Muslims converting to Christianity

[Jayda]

I am afraid in you zeal to impress people, you seem to have lost the plot and taken my post out of context.

I was trying to tell Br.Seeker that the other person was not talking about the new religion called Christian Science but may have actually been talking about a real life prof. who is a Scientist, was a Christian and is a Muslim now.

Please, I beg you not to reply to me anymore as you can see that I am busy with another person in the thread and want to devote my full attention to him or I will get confused. thanx in advance of any co-operation

hola NoName55

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama. their argument uses the credentials associated with the ubiquitous term 'scientist' to lend credence to the completely unverified claim that intelligent christians become muslims and ignorant muslims become christians. by that same token they should give greater weight to any argument i make because of my credentials.

it's called appeal to authority, look it up.

also, buy this, there is no reason to insinuate things about me or demand that i stop talking. if you don't have the time to have two conversations then do not engage in two conversations. adab and sabr, as you say.

que Dios te bendiga

 

[ummzayd]

hola Grace Seeker,

i do not know whether protestants retain the apostolic traditions of 'catechisms' or 'ecumenical councils.' for us and the orthodox the first ecumenical council was the Council of Jerusalem in the first century, it is discussed in the book of Acts, the question was which 'law' the gentile converts needed to follow. Paul taught that gentiles need only follow the laws of the Noahide covenant, St. Peter taught that they needed to follow the Jewish covenant... as if becoming Christian made them Jewish.

the Council decided that, in continuing the traditional Jewish practice, gentiles needed only to practice the noahide covenant, this is why they did not need to be circumcised. this and other decisions were preserved in our first catechism, which is called the didache and was produced in the first century.

que Dios te bendiga

Greetings

I am glad you pointed out that this was in fact already a Jewish practice - proselytes (sp?) to the Jewish faith were not required to follow all the laws in order to share in the covenant between God and the Jews, only the laws of Noah.

According to some scholars of first century Christianity/Judaism, this first council of Jerusalem is a strong indication that the early followers of Jesus pbuh were Jews, who were carrying on the Jewish tradition, and intended only to live and die as believing, practising Jews according to their understanding of the teachings of Jesus pbuh. They did not in fact intend that a whole new religion of Christianity should be instituted.

peace

 

[Jayda]

Greetings

I am glad you pointed out that this was in fact already a Jewish practice - proselytes (sp?) to the Jewish faith were not required to follow all the laws in order to share in the covenant between God and the Jews, only the laws of Noah.

According to some scholars of first century Christianity/Judaism, this first council of Jerusalem is a strong indication that the early followers of Jesus pbuh were Jews, who were carrying on the Jewish tradition, and intended only to live and die as believing, practising Jews according to their understanding of the teachings of Jesus pbuh. They did not in fact intend that a whole new religion of Christianity should be instituted.

peace

hola ummzayd,

from what we understand you are right, the early jewish christians considered themselves the fulfillment of the promise of israel... through Jesus they would go out into the world of gentiles and be priests for God. for this reason they were called christians and therefore differenciated (beginning in antioch) from other jews who did not consider this promise fulfilled, but still jewish nonetheless. the council of jamnia declared them apostates from judaism and signified the (from the jewish perspective) split between christianity and judaism.

que Dios te bendiga

 

[NoName55]

hola NoName55

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama. their argument uses the credentials associated with the ubiquitous term 'scientist' to lend credence to the completely unverified claim that intelligent christians become muslims and ignorant muslims become christians. by that same token they should give greater weight to any argument i make because of my credentials.

it's called appeal to authority, look it up.

also, buy this, there is no reason to insinuate things about me or demand that i stop talking. if you don't have the time to have two conversations then do not engage in two conversations. adab and sabr, as you say.

que Dios te bendiga

I have time but not the patience to take on more than I can handle, especially since I am not as cunning and crafty as you are, I do know that you are adept at misquoting and distorting but all I can do is to put you on my list of "to deal with later" members. I would not want to do as you claim you did

i mistakenly quoted your post instead of islamirama

taking on one of your and his kind at a time is, my sabr and patience and example of my adab was

Please, I beg you not to reply to me anymore as you can see that I am busy with another person in the thread and want to devote my full attention to him or I will get confused. thanx in advance of any co-operation

pity, in your haste to score cheap points, you did not see or understand that, yet you teaching me adab, when it is you who butted in, when my reply was clearly addressed to graceseeker as demonstrated by me quoting his post.

