Comments on: Love Your Neighbor: Only Israelites or Everyone?

By: Rick Swineford

Rick Swineford — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 18:46:28 +0000

Apparently no one can read. The text specifically states “Who was neighbor unto him, NOT that the injured person was his neighbor.” It actually states that the Samaritan was the injured man’s neighbor NOT that the injured man was the Samaritan’s neighbor.

By: Gary Bremer

Gary Bremer — Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:57:28 +0000

Of course, Jesus came to clean up the prejudices of the law and infuse God’s grace into Jewish life. As Jesus taught in Luke 30-37. A stranger was traveling and was beaten. A Jewish priest and Jewish Levite not only ignored their “neighbor” but avoided him by moving to the opposite side. A Samaritan (mixed race with pagan influences) was exemplified as showing love for this stranger {his “neighbor”}. Teaching us that everyone is considered our neighbor not just those of our own “tribe.”

By: Peter T

Peter T — Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:05:00 +0000

In reply to Jakke Day. I disagree that Jesus stayed within the limits of Torah observant Jews when commanding to love your neighbor. During his ministry, Jesus widened the circle of people considered, e.g., when the Phoenician woman says that even the dogs eat what falls from the table, and Jesus extends his healing power to her. And when Jesus is asked who our neighbors are he tells the story of the good Samaritan.

By: Jakke Day

Jakke Day — Mon, 13 Nov 2023 21:13:02 +0000

God says he is the God of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob. Those people and their descendants are His people.

Jesus said he came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. The lost sheep are the those descendants of Jacob who were dispersed eg the woman at the well who asks if Jesus was “greater than our father Jacob”. Cornelius is thought of as a non-Israelite but it’s clear he was an Israelite who grew up in Italy and was part of. The diaspora.

Therefore, it’s clear that your neighbour is a fellow Torah-observant Israelite. Praying for your enemies is about praying for your fellow Torah-observant Israelites who may have wronged you.

By: Veronika

Veronika — Sat, 16 Oct 2021 11:44:46 +0000

I believe you totally misunderstood the point. It’s, in fact, no big science 🙂 Re-a is your neighbour. When an alien becomes a neighbour, then he is a re-a too. When he is not your neighbour, he lives not with you and he is a stranger to your religion, to your habits etc., he obviously is not a re-a. So the term evolves with the times and each time, it means something different, a different group of people. In the global world of Romans, it means, obviously, something different than in times of King David, in global times you can be useful to everyone and also, they can be useful to you. Remember – the Lord always wants the „earthly good“ for its people. Why? More good means less sin in society, less sin of each of us. This is the reason for the Commandments – our salvation. But if somebody spread the sin, there are also many apparent commands in both Testaments what to do, you can’t overlook them. You can kill your re-a (in Old Testament) or teach him love or leave him (in the New Testament), while you have simultaneously to love him? Yet he is still a re-a…

I would also like to mention the classics – the good Samaritan cited here too in comments. Look at the words of Jesus CAREFULLY: who is the neighbour? Is it the one who lays on the ground, wounded and harmed, or is it the one who help? Hence, who is the neighbour? This one who HELPS YOU. Jesus even emphasises it in the following question. Again, the aim of all this is to live in peace on Earth, in the best possible conditions, which mutual love usually is. Everything that puts you in the danger of sin is not good and you shall not stay in it arguing these people are „re-a“ too… Either it’s your problem (then you have to solve it on your own), or it’s other person who brings the problem and then the process is clear enough, for biblical Jews as for us in Jesus words 🙂 It’s all the very same, from the beginning of Israel, the human sin and its annihilation are in the centre of such efforts, only the situations in human life vary.

By: John Smith

John Smith — Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:32:28 +0000

Is it possible that Re’a refers to neighbors, as in those within the the tribe, and alien refers to those Israelites that were separated from the mass? In the New Testament, we know that the Corinthians were distant relatives to the Isrealites (1 Cor. 10), these would be ‘aliens’. Paul makes the argument that they are also ‘Re’a’. The circumcision argument that Paul constantly makes is that these dispersed Israelites should be welcomed as they are. He had to make this argument because the Israelites who were still practicing the faith (the same faith that the Greeks had lost over centuries of being ‘far off from the faith’) wanted them to be circumcised to be welcomed. This whole article assumes that there’s only 2 groups: Israelites and non-Israelites. When, in reality, there were Israelites (Judahites, Benjaminites, Gadites, etc), non-practicing Israelites (Greeks, dispersed Israelites, Phoenecians (King Hiriam was of the tribe of Naphtali)), Adamites (basically cousins – would have been those before Jacob – including Edom, but God had His own pronouncements on them), and, finally, non-Israelites (the fallen angels and all that descended from Cain). Egypt (Mizraim) and Ethiopia (Cush) are Adamic, which is why they could be considered relatives to the Israelites. They were allowed to intermarry with these ‘cousins’ in controlled circumstances, but were always forbidden from marrying outside of this. Canaanites, Jebusites, Moabites, etc. were never okay to intermarry with. This article is twisting the truth by excluding this information.

By: artm11

artm11 — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 02:11:13 +0000

“He claims the Bible has been misinterpreted as there are no explicit references the use of nails or to crucifixion – only that Jesus bore a “staurus” towards Calvary which is not necessarily a cross but can also mean a “pole”.

Many scholars are aware of such problems with the texts.

However, one wonders if Samuelsson (et al) was’t making a distinction without a difference.

So Shimon from Cyrenaica is forced into carrying the stauros (σταυρός) for Yeshua.

Pole, or steak or cross piece.

He carried Yeshua’s pole so that they could go fishing at the top of the Place of the Skull? No, obvious in all the Gospel accounts is that he was executed (in some manner) there.

All manuscripts of Flavius Josephus claim Yeshua was crucified, and Josephus goes into some detail about other crucifixions in his histories, so that in context it’s clear that he means crucifixion as we understand the term (although the various methods can not be discerned from the texts).

Most all accounts agree that he was put to death. The Gospel of Yochanan (John) has the Disciples claiming “nail” marks/holes in his hands.

Context is as important as what was or was not explicitly described.

By: michaelh227

michaelh227 — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 01:49:12 +0000

This was a great example of a well reasoned and documented contribution to a controversial subject. I think it would have been instructive as well to discuss how Jewish Jesus of Nazareth dealt with the subject in the popularly titled: “Parable of the Good Samaritan”. In which He makes a Samaritan man the epitome of a good neighbor who loved even his Jewish enemy.

By: James Glinski

James Glinski — Tue, 24 Apr 2018 17:50:39 +0000

Very good five stars thank you .

By: William kirk

William kirk — Tue, 24 Apr 2018 07:57:16 +0000

I am quite frankly amused at the thousands of words used by learned people to try and express a very simple concept. We are all one creation and to say whether we should love or not love a part of God’s creation is showing no understanding of God’s word.