"Wow, wrong. "The remnant which accepted Christ Jesus were those from the house of Judah." The remnant is about Israel."
In Acts those of the physical bloodline are sometimes called Jews and sometimes called Israel.
Acts 2: "And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven..........10. Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,"
Acts 2: "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23. Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain..........Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."
Look in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance for verses in which Jews are used and for verses in which Israel is used in Acts. You will find a large number of verses using Jews and a large number using Israel.
On the other hand, Judah appears a huge number of times in the Old Testament. Strong's shows only one use of Judah in the New Testament, and that is a quote of Jeremiah 31: 31-34.
Before arguing about whether the remnant of Israel or the remnant of Judah first accepted Christ, find out if the New Testament continues the separation of Judah from Israel.
And see if a remnant of Judah appears in the New Testament.
Isaiah 37:31 does say "And the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward:"
I see no evidence, though, that the distinction between Israel and Judah is continued in the New Testament, except to quote Jeremiah 31 on the New Covenant being with Israel and Judah.
If Christian Zionism maintains the distinction between Israel and Judah, added to their distinction between Israel and the Church, and holds to a system of interpretation which is strictly of the letter, then believers in Christ who are not of the bloodline are not part of the New Covenant, for Christian Zionists.
In Acts those of the physical bloodline are sometimes called Jews and sometimes called Israel.
Acts 2: "And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
4. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven..........10. Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,"
Acts 2: "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23. Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain..........Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."
Look in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance for verses in which Jews are used and for verses in which Israel is used in Acts. You will find a large number of verses using Jews and a large number using Israel.
On the other hand, Judah appears a huge number of times in the Old Testament. Strong's shows only one use of Judah in the New Testament, and that is a quote of Jeremiah 31: 31-34.
Before arguing about whether the remnant of Israel or the remnant of Judah first accepted Christ, find out if the New Testament continues the separation of Judah from Israel.
And see if a remnant of Judah appears in the New Testament.
Isaiah 37:31 does say "And the remnant that is escaped of the house of Judah shall again take root downward, and bear fruit upward:"
I see no evidence, though, that the distinction between Israel and Judah is continued in the New Testament, except to quote Jeremiah 31 on the New Covenant being with Israel and Judah.
If Christian Zionism maintains the distinction between Israel and Judah, added to their distinction between Israel and the Church, and holds to a system of interpretation which is strictly of the letter, then believers in Christ who are not of the bloodline are not part of the New Covenant, for Christian Zionists.