and peace to all

 

[thydavidcome]

So hindus and other pagans could follow Islam if they so wished but Israeli Prophets were only meant for their own Nation?

or was It the case that Kufaar in other nations were already on sirat al mustaqeem? or God only cared about Israel at the time?

one more and final time:

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE NOT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

and how do you know it was not?
I prefer it if you were to clear my confusion

God sent a prophet to every nation. God cared about the Jew's because they were the most oppressed people at the time. So God gave the Jews Israel to make them happy.

I hope this answered your question

 

[NoName55]

I have just been reminded that I should not argue here for next week because the Mod who usually protects me from other mods (deleting my posts, giving infractions) is away. see you all on his return!!!

 

[Jayda]

I have time but not the patience to take on more than I can handle, especially since I am not as cunning and crafty as you are, I do know that you are adept at misquoting and distorting but all I can do is to put you on my list of "to deal with later" members. I would not want to do as you claim you did taking on one of your kind at a time is, my sabr and patience and example of my adab was pity, in your haste to score cheap points, you did not see or understand that, yet you teaching me adab, when it is you who butted in, when my reply was clearly addressed to graceseeker as demonstrated by me quoting his post.

and peace to all

you'll like me eventually

 

[InToTheRain]

So hindus and other pagans could follow Islam if they so wished but Israeli Prophets were only meant for their own Nation?

or was It the case that Kufaar in other nations were already on sirat al mustaqeem? or God only cared about Israel at the time?

one more and final time:

WHY WAS THE MESSAGE NOT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF THAT TIME?

and how do you know it was not?
I prefer it if you were to clear my confusion

Hope this clarifies it Insha'Allah:


Volume 1, Book 8, Number 429:
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any amongst the Prophets before me. These are:

1. Allah made me victorious by awe (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.

2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum. Therefore my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.

3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me (and was not made so for anyone else).

4. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation exclusively but I have been sent to all mankind.

5. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection.)

i'm a baroness, a countess, a scientist and a christian. there are poor, uneducated schizophrenics that are christians too... it is all the same in the eyes of God. with everything i learned in school about biological chemistry i could still burn in hell, while the poor beggar with a 5th grade education spends eternity serving God.

true.

The Noble Qur'an - Al-Hujurat 49:13
O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).

Hadith - Al-Tirmidhi #5198, Narrated AbuDharr [Ahmad transmitted it]
Allah's Messenger said to him, "You are not better than people with red or black skins unless you excel them in piety."

 

[NoName55]

did any fabrications or mistranslations ever make it to Sahih collections on the web or printed forms?

P.S why did you people not leave this question between me and Islamirama?

 

[InToTheRain]

did any fabrications or mistranslations ever make it to Sahih collections on the web or printed forms??

Not that I know of Bro.

P.S why can you people not leave it between me and Islamirama?

Thought I would help since he ain't replied :O


BROTHER ISLAMIRAMA PLEASE RESPOND TO NONAME55 ALSO! Jazak Allah.

 

[NoName55]

no, he need not bother anymore as the surprise that I was planning for him is in tatters (it was going to be a pay back for calling me munafiq, fasiq and accusing me of talking like kufar etc.) and I am logging off

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace

There is nothing in the New Testament regarding this.

may be , some Christians think the following verse does tell them to kill disbelievers ??


But those mine enemies who will not that I reign unto them bring them hither and SLAY them before me" Luke 19-27

G S: Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

--hehe nuh

God sent the last Prophet (p) with the last testament ...so all believers must follow the final instructions till the last day.

:smile:


Verses we need for this life & hereafter



.... This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).


Those who believe in the unseen and keep up prayer and spend out of what We have given them.

And who believe in that which has been revealed to you and that which was revealed before you and they are sure of the hereafter.

These are on a right course from their Lord and these it is that shall be successful.


Surely those who disbelieve, it being alike to them whether you warn them, or do not warn them, will not believe

(holy Quran ; 2:2-6)

 

[Grace Seeker]

Salaam/peace

may be , some Christians think the following verse does tell them to kill disbelievers ??


