Author Topic: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.  (Read 10489 times)

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43325
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #120 on: March 16, 2021, 04:24:52 PM »
Rev. Stoffregen,

While God did not give an explicit command, He DID only create ONE woman for Adam.  Aren't you the one who tells us, when you are bashing those mean old conservatives, that actions speak louder than words?  And if God had wanted to make 37 women for Adam out his ribs, He could have given Adam 37 more ribs.  Right?  Or are you trying to box God in?


So, why didn't the ancient Israelites believe that monogamy was God's plan?


Sin had already come into the world.


The first humans in the Garden of Eden, without sin in the world, didn't fair too well.

I don’t read in Genesis 1 and 2 (prior to Fall) that the first human(s) didn’t fare well.  Going “chronologically” and journalistically through the narrative in Genesis, there was a time when the pre-fall human enjoyed complete and even response with God.  No duplicity arrives until Genesis 3.


But God says in Genesis 2, "It is not good for the man to be alone." That's quite a different statement than "God saw that it was very good" in Genesis 1. Genesis 2 indicates that there was some not goodness in the garden before Genesis 3.


Yes, there was a time when the humans allowed the good impulses to rule their lives. However, the evil impulse was still present within them. The desire for the forbidden fruit didn't suddenly appear out of nowhere. It was present from the beginning. I've argued elsewhere that the "fall" didn't begin when they ate the forbidden fruit, but when the desire to eat it, and to increase their knowledge, and to be like God. Sin is primarily an inner impulse that often result in outward behaviors.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17777
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #121 on: March 16, 2021, 04:36:07 PM »
So Jesus isn’t the Messiah and original sin was present from the beginning of creation. Hmmm.  ::)

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12658
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #122 on: March 16, 2021, 05:27:52 PM »

But God says in Genesis 2, "It is not good for the man to be alone." That's quite a different statement than "God saw that it was very good" in Genesis 1. Genesis 2 indicates that there was some not goodness in the garden before Genesis 3.

You are interpreting God's statement in Genesis 2, "It is not good for the man to be alone." as indicating that creation was bad, or sinful. Another way to interpret God's statement then was the indication that creation was not completed with the creation of Adam and more needed to be done, which God proceeded to do. Then, "God saw that it was very good."
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Tom Eckstein

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • Tom Eckstein
    • View Profile
    • Concordia Lutheran Church, Jamestown, ND
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #123 on: March 16, 2021, 07:27:59 PM »
Pastor Bohler writes:
I don't know that we should be looking to those who deny the Messiah -- even when He stares them straight in the face, in passage after passage of the Old Testament -- for a proper understanding of other teachings of the Bible, such as marriage.
I comment:
Jews do not "deny the Messiah." They just do not believe (maybe yet) that Jesus is the One. And saying that something "stares" people "straight in the face, in passage after passage of the Old Testament" is not helpful when dealing with Christian/Jewish topics or approaches to scripture. It is unfair to simply dismiss the views of those reading the ancient scriptures and taking them as God's word for a lot longer than we Christians.
Language and attitudes like that - so simply expressed, without nuance - can be the foundation for much difficulty.

So, if someone says "Jesus is not the Messiah", he is not denying the Messiah?  Well, you are the wordsmith.
Steven, there is an ambiguity in your post that you may not recognize. The vocable "Messiah" can be used to refer to the concept of a Messiah or someone who has been identified as the Messiah. Many Jews do not reject the teaching that God will send a Messiah, so they do not deny the Messiah per se. But they do reject the identification of Jesus of Nazareth as the one whom God sent as the Messiah.


Over time, several groups of Jews, especially among the Hasidic Jews have identified leaders who they thought could be the promised Messiah.

Yes, I am aware of that.  However, those Hasidic Jews (and other Jews who would identify someone else as the Messiah or even as a messiah) are wrong.  There is only one Messiah: Jesus Christ, the Son of God.  And they all deny that.  It doesn't matter (as Rev. Austin wants to claim and as Rev. Stoffregen will undoubtedly bring up -- "but what about Cyrus?") that they believe in a messiah or a singular Messiah who is still to come (or who has already come in the person of this or that Hasidic rabbi): they all deny that Jesus is the Messiah, the Savior.  And whether or not that is plain to them is irrelevant to that fact.


