I am familiar with the scriptures you reference. And I reject that interpretation.
And what interpretation do you believe in its place? Here we are, quote the scriptures you claim you know I am talking about, and give their proper interpretation please. Or does your rejection of the interpretation imply you simply ignore those verses?
Just as you decry early church decisions to change the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, I decry the decisions of the early church to distance themselves from normative Judaism to escape Roman persecution in the 2nd century. They were both part of the same package, Amo.
You are comparing two very different events, at two different times, with two different sources of authentication. Revisionist historians are as revisionist historians do I suppose. Including of course, leaving out important details, which completely change the story or narrative they are trying to sell as truth.
There are no records from scripture addressing the change of the Sabbath from one day to another, because such never took place while the authors of them were alive. While our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ did address the issue of the seventh day sabbath many times, He never even suggested in any way shape or form that it would from one day to another. Testifying to the contrary, that God's law would not change before heaven and earth passed. Nor did any of the Apostles ever address any such change, holding up the commandments of God as the standard unto the last book and chapter of the New Testament. We must look to and study history alone regarding the change of the sabbath.
The division which took place between "Christianity" and "Judaism" though, is addressed in scripture itself, and not just history. Your suggestion that this division took place because of Roman persecution alone, is revisionist history at its finest. Ignoring the record within scripture itself regarding the beginnings of this division. Which division only grew over time between those Jews and Gentiles who accepted Christ Jesus our Lord as the true Prince and Messiah of the Jewish nation and biblical prophecy. It was the Jews themselves, who rejected Jesus Christ as their promised Messiah, who began the division your revisionist version of history apparently ignores. Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. 54 When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. 57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, 58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. 60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
Act 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles. 2 And devout men carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation over him. 3 As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.
Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. 45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming. 46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. 47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. 48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. 49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region. 50 But the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts. 51 But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium.
Act 26:9 I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
10 Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them. 11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
You ought to face the facts concerning where the division you harp upon really began. It began with a large segment of Israel rejecting and crucifying their own predicted Messiah and Prince. It then continued in the persecution of Jew and gentile alike, who accepted our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as just exactly that, from city to city by these same Jews who rejected their own Lord and Savior. Persecuting, imprisoning, and murdering the followers of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This rejection being maintained to this very day by many, the tides eventually turned in favor of professed "Christians" in any case, who severed the connection with Jews completely and began persecuting them. This as "Christianity" became increasingly political and therefore apostate itself.
Nevertheless, those Jews who rejected their Messiah when He came to them the first time, all ever since who did the same throughout history, and those who still do today, are not the Israel of God. The New Covenant Israel of God transcends nations, races, tribes, or what have you. It is the spiritual nation addressed by the very scriptures you reject proving this to be so. So be it.
Of course it is. (except we call Him Yeshua the Messiah) But Not in the way you think.
Of course, it is not possible that those who still reject Yeshua the Messiah as such, are part of that kingdom. Whether Jew or Gentile, correct? My point however, is concerning Christ's kingdom, which you claim the literal Jews are still part of. Which is simply not possible, as Christ's new covenant kingdom is not a literal one, as He Himself testified.Joh 18:33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? 35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? 36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
I ask you Dave, what kind of kingdom would a kingdom that is not of this world be? Would it not be a spiritual kingdom? Yes, of course it would. Nothing proves more precisely that the literal nation of Israel today, is not the Israel of God during this New Covenant era, than the very fact that it is a literal nation of this world again. Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. 8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Joh 4:19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. 21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Why will you reject the above words of your Lord and Savior, in declaring those of literal national Israel to be of the kingdom of God without being of the spirit or born again? Paul also declared this truth in more than one place. Rom 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? 28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Why will you deny the above in declaring literal national Israel of the kingdom of God? Eph 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; 12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: 13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
Why will you deny the above truth by maintaining a separation which our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ came to remove? I of course can go on with many more verses to the same effect as the above. Please do though, give the proper interpretation of the above quoted scriptures, since you reject that which I am presenting. Surely you won't declare something being wrong, without also declaring what is right concerning the same, will you?