring the context of what Jesus was saying?

Its obvious you are forcing it to mean something you would like it to mean.

Guojing said:

Matthew 15:24, which I have already quoted to you before, already spell out the context of what Jesus was saying there.

He was only sent to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. So children, in context, cannot be gentile children, if so, he would be contradicting himself.

But I understand why you would find all ways to dance around this clear exposition in the KJV. If you disagree and prefer alternative interpretations, no one can stop you.

Click to expand...

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

.

BABerean2 said:

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Click to expand...

Thank God the Law of Moses was not the Gospel. It is still the Word of God given to a chosen people. Christ in the flesh, was the living Word given to all humans, starting with His chosen people, Israel first, then to all humanity.