But those mine enemies who will not that I reign unto them bring them hither and SLAY them before me" Luke 19-27

I would tell any Christian who thought that this verse gave them such authority or direction that they were grossly misinterpreting this verse. It means no such thing. First it is a parable. It is not something that Jesus is commanding anyone to do, nor is he saying that God commands it. He is saying that in this story, a person behaved that way. Such a story is in complete harmony with the everyday life experience of people in Jesus' day. The parable follows the reality of ancient politics. Refusing the rule of the one in power often meant paying with one's life. So, in this parable we learn about the judgment of God.

originally by Grace Seeker: Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

--hehe nuh

God sent the last Prophet (p) with the last testament ...so all believers must follow the final instructions till the last day.

Yes, I understand that is your point of view. I was simply suggestion to ummzayd, that if I used the logic she had presented to me that Christians should keep all of the commands of God in the Old Testament because we believed that they were God's word, that Muslims also believe that God spoke through those prophets and should be keeping those commands as well. Muslims don't because, though they think it was God speaking through Moses, they don't think that those commands apply to them. I'm just saying that no Muslim should be surprised if we say the same thing as they do, that they don't apply to Christians, even though we view them as the word of God. They don't apply, because they were never meant to apply to non-Jews. Only that part which Jayda pointed out was part of the Noahide laws for all people are relevant to Christians today.

 

[ummzayd]

We don't disown any part of the OT, but we do not think that we are under the same covenant, and thus the expectations as to how we are to live are not the same.

Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet and yet don't practice the covenant God made with people through him. If Christians should, shouldn't Muslims also?

I'm sorry you missed my point completely. Regardless of whether you think those laws of stoning to death adulterers and blasphemers are now abrogated, they were certainly part of life in OT times and many people were stoned to death according to the command of God. and yet Christians say the death penalty for adultery and apostasy is barbaric.

as for the second part of your post, as you know Muslims believe that the qur'an is the final message from God and it contains all the guidance and knowledge necessary for anyone who wants to live according to His will.

It is up to us to judge the veracity and reliability of qur'an vs NT. I have made my choice and I guess so have you.

peace

 

[ummzayd]

I was simply suggestion to ummzayd, that if I used the logic she had presented to me that Christians should keep all of the commands of God in the Old Testament because we believed that they were God's word, that Muslims also believe that God spoke through those prophets and should be keeping those commands as well. Muslims don't because, though they think it was God speaking through Moses, they don't think that those commands apply to them. I'm just saying that no Muslim should be surprised if we say the same thing as they do, that they don't apply to Christians, even though we view them as the word of God. They don't apply, because they were never meant to apply to non-Jews. Only that part which Jayda pointed out was part of the Noahide laws for all people are relevant to Christians today.

just to clarify, Muslims don't believe the OT as it is today is the protected word of God. christians certainly do believe the OT is from God, and yet they call its laws barbaric. that was my point.

re the council of Jerusalem: I am a bit lost at the moment as I am away from home for a few weeks and don't have my books with me. I studied first century Christianity about 10 years ago and it is an absolutely gripping subject. The council of Jerusalem is evidence of how Paul was totally out on a limb by creating a new religion called Christianity, when the other followers of Jesus pbuh - the ones who actually knew him and lived with him and travelled with him - believed in the continuation of Judaism and its practice of making proselytes of non-Jews, by means of which they could have a share in the covenant without actually having to follow all the laws that Jews did.

the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT. It was Paul who did that. Paul, the one who was summoned back to Jerusalem by his elders and betters. Paul, whose boastful, whinging, hysterical voice dominates the NT, while those elders at Jerusalem hardly get a look in.

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

I'm sorry you missed my point completely. Regardless of whether you think those laws of stoning to death adulterers and blasphemers are now abrogated, they were certainly part of life in OT times and many people were stoned to death according to the command of God. and yet Christians say the death penalty for adultery and apostasy is barbaric.

Yes, I did miss your point, but I think I get it now. And I agree, you are right that there is some disingenuousness in Christians who uphold the OT as a wonderful guide for any given people of God and then say that those same actions are horrendous in another group of people, especially if they claim that those practices are also guidelines that they received from the same God.

And while I know where the death penalty for adultery and several other things can be found, including simply talking back to one's parents, I don't remember seeing a death penalty for apostasy. I'm afraid you'll have to refresh my memory.