If you would actually read the Old Testament - and look at where the noun/adjective, מִשִׁיח, and the verb, מָשַׁח are used, you would see that they nearly always refer to particular persons, Saul, David, and successors, Cyrus the Persian (Is 45:1), priests, patriarchs.

Brian, your statement above fails to consider that even though there were various small "m" messiahs (annointed ones) throughout OT history, the Jews eventually also came to use מִשִׁיח to refer to the BIG "M" Messiah - or THE Annointed ONE, who would come in the future as the Savior of God's people.  We see this in Matthew 26:63 where the high priest says to Jesus:  ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐσιώπα. καὶ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἐξορκίζω σε κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος ἵνα ἡμῖν εἴπῃς εἰ σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ.   Jesus had revealed to some that He was the promised Christ, and that wouldn't make any sense if the Jews had not been waiting for future coming Christ who would usher in God's Kingdom.  Of course, the Jews of Jesus day were in error about what God's Kingdom was and they were also in error when they rejected Jesus as The Christ.

Also, in Matthew 2:3-4 Herod asks the scribes where THE Messiah is to be born.  Here is more evidence that even though there were various "messiahs" throughout OT history, the Jews were also looking for ONE, PARTICULAR Messiah to come in the future.  Jesus clamed to be that Messiah (see Mark 14:62), but the Jews rejected Him.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 07:38:40 PM by Tom Eckstein »
I'm an LCMS Pastor in Jamestown, ND.

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43325
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #124 on: March 17, 2021, 02:42:35 AM »
If you would actually read the Old Testament - and look at where the noun/adjective, מִשִׁיח, and the verb, מָשַׁח are used, you would see that they nearly always refer to particular persons, Saul, David, and successors, Cyrus the Persian (Is 45:1), priests, patriarchs.

Brian, your statement above fails to consider that even though there were various small "m" messiahs (annointed ones) throughout OT history, the Jews eventually also came to use מִשִׁיח to refer to the BIG "M" Messiah - or THE Anointed ONE, who would come in the future as the Savior of God's people.  We see this in Matthew 26:63 where the high priest says to Jesus:  ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐσιώπα. καὶ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἐξορκίζω σε κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος ἵνα ἡμῖν εἴπῃς εἰ σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. Jesus had revealed to some that He was the promised Christ, and that wouldn't make any sense if the Jews had not been waiting for future coming Christ who would usher in God's Kingdom.  Of course, the Jews of Jesus day were in error about what God's Kingdom was and they were also in error when they rejected Jesus as The Christ.

Also, in Matthew 2:3-4 Herod asks the scribes where THE Messiah is to be born.  Here is more evidence that even though there were various "messiahs" throughout OT history, the Jews were also looking for ONE, PARTICULAR Messiah to come in the future.  Jesus claimed to be that Messiah (see Mark 14:62), but the Jews rejected Him.


Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests. He wasn't the type of Messiah they were expecting from their understanding of the Hebrew scriptures. One of the major charges against Jesus was blasphemy. His claim to be the Messiah was seen as blasphemy. He wasn't the type of Messiah that they found in their scriptures.


Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1:23: ἡμεῖς δὲ κηρύσσομεν Χριστὸν ἐσταυρωμένον, Ἰουδαίοις μὲν σκάνδαλον ἔθνεσιν δὲ μωρίαν.


While Christ crucified might seem foolish to the Greeks, i.e., why would anyone be willing to be crucified? It was scandalous to the Jews. Because a crucified Messiah/Christ was so foreign to the Jewish belief, the proclamation that the Messiah/Christ was crucified was an offensive message. It was contrary to their beliefs about the messiah - and certainly quite different from the messiahs, like Cyrus, they read about in their scriptures.


