Abraham, A Jew???

[EdwardGoodie]

With all the talk about Abraham being a Jew and those in Israel being related by DNA as being Jews, I just gotta ask:

Where in Scripture does it say Abraham was a Jew? 

Simple question, simple answer, right?

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Jew means a descendant of Judah.  Judah was Abraham's great-grandson.  It wouldn't make much sense to call Abraham by his great-grandson's name.

So, all Jews are Hebrews, but not all Hebrews are Jews.  Got it?

[EdwardGoodie]

Jew means a descendant of Judah.  Judah was Abraham's great-grandson.  It wouldn't make much sense to call Abraham by his great-grandson's name.

So, all Jews are Hebrews, but not all Hebrews are Jews.  Got it?

Still waiting for an answer to my original question...

[Jaime]

I think wycliffe answered it perfectly. Abraham was a Hebrew. Jews were decendents of Abraham's great grandson Judah. 

[Jaime]

Of course Paul considered himself a Jew, but was from the tribe of Benjamin.

[Beta]

To keep more in line with the Bible perhaps we should follow down through
Abraham  - A Hebrew
Jacob - his Grandson whose name was changed to ISRAEL
Jacob/Israel had 12 sons of whom only Judah had jewish descendants and all others were Israelites.
ALL are Israel including the Jews but not all are Jews. To think of present-dsy Jews as all Israel is a mistake.
At one time or another the 2 split off and became 2 nations 2Chron.11. First one was sent into captivity for sabbath-breaking yet some were later allowed to return and these are todays Jews now keeping the sabbath.Neh.8.
Later the nation Israel were sent into captivity for sabbath-breaking 2Kgs.17 and are today still enslaved in false worship (not keeping the sabbath).
 
This is just a 'framework to help us understand the problems that have accumulated and beset this world leading to misunderstandings and confusion. I'm sure there are more facts that can be added.

[DaveW]

Where in Scripture does it say Abraham was a Jew?

In Genesis 14:13 Abram was called a "Hebrew."

In Acts 21.39 and 22.3 Paul identifies himself as a 'Jew:' "But Paul said, “ I am a Jew of Tarsus in Cilicia."

In 2 Cor 11.22 he identifies himself as a 'Hebrew:'  "Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I."

In Phil 3.5 He says he is NOT of the tribe of Judah (strict definition of a "Jew") but from Benjamin: "circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin."

So Paul uses the terms Israelite, Hebrew and Jew interchangably.  On that basis, one can call Abraham a Jew.

[EdwardGoodie]

I guess the point I am attempting to make is not being understood.

Abraham was not the beginning of a race.

We have been told over and over and over that being a Jew is a racial, DNA concern.  It is not.  While lineage back to a certain people group may be possible, it doesn't have a thing to do with being a Jew.  Being a Jew is a matter of the heart (Romans 2:28-29)!  It was a covenant relationship with God.  Jesus and Paul continually dealt with this specific issue - adherence to the Law or real relationship with God (both non-racial issues).  Abraham was a man of faith.  The issue is a faith issue, not a racial, DNA issue.  Besides, even the Hebrew encyclopedias themselves promote this view of relationship versus race.

By the way, where did these so-called individuals find Abraham's body to compare DNA?  Have you ever heard of Taphonomy?

Those alleged Jews in present-day Israel are not biblical Jews because they cannot practice a covenant relationship with God as proposed by the Old Testament.  Their temple is gone.  The priesthood is gone.  No more sacrifices.  The genealogies to determine Levitical priesthood were destroyed 2,000 years ago.  Those people in Israel practice a form of the Babylonian Talmud.  Do some research, folks!

[DaveW]

Those alleged Jews in present-day Israel are not biblical Jews because they cannot practice a covenant relationship with God as proposed by the Old Testament.  Their temple is gone.  The priesthood is gone.  No more sacrifices.  The genealogies to determine Levitical priesthood were destroyed 2,000 years ago.  Those people in Israel practice a form of the Babylonian Talmud.  Do some research, folks!

We have.  Were the people in Babylon like Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel NOT JEWS because there had been no temple for over half a century? They were fully Jews.

No they cannot perform the sacrifices. Neither could they in Babylon.

Btw, the priest hood is NOT GONE.  It is just not functional.

The priests all know who they are. Check out the "Temple Faithful" group.  Priests that keep getting Israel in trouble by trying to reestablish a sacrifice system on the Temple Mount.

[EdwardGoodie]

Those alleged Jews in present-day Israel are not biblical Jews because they cannot practice a covenant relationship with God as proposed by the Old Testament.  Their temple is gone.  The priesthood is gone.  No more sacrifices.  The genealogies to determine Levitical priesthood were destroyed 2,000 years ago.  Those people in Israel practice a form of the Babylonian Talmud.  Do some research, folks!

We have.  Were the people in Babylon like Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel NOT JEWS because there had been no temple for over half a century? They were fully Jews.

No they cannot perform the sacrifices. Neither could they in Babylon.

Btw, the priest hood is NOT GONE.  It is just not functional.

The priests all know who they are. Check out the "Temple Faithful" group.  Priests that keep getting Israel in trouble by trying to reestablish a sacrifice system on the Temple Mount.

How do these "priests" know who they are?  All the genealogical records were destroyed 2,000 years ago.  Please explain.  BTW, those faithful back in the days of Ezra were not following the Talmud, but you are right, their rituals would have suffered quite a bit...

[DaveW]

How do these "priests" know who they are?  All the genealogical records were destroyed 2,000 years ago.

They kept it in their names.  Any name Kohn, Cohen, Cowan are most likely priests.

Recently DNA has proved that almost all these men both Ashkenazi (North and central Europe)and Sephardi (Mediteranean) have a common male ancestor. (something over 90%)

[EdwardGoodie]

How do these "priests" know who they are?  All the genealogical records were destroyed 2,000 years ago.

They kept it in their names.  Any name Kohn, Cohen, Cowan are most likely priests.

Recently DNA has proved that almost all these men both Ashkenazi (North and central Europe)and Sephardi (Mediteranean) have a common male ancestor. (something over 90%)

"MOST LIKELY PRIESTS"...it is most likely to get them killed if they were to enter the holy of holies in the OT!

"ALMOST ALL"...hmmmmm

I keep asking, but whose DNA are they comparing it to?  I asked once before in another post about taphonomy.  Know much about it?

[DaveW]

They are compared to each other. Groups that have been seperated for close to 2000 years. That goes back to when the Temple came down.  We know those priests were of the right bloodline.

As to that other term you are using, I have never come across it before and do not know what you mean by it.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

They didn't make a direct comparison.  It's a product of studying genetic mutations.

Say you have a bunch of groups of DNA - call them A thru Z.  By looking at which of them share identical mutations and which don't share that mutation, you can deduce, for each group, which other group was its predecessor.  That's a simplification, but the principle is there.

So perhaps you can logically deduce, for instance, that groups 'I' and 'J' were direct spinoffs of group 'H.'

Then you can estimate the number of generations ago that the major genetic mutation took place by counting the average number of minor genetic mutations in existing people belonging to those groups, plugging in the rate at which genetic mutation occurs in humans, and dividing.

Jarrod