For myself, I am glad that we see in Jesus that rather than agreeing with those who sought to punish guilty people, that he sought to bring them freedom from guilt producing behaviors. So, he is my model today, and I think that his gospel applies to all people, not just 1st century Jews but even to me and you.

re: the council of Jerusalem: I am a bit lost at the moment as I am away from home for a few weeks and don't have my books with me. I studied first century Christianity about 10 years ago and it is an absolutely gripping subject. The council of Jerusalem is evidence of how Paul was totally out on a limb by creating a new religion called Christianity, when the other followers of Jesus pbuh - the ones who actually knew him and lived with him and travelled with him - believed in the continuation of Judaism and its practice of making proselytes of non-Jews, by means of which they could have a share in the covenant without actually having to follow all the laws that Jews did.

the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT. It was Paul who did that. Paul, the one who was summoned back to Jerusalem by his elders and betters. Paul, whose boastful, whinging, hysterical voice dominates the NT, while those elders at Jerusalem hardly get a look in.

peace

I'll attach the passage which describes the Council of Jerusalem below so that you can have a closer look at it if you wish.

Acts 15

The Council at Jerusalem

1Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." 2This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the brothers very glad. 4When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.
5Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses."

6The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

12The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13When they finished, James spoke up: "Brothers, listen to me. 14Simon [i.e. Peter] has described to us how God at first showed his concern by taking from the Gentiles a people for himself. 15The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:
16" 'After this I will return
and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17that the remnant of men may seek the Lord,
and all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
18that have been known for ages.

19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers

22Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, two men who were leaders among the brothers. 23With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia: Greetings. 24We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
30The men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers. 33After spending some time there, they were sent off by the brothers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. 35But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

Now when I read this I do NOT see Paul out on a limb creating a new Christianity. Rather, I see Paul conferencing with the other leaders of the church regarding how to handle a point of disagreement that has been raised as some are insisting that Gentiles must become Jews in order to be Christians and Paul doesn't agree with that. So, the question is put not to Paul to decide but the rest of the church's leadership.

In that setting:
First Peter makes a speech in support of Paul as he tells about his own experience with Gentiles that took place completely independent of Paul and before Paul had begun any of his missionary efforts.
Second Paul and Barnabas relate their experiences of seeing God working in the lives of Gentiles.
Third James pronounces a judgment that does NOT require a Gentile to become a Jew in order to be a Christian.
Given the process and involvement of so many others, I don't see how you can say that it was Paul that created a new religion called Christianity. It seems that it was more Peter and James to me than Paul. Paul just became its greatest champion, but certainly not its creator. There is a difference.

As far as what rules Jews have to live by, I guess you will have to talk to the Jews. I am not one.

 

[Muslim Woman]

salaam/peace;

i think , we are going off topic


anyway , anybody personally knows any ex-Muslim ? What's his/her reason for leaving Islam ?

I met a young man long ago who bacame Christian because he was told ---on the Last Day , no Christian will get any punishment for Jesus (p). Jesus (p) died to make all Christians sinless.

PS. where is the thread --Questions...answered by Christians ???

 

[ummzayd]

As far as what rules Jews have to live by, I guess you will have to talk to the Jews. I am not one.

peace

your last comment is somewhat disingenuous, since the council of Jerusalem by no means said that Jews (which they were) must stop obeying the laws of Judaism.

as for the rest of your post, well no doubt that the Pauline version of Christianity triumphed over all others - only books that showed Paul and his followers in a good light could possibly be allowed to remain, all others were suppressed and then destroyed after the Council of Nicea (which was called together by the Pagan Constantine).

However if we look at the bare facts of the matter:

There was a group of Jewish elders in Jerusalem, followers of Jesus pbuh who had known him, lived with him, travelled with him, listened to him.

They were Jews who followed the law.

It came to their attention that Gentiles were being urged to be circumsized and otherwise follow the Judaic laws.

They got together to discuss the matter and decide whether or not this was correct.

It was decided that the Gentiles would be advised to follow the universal laws, the laws of Noah, in keeping with Jewish teaching about proselytes.

A letter was sent. For some reason (despite the flowery rhetoric praising them) Paul and Barbabas were not entrusted to deliver this letter themselves, but two others were chosen to accompany them and make sure the message was delivered.