It's quite possible that Christian evangelical work among Jews was less fruitful than among Gentiles because they had to unlearn some beliefs that they had about God and the Messiah.


I read once that it takes about seven times the energy to turn around a dying congregation than it takes to start a new congregation. In the established congregation, energy has to be spent to stop the train going in the wrong direction (and some don't want it to stop going in that direction,) so that it can get turned around to a new direction. With a new start, they are building the train and can make it go in whatever direction they deem necessary.


Getting devout Jews to change their deeply held beliefs was a greater task than getting Gentiles who few to no thoughts about the Jewish/Christian God to start believing in a new and different God.





"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43325
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #125 on: March 17, 2021, 01:36:52 PM »
A hitman can have a contract to violate the 5th. We don’t honor it. Why does making a contract out of something or mutually agreeing to it suddenly make it okay?


Do we honor our government when they have campaigns to kill terrorists' leaders? Wasn't there great rejoicing at the killing of Osama Bin Laden? Don't we honor Bonhoeffer (and others) who plotted for Hitler's death?
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

George Rahn

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #126 on: March 17, 2021, 02:57:11 PM »
A hitman can have a contract to violate the 5th. We don’t honor it. Why does making a contract out of something or mutually agreeing to it suddenly make it okay?


Do we honor our government when they have campaigns to kill terrorists' leaders? Wasn't there great rejoicing at the killing of Osama Bin Laden? Don't we honor Bonhoeffer (and others) who plotted for Hitler's death?

Both of these examples fall under the making-of-opinion heading.  They happen between and/or among humans alone (and yet always done before God's sight as well).   Making opinions can be honorable (or not)in the sight of others.  But these values never can stand before God's face as honorable or righteousness.  Opinion-making is a function which humans "do" within nomological existence and so fall under the retributional aspect of life.  And we know from Romans 3 that through the law comes the knowledge of sin only.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2021, 02:59:50 PM by George Rahn »

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17777
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #127 on: March 17, 2021, 03:00:53 PM »
A hitman can have a contract to violate the 5th. We don’t honor it. Why does making a contract out of something or mutually agreeing to it suddenly make it okay?


Do we honor our government when they have campaigns to kill terrorists' leaders? Wasn't there great rejoicing at the killing of Osama Bin Laden? Don't we honor Bonhoeffer (and others) who plotted for Hitler's death?
Soldiers do not have a contract to violate the 5th because killing combatants in just war is not a violation. As for assassinating Hitler, you think it was the validity of the contract that made it okay?   

George Rahn

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #128 on: March 17, 2021, 03:18:07 PM »
It is important to note (at least for me if not for others) that the Church's message of the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins goes out to every body, including the individual who identifies as gay. Individuals are offered the forgiveness of sins in Christ.  Social contracts, on the other hand, are orders comprised of individuals eg. marriage, and cannot be altered except by human whim and imagination.  Any humanly devised social construct does not stand before God as recognized.  Or more simply, individual persons are offered Christian forgiveness not social orders.  Contractual agreements create social constructs between or among individuals.  The order between father and son, et.al. as well as that between husband and wife occur within estates or orders blessed by God and unchangeably so in terms of the order aspect.  And of course, sinners can wield their own powers within these orders and deceive themselves when they believe that they change an order for their own purposes resulting in God's wrath upon them.

There is a distinction of effectiveness that needs to be recognized here.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2021, 03:21:38 PM by George Rahn »

Tom Eckstein

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
  • Tom Eckstein
    • View Profile
    • Concordia Lutheran Church, Jamestown, ND
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #129 on: March 17, 2021, 03:46:18 PM »
If you would actually read the Old Testament - and look at where the noun/adjective, מִשִׁיח, and the verb, מָשַׁח are used, you would see that they nearly always refer to particular persons, Saul, David, and successors, Cyrus the Persian (Is 45:1), priests, patriarchs.

