What does that mean? It's in the Gospels. Are you saying the Gospels were not written in Greek?
Besides, if every reference to Christ's sheep only referred to Jews by birth, then we are all toast!
Christ never, ever taught to the Gentiles. Christ never invited them. Jews could not fraternize or mix with the Gentiles. They could only live next to them.
There was no reason to preach to the non-believers. But the Gentiles are always welcome to convert to Judaism. What Christ taught, and what the Apostles thought He taught was Judaism. There was no reason to preach Judaism to non-believers.
Christ commanded the Apostles to go out and spread what He taught them
He did. He sent them to preach to the 12 tribes/clans/phule of Israel (descendants of Jacob).
that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. [Luke 22:30]
the promise to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly serve God night and day And for this hope, O King, I am being accused by Jews. [Acts 26:7]
James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad: Greetings. [James 1:1]
It had a great and high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels; and names were written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel. [Rev 21:12]
Sitting at the throne (end times) judging the 12 tribes of Israel (not all nations of the world). The promise to the 12 tribes hope to attain (not all nations of the world), only the names of the 12 tribes will be there...
Those teachings were meant for us too, including the teaching to further spread the word. If they were not, then what's the point?
The point is that the Church failed in Israel. There was no life for it anywhere among the 12 tribes of Israel. I think most people do not understand that the Church was about to become extinct.
The next (and only) logical step was to turn to the Gentiles. I am willing to believe that it was God's way of showing us what Christ really taught but no one understood, not even the Apostles. But the Bible does not seem to provide evidence to support that belief.
We are talking about whether Christ spoke of saving Gentiles. The centurion was clearly a Gentile. Christ said he had great faith, leading us to believe he was saved
You are right, but you are forgetting that as far as everyone was concerned the Centurion became a Jew by converting to Judaism. The Christ believing Jews of the time did not practice "Christianity" as we know it today, FK. They were Jews in belief, in Scripture (they only had the OT), and in places of worship (synagogues).
The Pharisaical sect developed alongside the Sadduccees about two centuries before Christ. They were as far apart as night and day in their end-times beliefs, and many other beliefs. The latter denied even the angels although the OT is full of angelic references.
Judaism was not a "catholic" religion but a bunch of different sects using similar Scriptural sources. It was an amalgam of beliefs and traditions. It still is. About have only one thing they have in common is their dneial of Christ Jesus as the Son of God.
The idea of a messiah, who was supposed to be a mortal human, and was to become [literally] a king of Israel (just as David was), originated at that time. Up to that point, Judaism basically maintained that man was in no need to be saved. They still believe that.
Along with the messianic beliefs, came the beliefs in resurrection, which was also foreign to Judaism up to that time. So, what Christ preached was in of itself not blasphemous. He rubbed the Jewish authorities raw when He suggested that He was the real Son of God (which is polytheism as far as Judaism is concerned, and therefore the worst kind of Gentile-pagan proposition).
But you must understand that no one who accepted Jesus as the Messiah was working outside of Judaism. Gentiles who accepted Him accepted Judaism and became Jews.
Even His own Apostles were not really clear as to just when was He going to take the throne of Israel as a real king (all kings, by the way, were 'anointed by God').
In all instances, Christ is referred to as the King of Israel. Although Christians consider themselves "extended" Israel, and +Paul makes us into 'grafts' to Israel, Christ's ministry was about the Jews, for the Jews and by the Jews until it morphed, by necessity, into a universal religion.
Again, I am willing to believe that this is was one of those mysterious God's ways of telling us what His real plan was, but it's not so clear from the Bible, and apparently not even the Apostles were quite clear about it.
No. The church was never about to become extinct regardless of appearances.
God needed no plan B.
His plan A always works out perfectly.
One of the perks of His being God.
You're overstating your case. Christ healed the Canaanite woman's daughter, and commended her for her faith, as too the centurion's slave, commending the centurion for his faith (with the implied criticism of His Chosen People, 'not even in Israel'), and spoke, indeed preached, to St. Photini, even though she was a Samaritan.
And you neglect, "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
Also, in seeing Paul as the originator of spreading the Gospel to the gentiles (a strange notion, given Christ's words just recalled), you forget Philip's baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch, while Paul was as yet, Saul, the persecutor of the Church.
Really? who was that woman at the well? Who were those centurions? Who were those Greeks?
What does that mean? It's in the Gospels. Are you saying the Gospels were not written in Greek?
The word in the text is "sheep". You took the liberty of interpreting that as the word "people". You then took your preferred Greek from your chosen word, even though the actual Greek for the actual text is still "sheep". You didn't choose the word "person", or "men" or "children" or "loved ones", etc. You chose a word that matched what you wanted in translation.
What Christ taught, and what the Apostles thought He taught was Judaism. There was no reason to preach Judaism to non-believers.
Then Christ and the Apostles were obviously wrong because of course they all preached to non-believers.
He did. He sent them to preach to the 12 tribes/clans/phule of Israel (descendants of Jacob).
If that was true, then God couldn't possibly love all men, as Orthodoxy holds. Your verses would also make Paul a false Apostle. That might be fine with you, but it does go against Orthodoxy. I'm sure there are many other implications here that would effectively wipe out Christianity and/or the Bible, but I will leave it there. :)
The point is that the Church failed in Israel. ...... The next (and only) logical step was to turn to the Gentiles. I am willing to believe that it was God's way of showing us what Christ really taught but no one understood, not even the Apostles. But the Bible does not seem to provide evidence to support that belief.
Was this God's failure, or the failure of the hierarchy of the Church? I mean, wouldn't you have to say that God's first act in leading His Church was to purposely lead them down the garden path to failure? Also, since all this happened after Pentecost, and you are saying that the Apostles still didn't get it, at what point do you think they DID get it, if ever?