(Reg) A typical SD invention. Who ever said anything remotely akin to this statement?
Have you met Havoc? And his cronies?
He holds that Peter could not have been in Rome because only Paul was sent to the Gentiles. All of the rest of the Apostles were only to preach to Jews.
This is his "proof" that Peter was not in Rome, therefore could not be the Bishop of Rome.
Maybe if I posted your statement again, and this time I insisted you not ramble around like a drunken sailor, you would address the question.
(SD) To read this text as Jesus prohibiting the Apostles from ever, ever, going out to the nations is contrary not only to the later charge Jesus gives, but also to history, which is replete with far flung Churches established by Apostles.
(Reg) Do you think you can answer the question I asked?
(Reg) Could you provide one or more references which indicates the "house of Israel" doesn't refer to the Lost Tribes? Thanks.
Sure. How about Psalm 118:
1 Give thanks to the LORD, who is good, whose love endures forever.
2 Let the house of Israel say: God's love endures forever.
3 Let the house of Aaron say, God's love endures forever.
The House of Israel is one of the tribes. Specifically, it was the one tribe of the Southern kingdom, that was not carried off to Babylon.
That's nice but it has absoloutely no correspondence to my question. How in the world does your Psalm passage prove anything?
Not to hurt your feelings, but I don't consider you as a qualified historical reference.
You have made a statement that the "House of Israel" in no way references the Lost Tribes of Israel. I have posted one reference which states the opposite and am prepared to offer more.
Can you do the same?
Please note that the Psalm refers to both the Houses of Israel and of Aaron. These are two of the tribes. There are twelve of them. They each have a name.
If the "House of Israel" was meant to refer to the lost tribes this would make no sense.
Israel was one of the southern tribes, one of hte Tribes that wasnot carried away into Captivity.
Why would the name of the existing tribe, still alive and well in, well, Israel, be sued to cipher for the missing tribes?
Explain that to me. The natural reading is that the House of Israel means the House of Israel.
IF the Delaware Indians disappeared from the earth, would we call them "Sioux," even though the actual Sioux still exist?
SD