These are the bare facts, the rest is typical Pauline padding.

If anyone Christian is capable of reading the epistles of Paul without the reverence they feel is due to a semi-prophet from whom they take their religion, they will find them an eye opener. the personality of Paul comes through so clearly.

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

peace

your last comment is somewhat disingenuous, since the council of Jerusalem by no means said that Jews (which they were) must stop obeying the laws of Judaism.

I am confused by your statement. I never implied that the Council of Jerusalem said anything with regard to how Jews should live. When the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses," they were speaking of what Gentiles should do, not Jews. So the discussion at the Council of Jerusalem was entirely about Gentile Christians, not Jewish Christians.

You had previously said, "the council of Jerusalem does not say that Jews henceforth no longer have to follow the laws of the OT." That's true. That was not even under discussion at the Council of Jerusalem. What was under discussion was whether a Gentile that was becoming a Christian had to become a Jew to become a Christian. All Jews at that time, whether they were Christians or not, practiced all the Jewish laws. The Council made not comment on that. But in saying that Gentiles did not have to become Jews to be Christians, it was the Council that drew a distinction between Christianity and Judaism. It was the council that said Christianity is not simply a subset within Judaism, but rather something unique in its own right, quite apart from Judaism.

So, when you ask about how Jews should behave, what they should eat, wear, etc... I simply say that I don't know. I am not a Jew. I am a Christian, a gentile Christian. I am one of those that the Council of Jerusalem made a decisions about saying that I should abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. These things I do. I have a friend who, by her self description, is a Jew and also a Christian. She keeps more than these rules that the Council of Jerusalem decided. She still keeps Friday night to Saturday night Sabbath, does not eat pork (though it appears that Peter may have felt free to), and other Jewish laws as a part of who she is as a Jew even as she worships Jesus as the promised Messiah and God incarnate.

as for the rest of your post, well no doubt that the Pauline version of Christianity triumphed over all others - only books that showed Paul and his followers in a good light could possibly be allowed to remain, all others were suppressed and then destroyed after the Council of Nicea (which was called together by the Pagan Constantine).

Personally, I think that interpretation of history is just as distorted as the history you have implied that has been passed on through the Church.

However if we look at the bare facts of the matter:

There was a group of Jewish elders in Jerusalem, followers of Jesus pbuh who had known him, lived with him, travelled with him, listened to him.

They were Jews who followed the law.

It came to their attention that Gentiles were being urged to be circumsized and otherwise follow the Judaic laws.

They got together to discuss the matter and decide whether or not this was correct.

It was decided that the Gentiles would be advised to follow the universal laws, the laws of Noah, in keeping with Jewish teaching about proselytes.

A letter was sent. For some reason (despite the flowery rhetoric praising them) Paul and Barbabas were not entrusted to deliver this letter themselves, but two others were chosen to accompany them and make sure the message was delivered.

These are the bare facts, the rest is typical Pauline padding.

Proselytes who became Jews had to keep the commands of Moses just as if they had been born Jewish. There was no difference. That was the whole point of the party of the Pharisees. That Peter should of the Gentile believers that God "made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith" is an incredible statement that Peter was not concerned about a person's Jewishness. But rather there is no difference between a Jew and an Gentile if both are in Christ. Again, you can't put that on Paul.

If anyone Christian is capable of reading the epistles of Paul without the reverence they feel is due to a semi-prophet from whom they take their religion, they will find them an eye opener. the personality of Paul comes through so clearly.

Agreed. Paul is an arrogant, strong-willed, driven person, absorbed with the role that he understands God has set him in. He had that character before he became a Christian, and that aspect of his character didn't change afterward. Rather, I see that God used that in Paul to find for himself one who could spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all nations just as he sends all of us, his disciples, to do.

 

[Talha777]

History bears witness to the fact that the true followers of Jesus (alaihi salam) were the "ebionites", but they were supressed and destroyed thanks to the false prophet and deceiver paul and his paganized gospel, and also constantine and the council of nicea. The ebionites knew that Jesus's message was only for the Israelites and not gentiles, which accounts for some passages in the "new testament" where Jesus tells his disciples to avoid preaching to the samaritan towns, and his famous statement "I have not come except for the lost sheep of Israel".