Why would you surmise that? How would pagan refugees from Babylon [II Kings 17:24] being repopulated into Samaria have any relationship to the Israelites of the North. They had previously been removed [II Kings 17:6] by this same king who is now bringing in Babylonians. Two separate groups of people!
So let's take a look at this a bit. According to what you're saying, in the above references, including Matthew 10:6, is that Peter and the twelve were commanded to go to the ten lost tribes. What you said earlier, was that the Samaritans were, in fact, paganized members of those ten lost tribes
I think you need to go back and read it again. I never said this.
I also never said that there would not be a ministry to the Gentiles. I think that you are reading something into this that I'm not saying.
By the way, I hope your grandson's game went well. 51 mph? Not half bad.
Thank you....we won 21 to 7. Like most little league games they are usually very high scoring. LOL!
How can I make that comment?
Because of your use of the word 'paganized.'
'Paganized', although not defined in Webster, implies that they were, at one time, not pagan. That a process occurred to make them pagan.
I wasn't personally assuming that Samaria was populated by descendants of the ten tribes. I surmised that you believed that because of your use of the word 'paganized.'
As to not having a ministry to the gentiles, I think that is exactly what you were saying. Until Saul of Tarsus. I think you have been saying that Jesus commanded the 12 to go forth to the lost tribes of Israel. And that only Saul of Tarsus was to have a ministry to the Gentiles.
Congrats on the little league game, btw!