No one said they never trod upon Gentile territory. What do you think those lands are that I listed for where the tribes went to as documented to date? All Gentile lands. And the charge was the charge.
Right. They were Gentile lands. And Jesus told them not to go into them. So you're stuck.
Unless you realize that Jesus sent all of the apostles out into the entire world. Not just Paul. All of the Apostles got a new mission after the Resurrection.
You can't be this dense, can you?
Scripture and history are in sync on where the tribes went. That would put the duties of ALL the apostles save for Paul primarily OUTSIDE the empire of Rome. Not just Peter - all of them.
Why is it that you accept the "history" of the lost tries on some wacky website, but reject actual historians who place Peter in Rome? You are simply not credible.
SD
Right. They were Gentile lands. And Jesus told them not to go into them. So you're stuck.
What in the world are you talking about? Do you have difficulty distinguishing the person from the territory?
Get off your high horse for a while and use your logic on the following:
John 4:
4 He had to pass through Samar'ia.
5 So he came to a city of Samar'ia, called Sy'char, near the field that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
6 Jacob's well was there, and so Jesus, wearied as he was with his journey, sat down beside the well. It was about the sixth hour.
7 There came a woman of Samar'ia to draw water. Jesus said to her, "Give me a drink."
Luke 9:
52 And he sent messengers ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him;
Pay attention, read the Scripture, and you may become unstuck.
Uh, no - I'm rather not stuck. Gentile lands; but, the tribes held to their own settlements. One can see this in 1 Peter. OOps, Scripture betraying the truth again.. We'll get to that later. Going into a Jewish settlement is not going amongst the Gentiles. Sorry. They were not yet supposed to minister to Gentiles. That didn't mean they couldn't be in Gentile territory or around Gentiles or they'd have to leave Israel which was possessed of Gentiles. Ope, what a giveaway. Did we forget that Israel at this time was a Gentile land - given over to the Gentiles by God because of the wantonness of the Israelites. Little details, huh.
So what have we to look at - well, for one, doing a study on the word Gentile in the NT turns up some rather amazing results. It turns out that though it might have been revealed to Peter that it was ok to minister to the Gentiles. Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles and is so labeled After the events of the Acts. To wit:
Galatians 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
1 Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
2 Timothy 1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
If we backtrack to Acts 13: 42-48, we see that the rule was to preach first to Jew, then to Gentile; but, If we move forward from there, we find in Acts 15 that Paul and Barnabas were sent to the Gentiles, followed by other disciples. The only thing that seems to have occurred with regard to Peter is that he confirmed to the others precisely what Paul's office was. Thusly we note why Paul refers to himself as the Apostle to the Gentiles in every other letter he wrote - noting in Galations that Peter is an Apostle to the circumcision.
Now, to answer the question as to what Peter considered himself and who he was ministering to, we can look at his first epistle and have the answer. He is writing to a collection of Israelite settlements or cities. It is recorded for history that they were such; but, we also have Peter's word on this: 1 Peter 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by [your] good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
1 Peter 4:3 For the time past of [our] life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
Peter is speaking to a Jewish audience whome he had shepherded. The places Paul was writing to in Asia Minor were Gentile settlements. Now, the fun thing here is, that these were not ministered to until after all of the events of the Acts that I've noted already covered. In Acts 16, it is noted that Asia Minor is off limits yet according to the Spirit. So after the events that have gone before; Peter is not only considered an Apostle to the Israelites, He ministers to Jewish settlements and only Paul is referred to as an Apostle to the Gentiles by office. And only disciples follow him in this office though the other Apostles are not forbidden to witness to Gentiles, they still have a primary overriding importance among the rest of the house of Israel. And in order to catch up with them, it would be necessary for the Apostles to follow where they were sent.
Whatever you think the scriptures say, you have by far failed to paint the whole picture. And I have only nailed the highlights. Do a word study on Gentile(s) in the NT and I'm certain you'll be made further unhappy with me.
Unless you realize that Jesus sent all of the apostles out into the entire world. Not just Paul. All of the Apostles got a new mission after the Resurrection.
Sending the Apostles out to the entire world does not negate their calling. And the apostles raised up plenty of disciples to deal with the Gentiles directly while they set about getting to the rest of the house of Israel. Your assessment doesn't hold up. If I'm called to minister to people in nursing homes in my city and then the lord says go out to the rest of the world, am I now no longer called to a nursing home ministry to deal with the aged? Do you even understand the notion of a calling or an appointed office. Jesus determined their ministry just as he determined that of Paul. And by their own pens, neither disrespected their calling. If what you are saying were true, the scriptures should bare it up in their witness. They don't. They contrarewise bare up what I've said. So what's the beef?
Already addressed this briefly earlier. Try looking up Simcha Jacobovici. Learn something. And no, I didn't find him on the web, though I know his stuff is available for order on the web. I have his 2 hour(?) documentary on the 12 tribes and his pursuit of them through the evidence. Quite compelling. Interesting thing is that when He says that Israelites have been somewhere, it's because he can produce something to show they have been there - like a museum stash of torah scrolls, clerical and everyday artifacts, etc. He doesn't just make claims and expect everyone to believe them because nobody else has made a similar claim...