Brian, your statement above fails to consider that even though there were various small "m" messiahs (annointed ones) throughout OT history, the Jews eventually also came to use מִשִׁיח to refer to the BIG "M" Messiah - or THE Anointed ONE, who would come in the future as the Savior of God's people.  We see this in Matthew 26:63 where the high priest says to Jesus:  ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐσιώπα. καὶ ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἐξορκίζω σε κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος ἵνα ἡμῖν εἴπῃς εἰ σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. Jesus had revealed to some that He was the promised Christ, and that wouldn't make any sense if the Jews had not been waiting for future coming Christ who would usher in God's Kingdom.  Of course, the Jews of Jesus day were in error about what God's Kingdom was and they were also in error when they rejected Jesus as The Christ.

Also, in Matthew 2:3-4 Herod asks the scribes where THE Messiah is to be born.  Here is more evidence that even though there were various "messiahs" throughout OT history, the Jews were also looking for ONE, PARTICULAR Messiah to come in the future.  Jesus claimed to be that Messiah (see Mark 14:62), but the Jews rejected Him.


Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests. He wasn't the type of Messiah they were expecting from their understanding of the Hebrew scriptures. One of the major charges against Jesus was blasphemy. His claim to be the Messiah was seen as blasphemy. He wasn't the type of Messiah that they found in their scriptures.


Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1:23: ἡμεῖς δὲ κηρύσσομεν Χριστὸν ἐσταυρωμένον, Ἰουδαίοις μὲν σκάνδαλον ἔθνεσιν δὲ μωρίαν.


While Christ crucified might seem foolish to the Greeks, i.e., why would anyone be willing to be crucified? It was scandalous to the Jews. Because a crucified Messiah/Christ was so foreign to the Jewish belief, the proclamation that the Messiah/Christ was crucified was an offensive message. It was contrary to their beliefs about the messiah - and certainly quite different from the messiahs, like Cyrus, they read about in their scriptures.


It's quite possible that Christian evangelical work among Jews was less fruitful than among Gentiles because they had to unlearn some beliefs that they had about God and the Messiah.


I read once that it takes about seven times the energy to turn around a dying congregation than it takes to start a new congregation. In the established congregation, energy has to be spent to stop the train going in the wrong direction (and some don't want it to stop going in that direction,) so that it can get turned around to a new direction. With a new start, they are building the train and can make it go in whatever direction they deem necessary.


Getting devout Jews to change their deeply held beliefs was a greater task than getting Gentiles who few to no thoughts about the Jewish/Christian God to start believing in a new and different God.







I fully agree with you that the Jews of Jesus' day did NOT understand or at least would NOT accept that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah was also THE Messiah (although there is some evidence that some Jews viewed Isaiah 53 as messianic, but not in terms of the messiah willingly enduring vicarious suffering on behalf of all people).  In fact, even Jesus' own apostles didn't grasp this until after Jesus' resurrection.

However, this doesn't change the fact that they were all reading the OT incorrectly and that Jesus sets them straight when He taught that the OT teaches that the Christ would suffer as a ransom for many (see Matthew 16:21 & 20:28;  also Luke 24:44-47).  In other words, The Messiah and The Servant are one and the same person!  John the Baptist alludes to this when he calls Jesus the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (see John 1:19-34).  Simply put, a proper understanding of what the OT teaches about The Messiah did not exist until The Messiah Himself opened our eyes to see how the OT is fulfilled in Him and His suffering, death and resurrection for us.

Even though the OT teaches that The Messiah would save God's people from their enemies, the fact is the OT itself teaches that our greatest enemy is our own sin against God - and Jesus, The Messiah, came to rescue us from this enemy (see Matthew 1:21).  It appears Zechariah was also given insight into this fact (see Luke 1:76-79).  But most people did not know what Zechariah knew, which is why Jesus said (Luke 19:42):  λέγων ὅτι Εἰ ἔγνως ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ταύτῃ καὶ σὺ τὰ πρὸς εἰρήνην· νῦν δὲ ἐκρύβη ἀπὸ ὀφθαλμῶν σου.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2021, 03:52:49 PM by Tom Eckstein »
I'm an LCMS Pastor in Jamestown, ND.

