I’m going to be straight with you: nothing of eternal import follows.
I get these odd spirituality-related thoughts that will never improve lives. My first wife* has little patience with my non-salient rumination, preferring to stick with matters that help us know God more intimately and – in her mind – relevantly.
*First out of one.
I suppose some frivolous questions can lead us to newer thoughts and perspectives, which in turn helps us grasp deeper issues. And then there’s the stuff I bring up to Wife while she’s netflixing.
Does Mark 8: 28 imply Jews believed in reincarnation? Did viruses exist before the fall, and if so, did they mutate at times like they do today, post-fall? Is it redundant to call someone a godless pagan, or does “pagan” imply the lack of a god? How would we understand the phrase “in the fullness of time” if half of humanity lived on that planet next to the black hole in “Interstellar”? And don’t get me started on the question of feline scientific worldviews.
Recently Wife read to me from Acts 8 about Simon and Peter in Samaria. A debate ensued, complete with thoughtfulness, discussion, and kicking. A leftover thought arose that evening as I was icing a bruise: Acts 8 comes before chapters 10 and 11.
Simon the Magician bedazzled in Samaria, yet Peter was there preaching to them in chapter 8. Philip labored in Samaria as well. The disciples and the early church traveled to Samaritan towns deliberately to share the gospel.
Much later – 2843 words later, according to my translation – the church came to grips with the fact that Gentiles could be saved.
My Sunday School teachers explained to us years ago that Jews hated Samaritans more than church kids hated Wednesday night adult choir practices that resulted in supper at 9:00 pm. The Samaritans were Jewish half-breeds, worshipped on the wrong mountain, and fought against the Maccabees. They once scattered bones in the Temple during Passover and may have massacred a group of Galileans during Christ’s childhood.
Why then did the disciples have no trouble visiting the hated Samaritans but drew the line at evangelizing the uncircumcised yet largely innocent Gentiles? Weren’t the Samaritans worse than Gentiles, collaborators with the enemy and possessed of mixed blood? Practicers of the sort of idolatry that lost the Jews their nation in the first place?
Sure, Jesus ministered to the Samaritan woman so perhaps the disciples drew a lesson from Him. He healed a Roman and a Phoenician as well; miracle-receiving Gentiles outnumbered Samaritans 2-to-1 but it had no appreciable impact on the disciples’ evangelism philosophy.
Theories?
Pre or Post Resurrection impact? Big differences. Pre–about like me –slow as a mule after 3 buckets of feed. Post, only the Spirit could quantify “appreciable.”
It’s simple (lol). Clearly, Samaria came before the ends of the earth in Acts 1:8, so they had to get their minds wrapped around Samaria before they could move on to the Gentiles. More seriously, the Samaritans were at least cultural, genetic and spiritual “cousins”, not to mention the closest region during the panicked flight from Jerusalem.
I get the cousin part, but Peter and the other disciples did not seem to flee the Jerusalem-centered persecution of Saul. They remained in town for some time.
I wonder how they understood Jesus’ references to taking the gospel to all the world if they did not initially understand that it was available to Gentiles as well? Were there still that many Jews scattered across the globe that the disciples thought Jesus was talking about them?
That is highly possible Ethan.
James references this in Acts 15.
I love the way your mind works, sir.
Is this just playing around or a serious discussion?
It is obvious that the problem the Jews had with out and out Gentiles coming to faith in Christ is that they by passed Moses. The issue of Acts 15 and Galatians pretty much demonstrates this. At least the Samaritans had some sort of orientation to Moses.
Acts makes clear the objection to Gentiles coming, but does not resolve the ambiguity of the Samaritans’ position. They are not explicitly addressed.
The limited books I possess tell little of the Samaritans’ religious practices, therefore I have no way of knowing whether they continued circumcision. If they did indeed practice it, then you may very well have solved the question.
This is how it is done – someone (usually me) asks a stupid question and amongst the various members of the body there is someone with an answer.
How is what you are asking a stupid question? It is a relevant and interesting question.
I think we miss the point of Acts 1:8 and the Matt. passage. This is not a widening circle starting with one and progressing to the other. They should be understood as all inclusive, wherever you are…if a Jew tell of Christ…if Gentile tell of christ. We do not start at home progress to nation an then the world we are responsible to witness everywhere and provide witness everywhere all at the same time
Matthew 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
One could make the argument that there were some lost sheep of Israel within the Samaritans. You could even possibly say that they were even more lost, considering the genetic commingling that had occurred since the Northern Kingdom was destroyed. I suppose that this verse has a very different meaning depending on which side of the Arminian/Reformed debate you subscribe to.
VMCD,
How would that verse have any different meaning depending on the theology. It is obvious that Jesus did not regard Samaritans as the being of the house of Israel.
Depending on how you view things, one could say that Israel represents the one people of God which encompasses all ethnics. Abraham. for example wasn’t a Jew, but he is the father to all who believe, circumcised and uncircumcised.
Thus all lost Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles who would come by faith would be to whom Jesus was sent.
Yes Abraham was a Jew. He was the first one referred to as a Hebrew. Genesis 14:13
And no in the passage referred to about the lost sheep of the house of Israel, He is referring to the Jews. Here it is in context.
Mat 10:5-6 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: (6) But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Jesus clearly distinguishes between Gentiles, Samaritans and Jews here.
John, Thanks for the info. But a couple of points. Abraham was not a Jew or an Israelite. He was a Hebrew, a man from beyond, from the house of Eber which was across the Euphrates, which is where Abram was from. Second, the Scripture is Mat. 15:24… 21 Jesus went away from there, and withdrew into the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 And a Canaanite woman from that region came out and began to cry out, saying, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed.” 23 But He did not answer her a… Read more »
In the passage that talks about the lost sheep of the house of Israel, Jesus is definitely referring to ethnic Jews.
And the Matthew 10 passage would give us some insight into the Matthew 15 passage.
Wasn’t there two nations and one was lost?
Amend that: wasn’t there ten lost tribes?
and weren’t these from the northern kingdom?
and could that be what Jesus is referring to?
No the 10 Northern Tribes were never lost. They were dispersed, but they were never lost.
So where are they today?
They are all over the world and even some in Israel.
Was Asher one of those tribes? What tribe was Anna in the Temple from?
Asher was on of them.
Exactly right and yet 700 years after the 10 Northern Tribes supposedly vanished we have Anna from the tribe of Asher in the Temple speaking about Christ.