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11623
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #130 on: March 17, 2021, 11:07:57 PM »
Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests.

Stupid Andrew! Misleading his brother. (John 1:41)

Oh, wait... Andrew was a Jew. ?? What the ... ? Oh, okay. He was just kidding around with Simon. It's all good. 
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43325
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #131 on: March 18, 2021, 01:42:32 AM »
Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests.

Stupid Andrew! Misleading his brother. (John 1:41)

Oh, wait... Andrew was a Jew. ?? What the ... ? Oh, okay. He was just kidding around with Simon. It's all good.


Andrew and Peter, and for that matter, none of the twelve were "Pharisees, scribes, or priests," those who were well-versed in scripture. As fishermen, it's likely they were illiterate.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11623
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #132 on: March 18, 2021, 07:43:43 AM »
Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests.

Stupid Andrew! Misleading his brother. (John 1:41)

Oh, wait... Andrew was a Jew. ?? What the ... ? Oh, okay. He was just kidding around with Simon. It's all good.


Andrew and Peter, and for that matter, none of the twelve were "Pharisees, scribes, or priests," those who were well-versed in scripture. As fishermen, it's likely they were illiterate.

You wrote:

"Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah..."

Then:  "...and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests."

Andrew and Peter, and the rest of the twelve for that matter, were Jews.

As for your particular category,  stupid Pharisee Paul misleading the world. And stupid Pharisee/Saint Nicodemus being misled to the point of assisting in a "" royal" burial of Jesus.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2021, 09:00:38 AM by Pr. Don Kirchner »
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43325
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #133 on: March 18, 2021, 01:59:19 PM »
Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests.

Stupid Andrew! Misleading his brother. (John 1:41)

Oh, wait... Andrew was a Jew. ?? What the ... ? Oh, okay. He was just kidding around with Simon. It's all good.


Andrew and Peter, and for that matter, none of the twelve were "Pharisees, scribes, or priests," those who were well-versed in scripture. As fishermen, it's likely they were illiterate.

You wrote:

"Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah..."

Then:  "...and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests."

Andrew and Peter, and the rest of the twelve for that matter, were Jews.

As for your particular category,  stupid Pharisee Paul misleading the world. And stupid Pharisee/Saint Nicodemus being misled to the point of assisting in a "" royal" burial of Jesus.


And the crowd who yelled, "Crucify him," were also Jews.


Consider my use of "the Jews" to be like that of the Gospel of John. The meaning is really "some of the Jews," or "the Jewish leadership." Not all of the Jews. BTW, I am Jewish (through my mother). Her grandfather help start the first Orthodox Synagogue in Seattle in the late 1800s.
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Donald_Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11623
    • View Profile
Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« Reply #134 on: March 18, 2021, 02:42:00 PM »
Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests.

Stupid Andrew! Misleading his brother. (John 1:41)

Oh, wait... Andrew was a Jew. ?? What the ... ? Oh, okay. He was just kidding around with Simon. It's all good.


Andrew and Peter, and for that matter, none of the twelve were "Pharisees, scribes, or priests," those who were well-versed in scripture. As fishermen, it's likely they were illiterate.

You wrote:

"Yes, the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah..."

Then:  "...and especially those who were well-versed in their Scriptures: Pharisees, scribes, and priests."

Andrew and Peter, and the rest of the twelve for that matter, were Jews.

As for your particular category,  stupid Pharisee Paul misleading the world. And stupid Pharisee/Saint Nicodemus being misled to the point of assisting in a "" royal" burial of Jesus.

And the crowd who yelled, "Crucify him," were also Jews.

Consider my use of "the Jews" to be like that of the Gospel of John. The meaning is really "some of the Jews," or "the Jewish leadership." Not all of the Jews. BTW, I am Jewish (through my mother). Her grandfather help start the first Orthodox Synagogue in Seattle in the late 1800s.

Well, you aren't the apostle John. So, you should be more specific and not attempt to evade and change categories, i.e., "Andrew and Peter, and for that matter, none of the twelve were "Pharisees, scribes, or priests,"..."
Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs